Posted on 07/23/2015 4:33:18 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Constructing an impassable wall along the U.S.-Mexico border would be a tall order — even for master real estate developer and 2016 GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump.
"From a security standpoint, it really is not an intelligent solution," said Eric Olson, associate director of the Latin American program at the non-partisan Wilson Center.
In fact, "it's ludicrous," Olson said of the idea, which has become a hallmark of Trump's campaign.
Experts estimate that building and maintaining such a wall on the 1,954-mile border, which snakes along four huge states, would cost tens of billions of dollars. And the 21,000 border patrol agents currently on duty would be "nowhere near sufficient" to keep close surveillance on all of it, said Wayne Cornelius, director of University of California San Diego's Mexican migration field research program.
"Any kind of border barrier can be climbed over, and to prevent that type of activity, we would have to have not just drones in the sky, but a lot of boots on the ground," he said.
As of now, fences or other physical obstacles cover about one third of the border, areas that can be accessed easily by foot or by car, Cornelius said. Trump wants to wall in the entire border to keep out undocumented Mexican immigrants, who he has called "rapists" and "criminals."(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
ROI: High
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
“it’s ludicrous,” Olson said of the idea
Who the hell are you?
What’s ludicrous is spending billions and billions in unearned benefits to people who should not be here.
Illegals are costing billions in healthcare, education, social services.
And that doesn’t include the crimes and gangs and third-world diseases, etc.
In the long run, the WALL could be more beneficial than a million new illegals each year.
What’s left of it you mean.
That has always been my thesis.
If we actually fully enforce the laws we have now and get rid of the anchor baby BS they would stop coming.
If any local, state, fed government agency was forced to turn them in when they encountered them, etc.
Make it very uncomfortable to hire them.
If there was no way for them to ‘get by’ here then yes, most would self deport.
The rest would just be a matter of time until they were caught and deported.
No need for a wall at all.
Seems like the union folks would have an interest in the construction jobs created by a huge government boondoggle like this.
It like the big dig x ten or twenty.
We're suppose to believe that liberals who give money away hand over fist are 'oh so worried about the cost'? Yeah, we were all born yesterday...
Bingo!
Yes, those are the 2 “experts”. Laughable.
Careful! When I suggested mining the border a couple of years ago I got a FReepmail from a mod threatening to ban or suspend me if I continued.
“Any kind of border barrier can be climbed over, and to prevent that type of activity, we would have to have not just drones in the sky, but a lot of boots on the ground,” he said**********
Well, how much would it cost without a fence? You’d need more drones, boots on the ground etc. These clowns are simply attempting now to claim securing the border is impossible.
And tens of billions to build a fence? Assuming $20,000,000,000 which is the lowest possible construction amount given this tens of billions nonsense quoted by the expert, the number comes out to $2,000 per lineal foot. You could build multiple fences for that amount.
My great-uncle was promoted to captain for the Mexican Punitive Expedition in 1915.
My grandfather was there, perhaps under him. cool.
Hogwash! A fence (doesn't have to be a wall) could be electrified, not enough to kill but to make it intolerable to grasp. And razor-wire bales (inhumane/so what)wrapped around the top and partly down the sides would discourage anyone who could withstand the electrification. That's only two ideas. Those opposed to a fence know that it would work. That's precisely why they're against it.
Sounds like a GOOD investment on behalf of the American people.
> Eliminate Government intervention in HealthCare, the Deptartments of Education, Energy, and HUD...
Just for starters. There are many many many Executive agencies that need to be abolished. The apparatchiks will squawk and fight it and deploy sob stories and trot out a parade of horribles, too bad. These agencies have got to go.
eXperts say.. OOOOOooooHHhhhhhh.. experts..
That's not a bad idea, but it probably wouldn't be wise to gut them first. It should be a "live" bounty at least on the 1st and 2nd time.
After that,...?
I think you just have to be clear that you are proposing it be done by the government, rather than as a private measure.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.