North Carolina Voting - and Consistency

[carpedm9587]

And today's Democrats are not arguing that there should not be a barrier - they are taking a stand against Trump's "big beautiful concrete wall" that will cost much more than $5B. They have signed on for $1.3B which can also be used for extending the fencing that already exists, and supplementing it with other controls.

But anyone who has actually BEEN to the border, or even done a bit of homework, knows that the border cannot simply be fenced off, because large segments of it are sovereign territory that the Native Americans who live there have already said will not be violated by a wall.

And the "token barrier" that already exists is amazingly similar to the "wall" Trump keeps touting in Israel. Have you seen either? Do you know that only 3% of the Israeli "wall" is actually made of concrete? The rest is a mental fence with an overhang.

And all of this to solve a problem (illegal immigration) that has been continually on the wane since 2011 - not to mention another problem it won't do anything to solve (i.e., drugs). The latter is because the vast majority of drugs entering this country do so through other avenues than crossing that southern border. They arrive in shipping containers, by plane, or smuggled through actual ports of entry. Only a fraction actually comes across the southern border.

This is a major issue for one reason only: it rally's Trump's base.

[rogue06]

And today's Democrats are not arguing that there should not be a barrier - they are taking a stand against Trump's "big beautiful concrete wall" that will cost much more than $5B. They have signed on for $1.3B which can also be used for extending the fencing that already exists, and supplementing it with other controls.

But anyone who has actually BEEN to the border, or even done a bit of homework, knows that the border cannot simply be fenced off, because large segments of it are sovereign territory that the Native Americans who live there have already said will not be violated by a wall.

And the "token barrier" that already exists is amazingly similar to the "wall" Trump keeps touting in Israel. Have you seen either? Do you know that only 3% of the Israeli "wall" is actually made of concrete? The rest is a mental fence with an overhang.

And all of this to solve a problem (illegal immigration) that has been continually on the wane since 2011 - not to mention another problem it won't do anything to solve (i.e., drugs). The latter is because the vast majority of drugs entering this country do so through other avenues than crossing that southern border. They arrive in shipping containers, by plane, or smuggled through actual ports of entry. Only a fraction actually comes across the southern border.

This is a major issue for one reason only: it rally's Trump's base.

Looks to be a bit more than a "mental fence with an overhang" and has some pretty interesting features. FWIU suicide bombing attacks have been all but stopped since its construction.

[carpedm9587]

Looks to be a bit more than a "mental fence with an overhang" and has some pretty interesting features. FWIU suicide bombing attacks have been all but stopped since its construction.

As I noted, Rogue - 3% of the wall is concrete. Since it is 404 miles long, that means a little over 12 miles of it is concrete - more than enough for these google images. These sections tend to be 30 feet high, are located in three population centers and are designed to prevent sniper fire. (Last I checked, we didn't have a great deal of sniper-fire problem from the Mexico side of the border). Now let's look at the rest of the wall.

https://files.foreignaffairs.com/sty...?itok=a0wI46O5

https://www.jerusalemonline.com/wp-c...er_flash90.jpg

https://cdn.presstv.com/photo/201802...c0709ed5a9.jpg

The wall is described here:

Although critics have sought to portray the security fence as a kind of "Berlin Wall," it is nothing of the sort. First, unlike the Berlin Wall, the fence does not separate one people, Germans from Germans, and deny freedom to those on one side. Israel's security fence separates two peoples, Israelis and Palestinians, and offers freedom and security for both. Second, while Israelis are fully prepared to live with Palestinians, and 20 percent of the Israeli population is already Arab, it is the Palestinians who say they do not want to live with any Jews and call for the West Bank to be judenrein. Third, the fence is not being constructed to prevent the citizens of one state from escaping; it is designed solely to keep terrorists out of Israel. Finally, only a tiny fraction of the total length of the barrier (less than 3% or about 10 miles) is actually a 30 foot high concrete wall, and that is being built in three areas where it will prevent Palestinian snipers from around the terrorist hotbeds of Kalkilya and Tul Karm from shooting at cars as they have done for the last three years along the Trans-Israel Highway, one of the country's main roads. The wall also takes up less space than the other barriers, only about seven feet, so it did not have a great impact on the area where it was built.

Most of the barrier will be a chain-link type fence similar to those used all over the United States combined with underground and long-range sensors, unmanned aerial vehicles, trenches, landmines and guard paths. Manned checkpoints will constitute the only way to travel back and forth through the fence. The barrier is altogether about 160 feet wide in most places.

The land used in building the security fence is seized for military purposes, not confiscated, and it remains the property of the owner. Legal procedures are already in place to allow every owner to file an objection to the seizure of their land. Moreover, property owners are offered compensation for the use of their land and for any damage to their trees.

You are right to correct me about one thing, however: the metal overhang is connected to both the concrete and metal parts of the wall/fence - not just the metal fencing. On the concrete segments, it is part of the sniper protection. So thanks for that correction.

I wondered why the concrete parts of the "wall" dominated the google search. Then I realized they are what comes up if you search on "Israeli Wall." If you search on "Israeli fence", however....

Facts can be such pesky things...

[Bill the Cat]

Right, and we don't want a stupid wall, and we don't want to pay for the stupid wall. What part don't you get?

because you are not interested in border security. If you had your way, it'd be a free for all. What other reason could you possibly have for there to be no physical barrier to deter illegal crossings? Perhaps future voters? Let them in unfettered, whine about their poor kids not knowing better, demand citizenship for their kids, and voila! Ready made demographic. We let you in, sheltered you from the mean cops, and got you citizenship, so you better vote for us! It's clever, I admit, but pathetically shallow to anyone with a sliver of brain cells.

[JimL]

because you are not interested in border security. If you had your way, it'd be a free for all. What other reason could you possibly have for there to be no physical barrier to deter illegal crossings? Perhaps future voters? Let them in unfettered, whine about their poor kids not knowing better, demand citizenship for their kids, and voila! Ready made demographic. We let you in, sheltered you from the mean cops, and got you citizenship, so you better vote for us! It's clever, I admit, but pathetically shallow to anyone with a sliver of brain cells.

Well, perhaps if republicans like yourself weren't such creeps, they might be your future voters. But really, you shouldn't be demeaning Ronald Reagan, the republican icon, in such a way.

[Cow Poke]

Well, perhaps if republicans like yourself weren't such creep....

That's really uncalled for, Jim.

[carpedm9587]

because you are not interested in border security. If you had your way, it'd be a free for all. What other reason could you possibly have for there to be no physical barrier to deter illegal crossings? Perhaps future voters? Let them in unfettered, whine about their poor kids not knowing better, demand citizenship for their kids, and voila! Ready made demographic. We let you in, sheltered you from the mean cops, and got you citizenship, so you better vote for us! It's clever, I admit, but pathetically shallow to anyone with a sliver of brain cells.

I'm responding to the emphasized segment. This is the oft-trotted-out trope from many on the right, and it is simply, flat-out, wrong. While there are some on the left who want open borders, most do not. Neither do most Democrats in office. What most of on the left do not want (and with this I agree with them) is to sink billions of dollars into a concrete barrier that runs 1,954 miles (the length of the southern border). The concrete alone is estimated to run almost $9B, never mind all of the labor. The Israeli wall Trump keeps pointing to is concrete (like Trump wants) for 3% of its length (about 12 miles), and those segments are in three populated areas to prevent sniper fire (which has been a problem in those areas). Last I checked, we have no sniper problem on our southern border. The rest of the border is metal fencing of various types, coupled with sensors and other detection technology. The cost was a fraction (per foot) of the cost of the concrete barrier.

THIS is what most on the left are saying: make the "wall" effective and cost efficient. Use the Israeli model. Some money HAS been allocated for the fencing, and the $1.3B can do a LOT more miles of fencing than it can do miles of concrete wall. Most of the people on the left are arguing for effective border security at a reasonable cost. Trump wants a "big beautiful concrete wall" without consideration of the cost, largely because it is visually appealing and rallies his base. If those of you on the right were to actually listen to the arguments from the left, instead of the trumped up (pun intended) version coming from many politicians on the right, you might find that the way most of the left is being characterized is simply not true. A few on the left ARE for open borders - but most of the left is not by any measure.

And the fact is that border security has been steadily improving and illegal immigration slowly dropping since 2011. Trump is inflaming this issue because it rallies his base.

P.S. And this wall, either type, will not do most of what Trump claims it will do. It will not stop the flood of drugs into our country because most of those drugs don't cross the southern border. It will not stop human trafficking because most human trafficking does not happen across the southern border. The one thing it could achieve is to reduce illegal immigration from that vector. But it will not stop illegal immigration because the number of illegal immigrants that are here due to visa over-stays swamps the number of illegal immigrants here because they crossed the southern border. So all of the money Trump throws at this "concrete wall" drains resources that could be used to solve these OTHER issues, and for no purpose - given that Israel has shown that the metal fencing supplemented with detector technology is highly effective.

[carpedm9587]

Well, perhaps if republicans like yourself weren't such creeps, they might be your future voters. But really, you shouldn't be demeaning Ronald Reagan, the republican icon, in such a way.

I agree with CP on this one - such personal attacks are unwarranted. My sister and her husband are about as Republican as you can get - and neither is a "creep." I disagree with their politics most of the time - but I do not disagree with their quality as people. I would likewise say the same for many I have met here. I have met Seer, and found him to be a good man - albeit one I probably disagree with most of the time. I have not met CP, but I suspect I would find the same thing. His politics are seriously hosed up and ill-informed, but his heart is in the right place.

What I tend to find of many on the left and the right is a tendency to parrot the party line, and swallow hole tropes offered by either side without really taking a moment to ask, "is this based on solid evidence, or is this cherry-picked evidence I am accepting because it conforms to my existing narrative?" This tendency seems to get worse the more "right" or "left" a person is. That is the primary danger I believe we face today - the selective acceptance/rejection of data to support our desired worldview. It is something I think we all have to seriously guard against. I have fallen prey to it myself more than once.

[rogue06]

That's really uncalled for, Jim.

Meh. Consider the source.

[Terraceth]

P.S. And this wall, either type, will not do most of what Trump claims it will do. It will not stop the flood of drugs into our country because most of those drugs don't cross the southern border. It will not stop human trafficking because most human trafficking does not happen across the southern border. The one thing it could achieve is to reduce illegal immigration from that vector. But it will not stop illegal immigration because the number of illegal immigrants that are here due to visa over-stays swamps the number of illegal immigrants here because they crossed the southern border.

Does it actually "swamp" that number? The various sources I've seen say that illegal immigrants are about 50/50 in being those who come here illegally in the first place versus those who technically come here legally but overstay their visas and thereby become illegal. It's true that doesn't negate your point of there being a lot who don't illegally cross the southern border, but one half of something cannot overwhelmingly outnumber the other half of the same thing.

[Cow Poke]

I agree with CP on this one -

such personal attacks are unwarranted.

To be fair, Bill can be rather harsh at times, and so can I, but "creeps"?

My sister and her husband are about as Republican as you can get - and neither is a "creep." I disagree with their politics most of the time - but I do not disagree with their quality as people. I would likewise say the same for many I have met here. I have met Seer, and found him to be a good man - albeit one I probably disagree with most of the time. I have not met CP, but I suspect I would find the same thing. His politics are seriously hosed up and ill-informed, but his heart is in the right place.

You might be surprised - sometimes I say things to get a reaction. Who was it that said "how can I know what I think until I hear myself say it"? I'm finding myself increasingly "in the middle" on a lot of these things.

I've become somewhat weary of the same ol' same ol'.... and a lot of the positions I'm assumed of holding aren't actually my positions at all. And, yeah, sometimes I argue just to see what the other guy will say.

I'm, quite honestly, losing interest in a lot of this.

[rogue06]

because you are not interested in border security. If you had your way, it'd be a free for all. What other reason could you possibly have for there to be no physical barrier to deter illegal crossings? Perhaps future voters? Let them in unfettered, whine about their poor kids not knowing better, demand citizenship for their kids, and voila! Ready made demographic. We let you in, sheltered you from the mean cops, and got you citizenship, so you better vote for us! It's clever, I admit, but pathetically shallow to anyone with a sliver of brain cells.

The claim that Democrats support open borders is obviously nothing but a right wing meme and can safely be dismissed. While there are some on the fringe who might fall into that category, those in elected office, especially in the upper echelons don't... want open... bord...

00000000000000ab0.0000.jpg

Oh.

[carpedm9587]

Does it actually "swamp" that number? The various sources I've seen say that illegal immigrants are about 50/50 in being those who come here illegally in the first place versus those who technically come here legally but overstay their visas and thereby become illegal. It's true that doesn't negate your point of there being a lot who don't illegally cross the southern border, but one half of something cannot overwhelmingly outnumber the other half of the same thing.

You may be right; swamped may be too strong a word. I am finding data for closer to a 60/40 split, but that is still not swamped. But the southern border makes up less than 1/4 of the total U.S. mainland border and less than 1/6 of the entire U.S. border (including Hawaii and Alaska). The tidbit I cannot find is the ratio of illegal border crossings that are done across this southern border vs. those that are done by sea, across the northern border, or across the Alaskan or Hawaiian border (I would assume Alaska would be a fairly small number, for obvious reasons).

If I find those numbers, I'll pass them on. If anyone else does, please pass them on.

[carpedm9587]

To be fair, Bill can be rather harsh at times, and so can I, but "creeps"?



You might be surprised - sometimes I say things to get a reaction. Who was it that said "how can I know what I think until I hear myself say it"? I'm finding myself increasingly "in the middle" on a lot of these things.

I've become somewhat weary of the same ol' same ol'.... and a lot of the positions I'm assumed of holding aren't actually my positions at all. And, yeah, sometimes I argue just to see what the other guy will say.

I'm, quite honestly, losing interest in a lot of this.

I think you are suffering from TFS...

[carpedm9587]

The claim that Democrats support open borders is obviously nothing but a right wing meme and can safely be dismissed. While there are some on the fringe who might fall into that category, those in elected office, especially in the upper echelons don't... want open... bord...

[ATTACH=CONFIG]34105[/ATTACH]

Oh.

An example is just that, Rogue, an example. I have seen no one claim that you cannot find anyone who believes in open borders, some of them fairly highly placed and some of them in Congress. Frankly, in a perfect world, I would as well. We don't live in a perfect world, so reasonable precautions need to be taken. The key is "reasonable." Pouring $25-$70B into a 2,000-mile long concrete border when there are less expensive and effective alternatives, as the Israeli wall demonstrates, is simply not "reasonable." It's a political tactic being used because it has good "optix" and rallies the Trump base.

But the general, sweeping claim that "the left wants open borders" and "the left doesn't care about border security" is simply patently false. It may sell well in Pretoria, but it is simply not true. I would suggest that this is a great example of cherry picking examples because they support your position. I suggest you look around to see what most on the left are actually saying, instead of indiscriminately buying into Trump's memes.