Posted on 10/06/2011 1:49:09 AM PDT by bullypulpit
For all of you with a fence fetish: how will it deter entry via underground tunnels? How will every part of this fence be monitored to ensure no one is going over, under, or even thru it?
This border fence is to (some on) the Right as global warming is to (many on) the Left.
Are you the one who posted the night vision videos of Mexicans climbing over a border fence? Anyone who thinks that a fence is all we need is simplistic.
When those prisons were built, the technology that we have today was not yet realized.
All the gates and walls at the prison are manned. Its also a very small area compared to the US border. Rick Perry is also for a fence for many urban areas.
None of your “rhetoric guys” will build a fence either. It just sounds good to those that love hearing it.
Some people are being snookerd on the issue of a fence.
The incremental cost of additional illegals is lower than the cost of the fence. The fence is useless against the existing illegal population.
They are not really “costing” us quite what you say either, you are costing “opportunity”, which if we removed the illegals entirely wouldn’t exist anyway. If we really cared about the money we are losing, we’d give them amnesty to force them into the system so they would pay taxes. That’s not what anybody here wants. We want them GONE, not to be tax-paying citizens.
I’m opposed to all the regulations and overbearing environmental laws, but they do exist, they are unfortunately legal, and stand in the way of any possibility of “shovel-ready” for building a wall along a major river with huge environmental repercussions.
Just figuring out how you don’t essentially dehydrate to death the entire desert animal population would be an enormous problem to solve.
It’s a different argument entirely than what you claim. The argument I’m making in this comment is that EVERYBODY supports “strategic fencing”, but the “fence the border” crowd simply refuses to admit it, as you refuse to admit it here, even while you argue for it.
You call fencing ANY part of the beach “one of the STUPIDEST straw men”. So you agree that nobody wants to do it. But it is a border. And you said you wanted to fence the ENTIRE border. But you don’t, and think it’s stupid to waste our time and inconvenience ourselves building a fence 20 feet from the Mexican border, because that 20 feet is along the gulf coast, even though you don’t need a BOAT, you can just walk around the edge of the fence.
This proves that you are for “strategic fencing” — fencing where it MAKES SENSE. You clearly believe that it “makes sense” to build a fence along the ENTIRE Rio Grande. But you think it would be STUPID to build ANY fence along the beaches. Rick Perry believes it would “make sense” to build a fence across the parts of the border where illegals ACTUALLY CROSS, but not on the parts of the border where there is no crossing and people use the border.
So you and Rick Perry are both using the same thought process, just coming to a different conclusion.
But rather than seriously arguing why you think any particular place Perry says “no fence” would be better with a fence, you call him “Open Borders”. And if I call YOU “Open Borders” because you won’t build a fence along the gulf of Mexico, you call it a “straw man” and “stupid” and won’t defend your opinion.
The REAL “straw man” argument is your lame attempt to compare walking along 100 yards of beach with “building rocket ships”. ANY person could walk around the edge of the fence. It’s trivial. Boats are also trivial, it’s why we have a COAST GUARD (boots on the ground) guarding our territorial waters and watching for smugglers.
Note that the answer to the gulf coast is “boots on the ‘ground’”, exactly the same answer Perry is giving for parts of the land border.
Nice try with the deflection though, mr. “I refuse to fence off the beaches because that’s a STUPID idea that would be a waste of time and money because they could fly in on rocket ships”.
All of your points are good. However, Rick Perry did go to Israel several times to study the way they use their fence.
Its worked for them and possibly it could help in several stategic spots just not on the entire border of the US.
Its almost is a moot point, however, since the fence will never be built.
The red meat guys are being snookered. No way am I advocatig builing a fence across the border because its never going to happen amd it would be a waste of money.
Perry quote: “President Fox’s vision for an open border is a vision I embrace”
That is a vision I embrace as well. I look forward to the day when Mexico is a real developed country, and our border with Mexico can be as “open” as our border with Canada (which isn’t exactly “open” if you’ve ever gone into Canada, but there’s no 30-foot fence blocking our view of Niagara falls either).
You only think you know more than the people who really know what they’re talking about.
The I’ll bet you just love the North American Union concept.
You don’t know how ignorant you are on border security.
I actually have no problem with the actual concept; I of course oppose the fanciful conspiracy version.
The “NAU” is of like kind with the absurd translation of “bi-national health insurance” into a “bi-NATIONALIZED health insurance”. The conspiracy is much worse than the reality.
We have NAFTA. I know some here dislike the concept of NAFTA, but the purpose of NAFTA was to bring us into a closer trading relationship with our neighbors. We also have common interests with our border countries regarding security, terrorism, and the drug trade, so it makes sense to work together on those issues, as well as environmental issues, water rights, and things like drilling in the gulf.
Our country is better off when we can cooperate with our neighbors, and not treat them as our sworn enemies, as some here seem to want to do with Mexico.
It’s almost like some freepers have never heard of Americans taking day-trips down to Tijuana, or all of the high-class vacation spots in Mexico. To hear some of them, you’d think Mexico was worse than the old Soviet Union or North Korea.
It’s interesting how Texas, where the people actually have to deal first-hand with the problems of illegal immigration, seem to like Perry just fine, electing him 3 times. And they seem to like the solutions to handling the large number of illegals they are stuck with.
But people in northern states who probably have never actually seen an illegal unless they were cutting their front lawns or fixing their roof all think they know a lot better than Rick Perry how to handle the problem he’s been dealing with for 10 years.
And they ignore NumbersUsa, a fanatically anti-illegal-immigrant, and largely anti-immigrant, group, which says Rick Perry is actually GOOD on border security.
The know-it-alls about border security are as clueless as the Wall St. protesters.
Your comments are right on. Everyone for a fence has vision of the Berlin Wall or the Great Wall of China. People were killed if they tried to scale those walls. All they have to look at is the border between North and South Korea. If a wall would work there, they would have built it.
Perry’s ENTIRE quote:
“President Fox’s vision for an open border is a vision I embrace, as long as we demonstrate the will to address the obstacles to it. An open border means poverty has given way to opportunity, and Mexico’s citizens do not feel compelled to cross the border to find that opportunity. It means we have addressed pollution concerns, made substantial progress in stopping the spread of disease, and rid our crossings of illicit drug smuggling activity. Clearly we have a long way to go in addressing those issues.”
Excellent post, wasted on fencetrolls though.
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.