One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
To All my OPP Friends who oppose Trump's Wall
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 14 next>>
Jan 11, 2019 19:40:55   #
buffalo
 
Peewee wrote:
Just watching a few of the DEM and GOP resistance to the wall, makes me believe they are involved in drugs and human trafficking.


It is much bigger than that...

Mitch, the bitch, McConnell, a big "anti-drug" Senator and stauch opponent of legalizing pot was linked through his wife's, Elaine Chao, to a cargo ship (owned by her family) which was stopped and searched before departing from Colombia recently, with approximately 90 pounds of cocaine found on board by the Coast Guard. This connection is not only relevant because of the family connection, but also because the Chao family has often made large donations to McConnell’s campaigns.

Strangely no charges have been filed. How hard is it to connect the dots, folks. The bastards in DC are crooked to the core! And the voters keep re-electing the assholes.

| Reply
Jan 12, 2019 05:52:51   #
badbob85037 (a regular here)
 
ACP45 wrote:
The best rationale in support of President Trump's position on building a wall to halt illegal immigration is explained in this article published on ZeroHedge: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-01-10/israel-vs-america-capita-cost-border-wall-construction

For those who do not want to take the time to read it, I will summarize the key take-aways:

1) A Wall is effective. -
"The wall Netenyahu is referring to is the Israel-Egypt barrier on the southern border, which began construction in November 2010 and was completed in December 2013. The 152-mile long barrier was built at the urging of Netenyahu to curb an influx of illegal immigrants and terrorists from African nations.

Even left-leaning Politifact was forced to admit it worked…

Johnson said Israel cut its illegal immigration rate by “99 percent” by constructing a 143-mile fence along its southern border.

Israeli government data support Johnson’s statement. Johnson’s statement is accurate, but needs additional information. We rate it Mostly True."

2) The "Wall is too Costly" - or, "We can't Afford It" -
This one is easy. Israel takes it's security seriously. Many of America's politicians do not. Let's look at the following:

"Clearly, the very tiny country of Israel devotes an incredible amount of resources to border fencing and security, with an estimated 484 miles of completed walls/fencing and more under construction. Conversely, the US claims to have 580 miles of “barriers” in place already. Israel’s heavy usage of border walls is even more astounding when its size and GDP are considered relative to the US:

Israel

Population (2017 est): 8.7 million

GDP (2017): $350.9 billion (USD)

GDP per capita: $40,333 (USD)

The US

Population (2017 est): 325.7 million

GDP (2017): $19.39 trillion ($19,390 billion USD)

GDP per capita: $59,533 (USD)

Israel’s population is 2.7% of the US population, and its annual GDP is 1.8% that of US GDP. In spite of Israel’s tiny size, population and GDP, the total mileage of completed barriers in the country is just under 25% that of the entire length of the 1,954-mile US-Mexico border.

Putting it into per capita terms, each Israeli citizen is “responsible” for the construction of about 3.5 inches of wall. Conversely, each US citizen is “responsible” for the construction of 0.11 inches of “barrier” – which as Peter Skerry articulated in in 2009, long before Trump or his wall – has been poorly constructed in many areas, often intentionally so."

The article goes on to say, "The opposition to Trump’s border wall ultimately boils down to the argument “it’s a waste of money”. But the same politicians so vociferously opposing a $5.7 billion dollar wall funding request complained, but ultimately funded George W. Bush‘s Iraq war request – despite its $54.4 billion budget for 2003 alone (over nine times Trump’s wall request). That price tag has since ballooned well into the trillions – but Democrats refused to shut the government to prevent it.

Democrats have also refused to shut the government over funding for the US Navy’s wasteful aircraft carrier spending. The last completed aircraft carrier, the USS George W. Bush (CVN-77), was commissioned in 2009 at a cost of $6.2 billion (more than Trump’s wall funding request), and underwent its first deployment in June 2011.

The USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) was commissioned in 2017 at a cost of $17.5 billion (including $4.7 billion in R&D for the new carrier class) – and will still require more funding to fix lingering issues with ship engines and EMALS catapults that stilldon’t work properly – before it can undergo its first deployment…

…but that still hasn’t caused Pelosi or Schumer to shut the government down to object to this waste of taxpayer dollars.

In fact, the USS John F. Kennedy (CVN-79) continues to be built, with no contractors or military personnel fired or disciplined, despite not being scheduled to enter service until 2022. And as noted above by Anthony Capaccio, the future USS Enterprise (CVN-80) just began construction with an estimated cost of $12.6 billion, and the unnamed CVN-81 at an estimated price tag of $15 billion was recently approved by the Navy – without any objection from Democrats."

CONCLUSION:

Many Americans don’t mind this government shutdown, and applaud Trump for drawing a line in the sand for what amounts to a rather small funding request in the overall scheme of things. However, “the resistance” is doing this to all of us, as they are so keen on not giving Trump a win, they will risk shutting the government down for what could be months.

If government money is going to be wasted anyway, why not spend it on a border wall – which the Israelis have a decades-long track record as a worthwhile investment?
The best rationale in support of President Trump's... (show quote)


Because none of that has one thing to do with it. Nor is it about security, or the protection of Americans or America's Southern Border. It's about how low some will go to further their lust for power. But I can tell them right now America will see they never get it one way or another.

| Reply
Jan 12, 2019 06:40:55   #
4430 (a regular here)
 
Airforceone wrote:
Yes a wall works this is the 21st century not the 15th century. So in the 15th century walls worked but we are in the 21st century where we have virtual walls. Democrats want 21st century technology to protect our borders not a 15th century technology.


Airfart thank you for proving again that you are as stupid as can be this wall is not in the 15th century

1) A Wall is effective. -
"The wall Netenyahu is referring to is the Israel-Egypt barrier on the southern border, which began construction in November 2010 and was completed in December 2013. The 152-mile long barrier was built at the urging of Netenyahu to curb an influx of illegal immigrants and terrorists from African nations.

| Reply
Jan 12, 2019 07:41:22   #
snowbear37
 
Airforceone wrote:
Yes a wall works this is the 21st century not the 15th century. So in the 15th century walls worked but we are in the 21st century where we have virtual walls. Democrats want 21st century technology to protect our borders not a 15th century technology.


Democrats want open borders. The statements that "walls don't work" or walls are immoral" are just excuses to keep them open. The Democrats want voters. They want power. They don't care about America, if they did, they would worry more about what the people want (which is a wall). 15th century or 21st century, walls work (hint: that's why prisons have walls). A wall in conjunction with technology would work even better.

| Reply
Jan 12, 2019 08:06:30   #
buffalo
 
10,000 Conservative Ranchers Just Came Out Against Trump’s Wall
BY BENJAMIN LOCKE

Thousands of Conservative Texas ranchers and landowners may have voted for President Trump but they just announced that they are adamantly opposed to his planned border wall.

The Texas Wildlife Association (TWA), representing about 10,000 members, who manage 40 million acres of ranches and hunting leases, says they support efforts to stop illegal immigration but the Trump plan makes no sense as presented.

“We just see so many problems,” TWA Chief Executive David Yeates told the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram.

Those include years of legal battles over the use of eminent domain to take ownership of the privately held land; interrupting access to water from the Rio Grande River for landowners, their livestock, and wildlife including black bears, mountain lions, deer, bighorn sheep; destroying the scenic beauty of nature in many places; and doing other damage to the environment.

The group says a portion of the wall will be constructed as much as one mile inside the Texas border to save on construction costs which could leave homes, ranches, golf courses, nature preserves and wild animals without access to water. Some homes would be outside the border gate.

“If you take away access to the Rio Grande,” added Yates, “you take away the water for 50,000 acres of irrigated farmland, not to mention the drinking water for cattle and migratory path for wildlife.”

The group is also offended by what they see as the stupidity of the plans for Trump’s wall along the Mexican border. For instance, the Big Ben National Park, which has over 801,000 acres, represents about 1,000 miles of the Southern border, in the Lower Rio Grande Valley. It is sparsely populated and is the home of hundreds of specials of birds, reptiles, and animals, many protected by law.

“We’ve got a big, beautiful barrier, bigger than anything even Trump could build,” Todd Beckett, Republican Party chairman for Presidio County, told the Austin American-Statesman, adding: “There is not going to be a wall in Big Bend.”

“Only a president from New York could think we need to spend public money building a 30-foot-high wall where nature already built a 1,000-foot-high mountain canyon,” explains the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram.

Scott Nicol, a coordinator for the Sierra Club, said the biggest problem is going to be the eminent domain issue. He says there are about 110 miles of the 1,200-mile border private owned, and predicts, “Land condemnation suits will take years.”

“The wrong way to think about the wall is whether it’s tactical or rational,” said Nicol. “It’s entirely about politics and money: Politicians want a mile count. They don’t care if its works – and contractors just want the money.”

“We feel that the border needs to be kept secure via technology and manpower, not a wall,” says Lynne Weber, who with her husband is author of “Nature Watch Big Bend: A Seasonal Guilde.”

“The construction of a wall,” adds Weber, “would disrupt the very fragile desert ecocystem, one that is still recovering from ranching and overgrazing almost 100 years ago.”

The opposition of these Texans, who should be Trump’s natural allies, foreshadows many problems, higher costs, long delays and more political battles if Trump continues to demand the wall.

So far, Trump seems tone deaf to all of what they have to say.

| Reply
Jan 12, 2019 08:15:42   #
Canuckus Deploracus (a regular here)
 
Great post... I for one feel the need to rethink my views... Border security is a must... But it must reflect all facets of the issue...

Careful there Buffalo... Certain members who swing to the left are going to vote you there leader... (know you don't sympathize that way... but funny to think of the spamming)

Love your posts... Always provocative...

P.S. Have been doing some research on the difficulties the wall would cause to ranchers and others... Would you be so kind as to suggest some resources? PM would be fine..

Your friend, Kyle

| Reply
Jan 12, 2019 08:36:22   #
4430 (a regular here)
 
buffalo wrote:
10,000 Conservative Ranchers Just Came Out Against Trump’s Wall
BY BENJAMIN LOCKE

Thousands of Conservative Texas ranchers and landowners may have voted for President Trump but they just announced that they are adamantly opposed to his planned border wall.

The Texas Wildlife Association (TWA), representing about 10,000 members, who manage 40 million acres of ranches and hunting leases, says they support efforts to stop illegal immigration but the Trump plan makes no sense as presented.

“We just see so many problems,” TWA Chief Executive David Yeates told the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram.

Those include years of legal battles over the use of eminent domain to take ownership of the privately held land; interrupting access to water from the Rio Grande River for landowners, their livestock, and wildlife including black bears, mountain lions, deer, bighorn sheep; destroying the scenic beauty of nature in many places; and doing other damage to the environment.

The group says a portion of the wall will be constructed as much as one mile inside the Texas border to save on construction costs which could leave homes, ranches, golf courses, nature preserves and wild animals without access to water. Some homes would be outside the border gate.

“If you take away access to the Rio Grande,” added Yates, “you take away the water for 50,000 acres of irrigated farmland, not to mention the drinking water for cattle and migratory path for wildlife.”

The group is also offended by what they see as the stupidity of the plans for Trump’s wall along the Mexican border. For instance, the Big Ben National Park, which has over 801,000 acres, represents about 1,000 miles of the Southern border, in the Lower Rio Grande Valley. It is sparsely populated and is the home of hundreds of specials of birds, reptiles, and animals, many protected by law.

“We’ve got a big, beautiful barrier, bigger than anything even Trump could build,” Todd Beckett, Republican Party chairman for Presidio County, told the Austin American-Statesman, adding: “There is not going to be a wall in Big Bend.”

“Only a president from New York could think we need to spend public money building a 30-foot-high wall where nature already built a 1,000-foot-high mountain canyon,” explains the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram.

Scott Nicol, a coordinator for the Sierra Club, said the biggest problem is going to be the eminent domain issue. He says there are about 110 miles of the 1,200-mile border private owned, and predicts, “Land condemnation suits will take years.”

“The wrong way to think about the wall is whether it’s tactical or rational,” said Nicol. “It’s entirely about politics and money: Politicians want a mile count. They don’t care if its works – and contractors just want the money.”

“We feel that the border needs to be kept secure via technology and manpower, not a wall,” says Lynne Weber, who with her husband is author of “Nature Watch Big Bend: A Seasonal Guilde.”

“The construction of a wall,” adds Weber, “would disrupt the very fragile desert ecocystem, one that is still recovering from ranching and overgrazing almost 100 years ago.”

The opposition of these Texans, who should be Trump’s natural allies, foreshadows many problems, higher costs, long delays and more political battles if Trump continues to demand the wall.

So far, Trump seems tone deaf to all of what they have to say.
10,000 Conservative Ranchers Just Came Out Against... (show quote)


What a crock of Hogwash !

| Reply
Jan 12, 2019 08:55:49   #
ACP45 (a regular here)
 
badbob85037 wrote:
Because none of that has one thing to do with it. Nor is it about security, or the protection of Americans or America's Southern Border. It's about how low some will go to further their lust for power. But I can tell them right now America will see they never get it one way or another.


We simply disagree on this issue. Walls do work (where needed and practical). Border security is without a doubt important, and to suggest otherwise is .... well... fill in the blanks.

| Reply
Jan 12, 2019 08:57:25   #
ACP45 (a regular here)
 
buffalo wrote:
10,000 Conservative Ranchers Just Came Out Against Trump’s Wall
BY BENJAMIN LOCKE

Thousands of Conservative Texas ranchers and landowners may have voted for President Trump but they just announced that they are adamantly opposed to his planned border wall.

The Texas Wildlife Association (TWA), representing about 10,000 members, who manage 40 million acres of ranches and hunting leases, says they support efforts to stop illegal immigration but the Trump plan makes no sense as presented.

“We just see so many problems,” TWA Chief Executive David Yeates told the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram.

Those include years of legal battles over the use of eminent domain to take ownership of the privately held land; interrupting access to water from the Rio Grande River for landowners, their livestock, and wildlife including black bears, mountain lions, deer, bighorn sheep; destroying the scenic beauty of nature in many places; and doing other damage to the environment.

The group says a portion of the wall will be constructed as much as one mile inside the Texas border to save on construction costs which could leave homes, ranches, golf courses, nature preserves and wild animals without access to water. Some homes would be outside the border gate.

“If you take away access to the Rio Grande,” added Yates, “you take away the water for 50,000 acres of irrigated farmland, not to mention the drinking water for cattle and migratory path for wildlife.”

The group is also offended by what they see as the stupidity of the plans for Trump’s wall along the Mexican border. For instance, the Big Ben National Park, which has over 801,000 acres, represents about 1,000 miles of the Southern border, in the Lower Rio Grande Valley. It is sparsely populated and is the home of hundreds of specials of birds, reptiles, and animals, many protected by law.

“We’ve got a big, beautiful barrier, bigger than anything even Trump could build,” Todd Beckett, Republican Party chairman for Presidio County, told the Austin American-Statesman, adding: “There is not going to be a wall in Big Bend.”

“Only a president from New York could think we need to spend public money building a 30-foot-high wall where nature already built a 1,000-foot-high mountain canyon,” explains the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram.

Scott Nicol, a coordinator for the Sierra Club, said the biggest problem is going to be the eminent domain issue. He says there are about 110 miles of the 1,200-mile border private owned, and predicts, “Land condemnation suits will take years.”

“The wrong way to think about the wall is whether it’s tactical or rational,” said Nicol. “It’s entirely about politics and money: Politicians want a mile count. They don’t care if its works – and contractors just want the money.”

“We feel that the border needs to be kept secure via technology and manpower, not a wall,” says Lynne Weber, who with her husband is author of “Nature Watch Big Bend: A Seasonal Guilde.”

“The construction of a wall,” adds Weber, “would disrupt the very fragile desert ecocystem, one that is still recovering from ranching and overgrazing almost 100 years ago.”

The opposition of these Texans, who should be Trump’s natural allies, foreshadows many problems, higher costs, long delays and more political battles if Trump continues to demand the wall.

So far, Trump seems tone deaf to all of what they have to say.
10,000 Conservative Ranchers Just Came Out Against... (show quote)


You make some good points. But like I said before, not all areas of the border need a wall or fence. I think there is a way to compromise on this issue. I do not think that Trump will want an entire 1,900 mile fence.

| Reply
Jan 12, 2019 09:13:12   #
buffalo
 
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
Great post... I for one feel the need to rethink my views... Border security is a must... But it must reflect all facets of the issue...

Careful there Buffalo... Certain members who swing to the left are going to vote you there leader... (know you don't sympathize that way... but funny to think of the spamming)

Love your posts... Always provocative...

P.S. Have been doing some research on the difficulties the wall would cause to ranchers and others... Would you be so kind as to suggest some resources? PM would be fine..

Your friend, Kyle
Great post... I for one feel the need to rethink m... (show quote)


Try googling some Texas newspapers on the subject of the wall and get actual opinions of people, farmers and ranchers whose lives, lifestyles and livelihoods are going to be disrupted and torn apart and the impracticality of a wall.

Think of the disruption to the migratory patterns of many species of endangered wildlife. Parts of the wall, due to logistics will have to be built as far as a mile inward from the border slpiting some farm andranch land in two.

| Reply
Jan 12, 2019 09:15:14   #
markc
 
From a concerned engineer:

“To recap: Iʼm a licensed structural and civil engineer with a MS in structural engineering from the top program in the nation and over a decade of experience on high- performance projects, and particularly of cleaning up design disasters where the factors werenʼt properly accounted for, and Iʼm an adjunct professor of structural analysis and design at UH-Downtown. I have previously been deposed as an expert witness in matters regarding proper construction of walls and the various factors associated therein, and my testimony has passed Daubert.
Am I a wall expert? I am. I am literally a court-accepted expert on walls.
Structurally and civil engineering-wise, the border wall is not a feasible project. Trump did not hire engineers to design the thing. He solicited bids from contractors, not engineers. This means itʼs not been designed by professionals. Itʼs a disaster of numerous types waiting to happen.
What disasters?
Off the top of my head...
1) It will mess with our ability to drain land in flash flooding. Anything impeding the ability of water to get where it needs to go (doesnʼt matter if there are holes in the wall or whatever) is going to dramatically increase the risk of flooding.
2) Messes with all kind of stuff ecologically. For all other projects, we have to do an Environmental Site Assessment, which is arduous. Theyʼre either planning to circumvent all this, or they havenʼt accounted for it yet, because thatʼs part of the design process, and this thing hasnʼt been designed. 3) The prototypes they came up with are nearly impossible to build or donʼt actually do the job. This article explains more:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.engineering.com/amp /17599.html
And so on.
The estimates provided for the cost are arrived at unreasonably. You can look for yourself at the two-year-old estimate that you see everyone citing.
http://fronterasdesk.org/sites/default/files/field/docs/2016/0 7/Bernstein-%20The%20Trump%20Wall.pdf
It does not account for rework, complexities beyond the prototype design, factors to prevent flood and environmental hazard creation, engineering redesign... Itʼs going to be higher than $50bn. The contractors will hit the government with near CONSTANT change orders. “Cost overrun” will be the name of the game. It will not be completed in Trumpʼs lifetime.
Iʼm a structural forensicist, which means Iʼm called in when things go wrong. This is a project that WILL go wrong. When projects go wrong, the original estimates are just *obliterated*. And when that happens, good luck getting it fixed, because there arenʼt that many forensicists out there to right the ship, particularly not that are willing to work on a border wall project— a large quotient of us are immigrants, and besides, we canʼt afford to bid on jobs that are this political. Weʼre small firms, and weʼre already busy, and we donʼt gamble our reputations on political footballs. So youʼd end up with a revolving door of contractors making a giant, uncoordinated muddle of things, and itʼd generally be a mess. Good money after bad. The GAO agrees with me.
And it wonʼt be effective. I could, right now, purchase a 32 foot extension ladder and weld a cheap custom saddle for the top of the proposed wall so that I can get over it. I donʼt know who they talked to about the wall design and its efficacy, but it sure as heck wasnʼt anybody with any engineering imagination.
Another thing: we are not far from the day where inexpensive drones will be able to pick up and carry someone. This will happen in the next ten years, and itʼs folly to think that the coyotes who ferry people over the border wonʼt purchase or create them. Theyʼre low enough, quiet enough, and small enough to quickly zip people over any wall we could build undetected with our current monitoring setup.
Letʼs have border security, by all means, but letʼs be smart about it. This is not smart. Itʼs not effective. Itʼs NOT cheap. The returns will be diminishing as technology advances, too. This is a ridiculous idea that will never be successfully executed and, as such, would be a monumental waste of money.“

Just a thought

| Reply
Jan 12, 2019 09:17:49   #
buffalo
 
4430 wrote:
What a crock of Hogwash !


Really? And just what the hell do you know about the Texas/Mexico border and the people and wildlife that depend on the Rio Grande for their lives?

I am not saying that the invasion of the US by illegals, criminals, terrorists, gangs, etc is not a serious problem that MUST be addressed, I just don't think a disruptive wall is the best answer.

Listen to the people that actually LIVE on the border and make their living from border land and the river that will be affected by a wall.

| Reply
Jan 12, 2019 09:24:56   #
JoyV (a regular here)
 
ACP45 wrote:
The best rationale in support of President Trump's position on building a wall to halt illegal immigration is explained in this article published on ZeroHedge: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-01-10/israel-vs-america-capita-cost-border-wall-construction

For those who do not want to take the time to read it, I will summarize the key take-aways:

1) A Wall is effective. -
"The wall Netenyahu is referring to is the Israel-Egypt barrier on the southern border, which began construction in November 2010 and was completed in December 2013. The 152-mile long barrier was built at the urging of Netenyahu to curb an influx of illegal immigrants and terrorists from African nations.

Even left-leaning Politifact was forced to admit it worked…

Johnson said Israel cut its illegal immigration rate by “99 percent” by constructing a 143-mile fence along its southern border.

Israeli government data support Johnson’s statement. Johnson’s statement is accurate, but needs additional information. We rate it Mostly True."

2) The "Wall is too Costly" - or, "We can't Afford It" -
This one is easy. Israel takes it's security seriously. Many of America's politicians do not. Let's look at the following:

"Clearly, the very tiny country of Israel devotes an incredible amount of resources to border fencing and security, with an estimated 484 miles of completed walls/fencing and more under construction. Conversely, the US claims to have 580 miles of “barriers” in place already. Israel’s heavy usage of border walls is even more astounding when its size and GDP are considered relative to the US:

Israel

Population (2017 est): 8.7 million

GDP (2017): $350.9 billion (USD)

GDP per capita: $40,333 (USD)

The US

Population (2017 est): 325.7 million

GDP (2017): $19.39 trillion ($19,390 billion USD)

GDP per capita: $59,533 (USD)

Israel’s population is 2.7% of the US population, and its annual GDP is 1.8% that of US GDP. In spite of Israel’s tiny size, population and GDP, the total mileage of completed barriers in the country is just under 25% that of the entire length of the 1,954-mile US-Mexico border.

Putting it into per capita terms, each Israeli citizen is “responsible” for the construction of about 3.5 inches of wall. Conversely, each US citizen is “responsible” for the construction of 0.11 inches of “barrier” – which as Peter Skerry articulated in in 2009, long before Trump or his wall – has been poorly constructed in many areas, often intentionally so."

The article goes on to say, "The opposition to Trump’s border wall ultimately boils down to the argument “it’s a waste of money”. But the same politicians so vociferously opposing a $5.7 billion dollar wall funding request complained, but ultimately funded George W. Bush‘s Iraq war request – despite its $54.4 billion budget for 2003 alone (over nine times Trump’s wall request). That price tag has since ballooned well into the trillions – but Democrats refused to shut the government to prevent it.

Democrats have also refused to shut the government over funding for the US Navy’s wasteful aircraft carrier spending. The last completed aircraft carrier, the USS George W. Bush (CVN-77), was commissioned in 2009 at a cost of $6.2 billion (more than Trump’s wall funding request), and underwent its first deployment in June 2011.

The USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) was commissioned in 2017 at a cost of $17.5 billion (including $4.7 billion in R&D for the new carrier class) – and will still require more funding to fix lingering issues with ship engines and EMALS catapults that stilldon’t work properly – before it can undergo its first deployment…

…but that still hasn’t caused Pelosi or Schumer to shut the government down to object to this waste of taxpayer dollars.

In fact, the USS John F. Kennedy (CVN-79) continues to be built, with no contractors or military personnel fired or disciplined, despite not being scheduled to enter service until 2022. And as noted above by Anthony Capaccio, the future USS Enterprise (CVN-80) just began construction with an estimated cost of $12.6 billion, and the unnamed CVN-81 at an estimated price tag of $15 billion was recently approved by the Navy – without any objection from Democrats."

CONCLUSION:

Many Americans don’t mind this government shutdown, and applaud Trump for drawing a line in the sand for what amounts to a rather small funding request in the overall scheme of things. However, “the resistance” is doing this to all of us, as they are so keen on not giving Trump a win, they will risk shutting the government down for what could be months.

If government money is going to be wasted anyway, why not spend it on a border wall – which the Israelis have a decades-long track record as a worthwhile investment?
The best rationale in support of President Trump's... (show quote)


I would have chosen different examples as I believe we do need aircraft carriers after Bill Clinton decommissioned almost all of them. I believe he decommissioned 13 which has so far been replaced with 1 new carrier actually in operation and several in the pipeline. But I don't know how much of the costs are unnecessary.

But there are other places to get the funds. To start, Trump slashed $1 billion from the cost of the new Air Force One. Then there is the Pentagon reported “expired unobligated balance” of $27.7 billion in its most recent financial report. I'm sure with a little digging, more $billions could be discovered in wasteful spending, unnecessary spending, or expired sums.

| Reply
Jan 12, 2019 09:29:50   #
buffalo
 
markc wrote:
From a concerned engineer:

“To recap: Iʼm a licensed structural and civil engineer with a MS in structural engineering from the top program in the nation and over a decade of experience on high- performance projects, and particularly of cleaning up design disasters where the factors werenʼt properly accounted for, and Iʼm an adjunct professor of structural analysis and design at UH-Downtown. I have previously been deposed as an expert witness in matters regarding proper construction of walls and the various factors associated therein, and my testimony has passed Daubert.
Am I a wall expert? I am. I am literally a court-accepted expert on walls.
Structurally and civil engineering-wise, the border wall is not a feasible project. Trump did not hire engineers to design the thing. He solicited bids from contractors, not engineers. This means itʼs not been designed by professionals. Itʼs a disaster of numerous types waiting to happen.
What disasters?
Off the top of my head...
1) It will mess with our ability to drain land in flash flooding. Anything impeding the ability of water to get where it needs to go (doesnʼt matter if there are holes in the wall or whatever) is going to dramatically increase the risk of flooding.
2) Messes with all kind of stuff ecologically. For all other projects, we have to do an Environmental Site Assessment, which is arduous. Theyʼre either planning to circumvent all this, or they havenʼt accounted for it yet, because thatʼs part of the design process, and this thing hasnʼt been designed. 3) The prototypes they came up with are nearly impossible to build or donʼt actually do the job. This article explains more:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.engineering.com/amp /17599.html
And so on.
The estimates provided for the cost are arrived at unreasonably. You can look for yourself at the two-year-old estimate that you see everyone citing.
http://fronterasdesk.org/sites/default/files/field/docs/2016/0 7/Bernstein-%20The%20Trump%20Wall.pdf
It does not account for rework, complexities beyond the prototype design, factors to prevent flood and environmental hazard creation, engineering redesign... Itʼs going to be higher than $50bn. The contractors will hit the government with near CONSTANT change orders. “Cost overrun” will be the name of the game. It will not be completed in Trumpʼs lifetime.
Iʼm a structural forensicist, which means Iʼm called in when things go wrong. This is a project that WILL go wrong. When projects go wrong, the original estimates are just *obliterated*. And when that happens, good luck getting it fixed, because there arenʼt that many forensicists out there to right the ship, particularly not that are willing to work on a border wall project— a large quotient of us are immigrants, and besides, we canʼt afford to bid on jobs that are this political. Weʼre small firms, and weʼre already busy, and we donʼt gamble our reputations on political footballs. So youʼd end up with a revolving door of contractors making a giant, uncoordinated muddle of things, and itʼd generally be a mess. Good money after bad. The GAO agrees with me.
And it wonʼt be effective. I could, right now, purchase a 32 foot extension ladder and weld a cheap custom saddle for the top of the proposed wall so that I can get over it. I donʼt know who they talked to about the wall design and its efficacy, but it sure as heck wasnʼt anybody with any engineering imagination.
Another thing: we are not far from the day where inexpensive drones will be able to pick up and carry someone. This will happen in the next ten years, and itʼs folly to think that the coyotes who ferry people over the border wonʼt purchase or create them. Theyʼre low enough, quiet enough, and small enough to quickly zip people over any wall we could build undetected with our current monitoring setup.
Letʼs have border security, by all means, but letʼs be smart about it. This is not smart. Itʼs not effective. Itʼs NOT cheap. The returns will be diminishing as technology advances, too. This is a ridiculous idea that will never be successfully executed and, as such, would be a monumental waste of money.“

Just a thought
From a concerned engineer: br br “To recap: Iʼm a... (show quote)


EXCELLENT!

| Reply
Jan 12, 2019 09:43:23   #
buffalo
 
JoyV wrote:
I would have chosen different examples as I believe we do need aircraft carriers after Bill Clinton decommissioned almost all of them. I believe he decommissioned 13 which has so far been replaced with 1 new carrier actually in operation and several in the pipeline. But I don't know how much of the costs are unnecessary.

But there are other places to get the funds. To start, Trump slashed $1 billion from the cost of the new Air Force One. Then there is the Pentagon reported “expired unobligated balance” of $27.7 billion in its most recent financial report. I'm sure with a little digging, more $billions could be discovered in wasteful spending, unnecessary spending, or expired sums.
I would have chosen different examples as I believ... (show quote)


Why do you people listen to the military industrial corporations that make BILLIONS in taxpayer dollars building needless miltary equipment. How much do we need?

This is the number of aircraft carriers of the US and other countries as of 2018:

https://www.globalfirepower.com/navy-aircraft-carriers.asp

The US currently has 20 aircraft carriers to the rest of the wold's 24. The MOST any other country have is 4 piece. And NONE of them can match the capabilities of the US carriers. GEEZ!

This gddamn bullshit of spending TRILLIONS on unneeded military crap is what has broke this country NOT needed social and non-existent infrastructure spending. How many time do we need to insanely obliterate the entire earth.

| Reply
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 14 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2019 IDF International Technologies, Inc.