Do you think we should use the Army, Army National Guard and Army Reserve Engineers to build the wall with Mexico if Congress says no?

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 00:41:08 -0400

Congress may not fund President Trump's desire to enhance or build the wall with Mexico. I suggest that we have Active Duty, Army Reserve and Army National Guard Engineering Battalions to build the wall. If congress does not fund the materials, take materials out of emergency supply depots. I did not have room but we can also use USMC, USN or USAF construction battalions in the Active as well as the Reserve component help out as well. Use them for their 2 weeks of active duty each year or request service members to go title 32 active duty special work to help with this project.

Response by SMSgt Lawrence McCarter made Aug 31 at 2017 12:45 AM

SMSgt Lawrence McCarter — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 00:45:17 -0400

Why not ? The Army Corp of engineers has built dams to hold back water, how about another sort of of dam, a wall to be specific to hold back a human tide of Illegal aliens

Response by SSgt Christopher Brose made Aug 31 at 2017 12:52 AM

SSgt Christopher Brose — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 00:52:01 -0400

Didn't the Army Corps of Engineers play a key role in building the Panama Canal? What have they been doing lately? Why not put them to work building the wall?

Response by PFC Lisa McDonald made Aug 31 at 2017 12:54 AM

PFC Lisa McDonald — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 00:54:48 -0400

I think use a combination of ways. I think you are a bit late to the party though.
The best time to have brought up an idea like this would have been pre-design phase. I think it would have been great for the different commands to design and submit their own wall designs. Maybe one of them would have gotten so far as to have been able to build a proto-type.
About the only wall design I like is the one with solar panels.

Response by PO1 Tony Holland made Aug 31 at 2017 1:34 AM

PO1 Tony Holland — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 01:34:32 -0400

Nice thought, but I see major problems in attempting to thwart civilian control of the military --- the Armed Services are not the personal fiefdom of POTUS

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 31 at 2017 1:55 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 01:55:34 -0400

One question I still have not seen a good answer for: what will be done along the Rio Grande?
Do we put the wall on Mexico side? Don't see how that would work. Do we put the wall on US side, effectively letting Mexico gain control of the river?

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 31 at 2017 3:16 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 03:16:24 -0400

I'd go on ADOS to help build it, not exactly my job but hey I'll take the money.

Response by SSG Diane R. made Aug 31 at 2017 4:39 AM

SSG Diane R. — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 04:39:33 -0400

I think the border barrier should be aethetic as well a functional so it doesn't look like an eyesore. Consider building a structure based on the great wall of China, or Hadrian's wall, also using natural terrain as part of the barrier.

What we need is a big, beautiful wall, and Mexico should pay for part of it.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 31 at 2017 4:48 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 04:48:12 -0400

Yeah, have the president bypass the branch of government Responsible for government spending and having the "power of the purse" by using the military as his personal plaything to do what he ever wants. What could be wrong with that?

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 31 at 2017 5:44 AM

PFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 05:44:20 -0400

LTC Private RallyPoint Member my doubts about a walls effectiveness.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36099336

Huge US-Mexico drugs tunnel found in San Diego - BBC News

One of the longest cross-border drugs-smuggling tunnels between Mexico and the US has been found by authorities in San Diego, US officials say.

Response by CW4 Guy Butler made Aug 31 at 2017 6:21 AM

CW4 Guy Butler — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 06:21:35 -0400

Building materials are the cheap part. Moving engineers from point A to point B (New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Vermont in the case of one Reserve Battalion) and all the other messy logistics parts (fuel, for example) are where the money's spent, and that faucet is easy to shut off by Congress (and the States for the National Guard - unless you're talking Federalization).

That doesn't include the land seizure piece.

Response by SGT David T. made Aug 31 at 2017 8:36 AM

SGT David T. — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 08:36:27 -0400

The Corps of Engineers would already be responsible for such a project. The district/division that the area belongs to would handle that. Engineer battalions wouldn't be used. Most of it would be contracted out.

You also have to remember that the military cannot use materials in a manner that they were not appropriated for. As this is a civil works project, it would need that type of funding. The building materials that are on hand in the depots used either Operations and Maintenance or Procurement dollars. Since the funds used for that were not appropriated for that purpose, that would violate Federal law.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 31 at 2017 9:03 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 09:03:24 -0400

All we'd need to pay for is materials then. Everything else is already funded. That's their field exercise/AT.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 31 at 2017 9:26 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 09:26:18 -0400

I did not mention ground penetrating radar teams but they would need to be added in it and be able to make sound checks across the border looking for it just this type of tunnel complexes.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 31 at 2017 9:35 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 09:35:55 -0400

No. They have better things to do. The wall is unnecessary and will not stop illegal immigration. Next.

Response by SGT Edward Wilcox made Aug 31 at 2017 9:43 AM

SGT Edward Wilcox — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 09:43:37 -0400

It would still need Congressional approval to fund the construction.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 31 at 2017 9:49 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 09:49:21 -0400

Yes, defending the nation belongs to the military and securing the border is defending the nation.

Response by SMSgt Thor Merich made Aug 31 at 2017 10:52 AM

SMSgt Thor Merich — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 10:52:44 -0400

Yes. But I have been a proponent of putting the military on the border for years also. It has been the practice for many years of sending guard/reserve engineers to other countries to build up their infanstructure, why not in the US?

Response by Lt Col Jim Coe made Aug 31 at 2017 11:09 AM

Lt Col Jim Coe — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 11:09:08 -0400

If Congress doesn't prohibit the use of military funds to build the wall, then I say yes. It could be a training opportunity. The Army Engineers, Navy SeaBees, and Air Force Prime Beef built roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, and other facilities in Honduras. There was a year-long joint exercise in Central America under USSOUTHCOM. We flew Reserve and Guard teams into Honduras for their two-weeks of active duty. They built stuff and we flew them home. Why not in the USA?

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Aug 31 at 2017 11:21 AM

CAPT Kevin B. — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 11:21:01 -0400

I remember a line out of "The Right Stuff". "No bucks, No Buck Rogers." Can't do anything without the money. BTW, funds are appropriated with specific authorized uses. Good way to go to jail by spending it on something else. Also consider the enormity of the task. We'd piddle at it for decades with little to show for it. Also remember, the MIL side better not start tinkering with self generated taskings which are not in their purview. The whole commercial labor side which greases the politicians will come down on the MIL's heads. You can't do anything CONUS because it takes food out of babies' mouths. Finally, if MIL types are doing this stuff, it'd be a huge advertisement for force reduction because we're obviously overmanned if we have time to do that. Nice whimsical dream though.

Response by CSM Richard StCyr made Aug 31 at 2017 11:30 AM

CSM Richard StCyr — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 11:30:41 -0400

The Combat Heavies or Construction Effects Battalions are not as plentiful as they used to be. That said while in the 864th we went to Nogales in the 90's and worked on the border building fence line and patrol roads. Alpha 62nd and elements of the HSC went to Eagle Pass TX in 2004 and built a permanent fixed bailey with concrete abutments and a huge central pier along with approach and egress routes in support of the border patrol. Both were great training opportunities.
While I served in a couple units that maintained stocked materials, those materials were dedicated to very specific things and were not available for general use.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 31 at 2017 12:49 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 12:49:24 -0400

Yeah that sounds like a great use of the military that is already over extended and still fighting the longest war in American history...

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 31 at 2017 1:29 PM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 13:29:23 -0400

Sounds good to me. Seeing as securing the border constitutes "National Defense" on any day of the week and twice on Sunday, and the President is charged by the U.S. Constitution with providing for the National Defense, this would seem like an ideal solution.

Response by SPC Casey Ashfield made Aug 31 at 2017 3:36 PM

SPC Casey Ashfield — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 15:36:25 -0400

Congress still has to approve the funding to pay for the wall materials and time.

But yes, I think the military should be used to build the wall.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 31 at 2017 4:21 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 16:21:02 -0400

Wait, I had this problem in IOBC. I think the right answer is to get a bunch of E-2's and E-3's, and 1 motivated NCO and say "We need a wall built here". Then come back in a few hours and be amazed at the newly built and functional wall.

Response by SFC Steven Raymond Thompson made Aug 31 at 2017 6:02 PM

SFC Steven Raymond Thompson — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 18:02:50 -0400

Utilize Uniformed Personnel to patrol, secure and apprehend.

Response by SSG Robert Perrotto made Aug 31 at 2017 6:21 PM

SSG Robert Perrotto — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 18:21:12 -0400

to quote our former president "I have a pen and a phone" Many of our former Commander in Chiefs policies were enacted without congressional approval. He consistently bypassed Congress in his use of executive orders. Do not see a reason why trump cannot do the same.

Response by SSG Trevor S. made Aug 31 at 2017 6:45 PM

SSG Trevor S. — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 18:45:39 -0400

Great training exercise!!!!

Response by SPC Daniel Haney made Aug 31 at 2017 9:06 PM

SPC Daniel Haney — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 21:06:18 -0400

I don't think so, the money for the materials would come out of the defense budget. That'll just take money away from where we need it. Units already have outdated weaponry, it would be nice to get some updated stuff, but that won't happen if you take the defense budget away.

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Sep 3 at 2017 2:26 PM

SSG Edward Tilton — Sun, 03 Sep 2017 14:26:24 -0400

Don't build any wall. It will be every bit as useless as the Great Wall of China or the Maginot Line. For those of you who wouldn't know it if they see it. There is already a formidable fence, Surveillance Baloons, and drones

Response by LCpl Jeff Moore made Sep 12 at 2017 10:10 PM

LCpl Jeff Moore — Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:10:09 -0400

I work on the border, and have been down here for the last ten years. I can tell you almost 1/2 of the illegal aliens from Mexico amd central America cross on valid visas. The other half comes in as imposters, hidden in vehicles cargo, false claims, or the hope the 20 foot fence.

Almost all other illegals are visa overstays, or come by ship.

We be better off enforcing our immigrantion laws, no more waiting 3 to 5 years to deport someone, no more giving folks asylum status cause they claim creditable fear of their home nation, only to watch them go there every other week. No more giving illegal caught with kids a piece of paper saying appear in 6 to 12 months.

Build detention centers ie tents in the desert, have a system to record when someone leaves the country. Stop the revolving door effect of letting someone in for 6 months, they leave for a day only to come back for another 6 months vacation.

Fine companies hiring illegals 25% of their yearly profit for 1st time. 2nd 75%, toss some HR managers in jail etc wtc

Response by SSgt Jim Gilmore made Sep 15 at 2017 12:57 AM

SSgt Jim Gilmore — Fri, 15 Sep 2017 00:57:14 -0400

Damn fined idea...

Response by SP5 Joel O'Brien made Sep 23 at 2017 4:48 PM

SP5 Joel O'Brien — Sat, 23 Sep 2017 16:48:13 -0400

In light of the recent weather, I think the $$$ for that project needs to go where it will do more good. Like hurricane relief efforts. Not the answer to the posted question, but so be it.

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Sep 25 at 2017 7:49 PM

SSG Edward Tilton — Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:49:57 -0400

Send them to Puerto Rico

Response by PO3 Grant Skiles made Sep 26 at 2017 7:36 AM

PO3 Grant Skiles — Tue, 26 Sep 2017 07:36:06 -0400

I have been saying this since President Trump started campaigning. I also feel that we should be using our military to build infrastructure in the United States as well as rehabilitate houses in our cities where Veterans, homeless and low income can live as long as they keep the gangs out, keep the house fixed up and maintain a job. I marked other because we can use Engineer Battalions, boot camp recruits their least couple of weeks, as well as individuals working on shore. We also need to use the military better for Natural Disaster. Every ship that we have in port right now should be being loaded up with food, clothing, fuel, generators and housing materials and sent to Florida, Texas, Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 27 at 2018 11:59 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 27 Aug 2018 23:59:18 -0400

It is more complicated than simply sending troops with shovels to the border. Regardless, it will need federal approval. The border is not locally administered by an individual state, and outside of the coast guard no other military branch has civil law enforcement intrinsic to its mission and scope of operations (a legal design from the foundation of the US).

In addition, even if a state activated its NG for building a border wall, it will require federal approval to simply carry out its mission because the border is federal jurisdiction. This would require coordination with customs and border patrol, along with municipalities where the wall will be located, and individuals who may lose land to the wall - a long time source of friction for many already.

Lastly, depending on what title the troops act under, funding will be an issue. Most likely it would have to be federal funding to pay the troops for their efforts. It isnt as simple as the president saying our troops should build a wall - there is a reason why Congress and local authorities are generally involved (or should be) in these sorts of decisions.