It's Not Just Physical Walls the U.S. Must Build in the Coronavirus Era

American Thinker ^ | January 24, 2020 | Chet Richard

[Kaslin]

Walls have been the norm for settlements since the earliest Neolithic days. Farmers have things, such as food and valuable implements. Other people want those things and are sometimes inclined to take them. Walls provide security so that people can live with some degree of peace. Throughout history, everywhere towns and cities, and even nations, have built walls to keep out the riff-raff. Why? Well, walls work!

Walls come in many sizes and materials: stone, steel, bricks and wood. They come in many sizes, from protecting a small settlement to protecting an entire territory. Hadrian’s Wall, Offa’s Dyke and the Great Wall of China show us the effectiveness of long walls in the preservation of a nation. Trump’s wall promises similar utility.

Walls are a powerful force multiplier – provided they are adequately garrisoned. There are a multitude of examples in history where a small defending force has defeated a massive besieging army through the power of walls. But walls must not have open ends that can be flanked. The Maginot line is a sad example.

Protective walls don’t have to be material. They can be cultural, political or economic in nature. Ancient Sparta had no walls of stone. The Spartans relied on the reputation of their warriors. Reputation was their wall. The very name Sparta was enough to deter invasion.

After the Second World War, the United States built treaty walls – NATO in Europe protecting against the Soviet Union and SEATO in the western Pacific shielding East Asia against communist China. These treaty organizations not only provided enhanced military protection, they also economically enriched all the participants.

[Rurudyne]

I’ve long said that the message sent by a barrier, the “unwelcome sign” if you will, is as important if not more so than the wall itself.

[Altura Ct.]

Absolutely. Immigration in general must be rethought. We need to repeal the 1965 Immigration Act for starters.

[dljordan]

“We need to repeal the 1965 Immigration Act for starters.”

Powerful people and organizations were behind that bill and they still exist today. They won’t stop until this country is destroyed.

[PeterPrinciple]

I’ve long said that the message sent by a barrier, the “unwelcome sign” if you will, is as important if not more so than the wall itself.

---

and enforcing our current laws is more important than new ones.

[Rurudyne]

Hard to enforce laws when one political party is into population replacement on the sly.

[bubbacluck]

I remember reading about newly arrived immigrants at Ellis Island being sent back home because they were ill with TB. Their family stayed but they went back.

[Paladin2]

"Well, theories are nice, but they often don’t work out in practice."

"...in theory there is no difference between theory and practice, while in practice there is."

[Paladin2]

Who then will continue to hold the Federal Debt?

[Redwood71]

“We need to repeal the 1965 Immigration Act for starters.”

During Congressional debates at that time, a number of experts testified that little would effectively change under the reformed legislation of the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965, and it was seen more as a matter of principle to have a more open policy. But it would have an immediate and lasting impact.

In place of the national-origins quota system, the act provided for preferences to be made according to categories, such as relatives of U.S. citizens or permanent residents, those with skills deemed useful to the United States or refugees of violence or unrest. (And we all know what sanctuary has been turned into)

But as times changed, and the amount of immigrants coming in on the act has flucated with it, we now are arguing apples and oranges calling it fruit. We still are using the “usefulness to our country” thought process from the act. But certain states are ignoring it. So taking it out won’t cause change until the states ignoring it are forced to comply to it. Then it would have usefulness. Right now it’s being illegally put on the back burner.

rwood