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 bulls**t 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.

What would be wrong with permanently stationing enough troops (with the accompanying current technologies) along the border and giving them the needed authority to use wh**ever force necessary to STOP the invasion of the US by i******s, terrorists, criminals and gangs, not to mention drugs at the border.

There would be no need for more detention centers, or immigration courts or any other expenses. After all the troops were going to be paid regardless, so that would be no additional cost.

Stationing them there permanently would necessitate the need for housing for their families, auto purchases, groceries, etc. It would mean a boom for all the US towns and cities along the US/Mexico border. A win/win deal.

For me the obvious answer is to have solid fence where feasible and open where it is not. Large grazers will change their migration routes to go around the solid sections, eliminating that argument. But i******s will also be funnelled to shorter spaces where they can be more easily intercepted.

Bend National Park can sit entirely outside the wall and the crossing points through the wall can also serve as the Park entrances. No problem there either.

As for ranches being split, they can have a crossing point - same principle as my first point - much smaller strategic point to defend. Even having such a point every mile would not defeat the benefits.

I am not changing my views but this article makes some good points. I have been down on the border many times and indeed there are many places whee a wall would literally be impossible.

However, Trump isn't wanting to actually wall up the entire border, just those areas of high illegal traffic which can act as a funnel for the i******s, funneling them towards points of legal entry. Without a barrier, the border patrol gets over run and they can only apprehend a small percentage of the immigrants. The border patrol have also pointed out that a wall/barrier can act as an anchor for technology as well.

I am sure there will be problems associated with some ranchers but if you listen to the ranchers in Arizona, they are very much in favor of a wall/barrier. WE need to remember that the evidence is over whelming as to how a barrier/wall has improved the lives of the locals in many areas like El Paso. The wall, howeer, is not the total solutions, obviously. Technology and manpower will also be needed in increased amounts.

We also need to remember, these things are wlll known to the designers and there are probably solutions already in the works but they are not being reported. We can hardly trust the media as to what they tell us about is as well. 90% of the media are simply arms of the democratic party and for the dem's, this has nothing to do with i*****l i*********n. It is ALL about Trump and politics. Don't forget that!

Mara Kiska, a San Diego resident, says, "Well, have you seen the wall? It's like you could hop over it. It's like a joke. It's a joke."

De Le, also a San Diego resident, says, "Right now, we have a fence. But a fence can be cut. But I would rather have a solid wall. A solid concrete wall. The entire border needs to be walled off from California all the way up to Texas. I*****l i*********n is a drain to America, and they are doing nothing but bringing this country down. And look at them, they come here — they mostly uneducated, they commit a lot of crime, they are low-class people. They're trash. Let's build a wall, a fence, wh**ever. Let's keep i******s out. I cannot wait to be walking down the street and see American faces again for a change. They might call me r****t. I don't care."

http://www.texastribune.org/2016/10/19/concrete-divisions-us-mexico-border/

Obviously YOU aren't! Farmers and ranchers along the border in Texas are against the wall! So are conservationist.

Has anyone, including YOU, thought about, or even care about the impact a wall would have on the lifestyles and livelihood of Texas farmers and ranchers? Have you or anyone else thought about the impact a wall would have on wildlife, especially endangered species? Have you or anyone given any thought to the logistics of building a wall along a river that is subject to drying up, flooding, changing directions?

MarkC covered this best in case no one bothered to read his post:

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 wh**ever) 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

Obviously YOU aren't! Farmers and ranchers along the border in Texas are against the wall! So are conservationist.

Has anyone, including YOU, thought about, or even care about the impact a wall would have on the lifestyles and livelihood of Texas farmers and ranchers? Have you or anyone else thought about the impact a wall would have on wildlife, especially endangered species? Have you or anyone given any thought to the logistics of building a wall along a river that is subject to drying up, flooding, changing directions?

MarkC covered this best in case no one bothered to read his post:

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 wh**ever) 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