Posted on Jan 8, 2019
Do you support building a wall along the Mexican/American border?
757
96
44
11
11
0
It's a hot topic these days. The President wants it and claims that most Americans agree. The Democrats in Congress don't want it and claim that most American agree. It seems that the verdict is in but I'm sure the source will be attacked (which is going to be fun to watch inasmuch as Harvard and the Washington Times who report most Americans in favor of the wall, are typically progressive proponents...)
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jan/23/roughly-80-of-all-voters-say-us-needs-secure-borde/?fbclid=IwAR140PAX1Pu7_Ear5GgnGl6NfW3_m5k_B8hFNEX4dIdS8WwTlkekjdn8N58
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jan/23/roughly-80-of-all-voters-say-us-needs-secure-borde/?fbclid=IwAR140PAX1Pu7_Ear5GgnGl6NfW3_m5k_B8hFNEX4dIdS8WwTlkekjdn8N58
Edited 6 y ago
Posted 6 y ago
Responses: 20
There is 1,279 miles of border that doesn't even have a fence yet, let alone some kind of concrete wall. It's a huge waste of money, and will likely never happen anyway. And even if it did, people would find a way to get over it, around it, through it, etc.
(6)
(0)
MAJ Grant Gutkowski
That wall project in China a while back employed whole generations....I wonder if we offered to pay illegals to build the wall as a speedy path to citizenship? hahaha....sorry...couldn't resist.
(1)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
GySgt John Olson - No mexicans in china... seems to be effective....
But in all seriousness, people seem to be forgetting not only the base cost, but the upkeep, and the manpower. We don't even maintain the roads we have now (Eisenhower Interstate System).
But in all seriousness, people seem to be forgetting not only the base cost, but the upkeep, and the manpower. We don't even maintain the roads we have now (Eisenhower Interstate System).
(2)
(0)
MAJ Grant Gutkowski
GySgt John Olson - Of course, but no one who built it was alive to see it fail. It was necessary at the time...and probably went a long way to calming populace tensions and providing a great distraction. By the time our wall fails, it might no longer be necessary.
(0)
(0)
Sgt Bruce C.
So I wonder how hard it is to take off from the Mexico Baja and travel by boat to some shore line in California? Or through the Gulf of Mexico? I am not sure the wall will do what they say it will, its a hard structure that will give people time to find a way around. I think a larger more mobile operation would be better.
(0)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish POTUS has committed himself with coming out with a border wall during the campaign. He cut to the COA without mission analysis or defining the problem. What is the definition of a secured border? If the mission is to secure the border, Is it to prevent 90% of land based infiltration? 70%? It's like arguing about Destroy, neutralize , harass, or annoy in Artillery effects ala FM 1.02. What is the mission and what is the problem we are solving?
A couple thoughts
- an obstacle (like a wall) is not an obstacle unless it is covered by direct fire, observation, or indirect fire. It's sculpture. Unobserved and uncovered, it will be breached or bypassed. A standard 12' chainlink fence is like a 15 second deterrent.
- obstacles block, slow, disrupt, Turn, or canalize the people on the downrange side of it. These effects dictate where the defenders go. You can't be everywhere at once. It makes possible the defense against many by the few.
- if we were to secure the border to prevent 90% of land based infiltration (without obstacles), you'd need mutually supporting guard posts within visual range (couple hundred yards) of each other with area QRFs to handle surges...24/7. Can Customs and Border Patrol man all that? What would that look like? What would it cost? Sustainment costs? I see in my mind's eye Picket Shacks like in Pakistan. Desolate guard shacks covered by a lone soldier and his family living in a 4x4 shack. Where do I sign up, right?
- what would we do with all the intercepted people? They'd be detention and vetting Facilities. Every time the USG holds someone in one of these, it is vast resources to turn them out. Hearings, petitions, asylum requests, simply figuring out who you have, caring for them while you do this etc. it's an ulcer for the USG, exploited by the Loose immigration lobby.
- I can see why someone would advocate for a wall with sensors to better use Border Patrol, ICE, and DHHS and DOS assets if the wall blocked, turned, and canalized land infiltration to specific places to be vetted, intercepted, and processed.
- to make a dry eyed decision, I'd like to see a dollars per intercept annual cost of the prorated construction, sustainment, and operations versus the cost incurred if we don't (all the things the administration says are costs at the local, state, and federal levels). Otherwise we are evaluating the goodness or badness of visceral emotional response.
A couple thoughts
- an obstacle (like a wall) is not an obstacle unless it is covered by direct fire, observation, or indirect fire. It's sculpture. Unobserved and uncovered, it will be breached or bypassed. A standard 12' chainlink fence is like a 15 second deterrent.
- obstacles block, slow, disrupt, Turn, or canalize the people on the downrange side of it. These effects dictate where the defenders go. You can't be everywhere at once. It makes possible the defense against many by the few.
- if we were to secure the border to prevent 90% of land based infiltration (without obstacles), you'd need mutually supporting guard posts within visual range (couple hundred yards) of each other with area QRFs to handle surges...24/7. Can Customs and Border Patrol man all that? What would that look like? What would it cost? Sustainment costs? I see in my mind's eye Picket Shacks like in Pakistan. Desolate guard shacks covered by a lone soldier and his family living in a 4x4 shack. Where do I sign up, right?
- what would we do with all the intercepted people? They'd be detention and vetting Facilities. Every time the USG holds someone in one of these, it is vast resources to turn them out. Hearings, petitions, asylum requests, simply figuring out who you have, caring for them while you do this etc. it's an ulcer for the USG, exploited by the Loose immigration lobby.
- I can see why someone would advocate for a wall with sensors to better use Border Patrol, ICE, and DHHS and DOS assets if the wall blocked, turned, and canalized land infiltration to specific places to be vetted, intercepted, and processed.
- to make a dry eyed decision, I'd like to see a dollars per intercept annual cost of the prorated construction, sustainment, and operations versus the cost incurred if we don't (all the things the administration says are costs at the local, state, and federal levels). Otherwise we are evaluating the goodness or badness of visceral emotional response.
(5)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
With today's technology why not fly autonomous drones and "sleep gas" those that cross into the US? Send a team out there to round them up and deposit them back on the other side. Don't detain, don't arrest, just eject. We can also put cameras every 50 feet, put the feeds into an IBM Watson type program and send alerts as needed. Also put ground shake sensors up to 500 feet into our territory to detect tunneling. Just poking some thoughts out there...
(0)
(0)
LTC Jason Mackay
SSgt (Join to see) - integrated sensors would be the only way to cover that much ground... part of my argument above. The burden of employing BOG capability would be staggering And rife with graft and corruption. Using a sleeping agent like BZ would bump against chemical warfare treaties...I'll leave to the lawyers. I like where you are going. The "do nothing" alternative has not worked to date. We are wasting the dedicated service of our Border Patrol. Take this thimble and bail the Titanic, we will back you up by rearranging the deck chairs.
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
I can pretty much bet that if an X-Prize was offered that we would see many valid solutions to cover 90% or better of the problem. Technology to cover your house (security) has changed dramatically over the last 5 years. And we've barely scratched the surface of IoT solutions. Yes, they are insecure when it comes to hackers, but that is also changing. We already have RI (Restricted Intelligence) to a large degree. What people are calling AI now-a-days. Like Alexa, Siri, Cortana, etc.
And don't forget the other 3 borders we need to "secure". Canada has a huge land boarder and is easy to walk south from Canada. Then we have 2 coasts with sea-ports as well as many miles of unwatched coastline. Then we have air-ports to cover as well.
Yea, BZ or similar are borderline Chem warfare. I am not in legal and don't have any answers in that direction either.
An X-Prize - that may contain at least part of the solution...
And don't forget the other 3 borders we need to "secure". Canada has a huge land boarder and is easy to walk south from Canada. Then we have 2 coasts with sea-ports as well as many miles of unwatched coastline. Then we have air-ports to cover as well.
Yea, BZ or similar are borderline Chem warfare. I am not in legal and don't have any answers in that direction either.
An X-Prize - that may contain at least part of the solution...
(0)
(0)
Read This Next