buffalo Loc: Texas

Would some of you wall/fence/barrier proponents tell me how and where exactly a wall/fence/barrier could be built along the southern Rio Grande that would not cause massive flooding on either side as debris backed up, could move with the ever changing flow of the river or not have to be bakced away from the river as to require the massive taking of private property, building an impenetrable wall and essentially cutting private property owners, even entire towns access to the river off.

Watch this then tell me o wise ones:

http://i.imgur.com/Uak4YU3.gif

archie bunker Loc: Texas

Don't need a wall there. Landmines. Snipers. Packs of Pit Bulls. Men. Armed men with permission to act as if their home was being invaded.
It can work.

Mike Easterday

Archie Bunker is correct!

buffalo Loc: Texas

e impossib

But you both get that a wall/fence/barrier on or close to an ever changing Rio Grande would be impossible. Plus, as long as it stood (which the first flood would destroy it), would prevent peoples' and wildlife access to it off.

TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA

Are you really that willingly ignorant that you must ignore that the discussion was never about “only a wall”, but about protecting Americans through comprehensive border security to include a wall and immigration reform? Your post is deceitful. It’s called a false dilemma and a straw man.

buffalo Loc: Texas

Hey Radd, define the worn out phrase "comprehensive border security" and immigration reform. And a WALL/FENCE/BARRIER is/was damn sure a big part of trumpy's plan.

I am against any kind of "wall" because, like the current "barriers" they are a waste of tax money. For to build them on the Rio Grande (where even possible) will not stop i******s, et al. To build an effective "wall" that will actually have the potential to STOP i******s would require building it long distances from the Rio Grande, so as to not be destroyed by flooding or cause more extensive damages from flooding (which is banned by treaty), will require the taking of 1000s of acres of private farm and ranch lands.

I can promise the wall nuts that lawsuits against the federal government will be in the 1000s and will be tied up in court for years and even IF the government should prevail will push the cost of said "wall" into the 100s of BILLIONS.

archie bunker Loc: Texas

Well, FK me!! Another freaking genius who knows everythling, and has all the answers, but can't answer a damn thing!!
Let's not do a damn thing, but keep b***hing, and watch our citizens die because EVERYBODY has the answer, and NOBODY can agree on what is the right one!

buffalo Loc: Texas

A gddamn wall, or wh**ever, would be impractical, if not impossible. The Rio Grande is ever changing course (did you watch the video?) ( http://i.imgur.com/Uak4YU3.gif ). The wall would have to be so far from the river that it would take the confiscation of 1000s of acres of farm and ranch land and cut off access to the river for many, even cutting off towns that border the river. Farmers and ranchers have already vowed to fight the taking of their land. The damn think would be tied up in the courts for years. 80 plus such suits (out of 300 plus) brought about by bushies 2006 Border Security Act STILL have not been settled. That is why the fence or wh**ever has never been completed.

Arch, you evidently haven't read all my post on this matter or you would know I have advocated stationing the military along the border...permanently. And give them the authority to use wh**ever means necessary to stop the invasion. One thing that would help immensely is to rescind the law that gives an illegal rights if they can set ONE foot on US soil.

All the towns and cities would prosper from the troops' families being moved in...houses bought, cars bought, food, clothing...they would pay taxes...etc.

My brother has lived in Del Rio for 20 years. He says without the airforce base adding so much to the local Del Rio Economy that Del Rio would dry up and blow away. Laughlin Airforce Base has been located there for 60 years.

"In 2009, Laughlin directly employed 2,642 people and indirectly generated employment for 1,436 others. Laughlin’s payroll was nearly $96 million, and the base provided a total estimated economic impact of more than $217 million."

Now, do that with the troops along every Texas border town and city and see what happens. The troops would be paid no matter where they are stationed and what they are doing. So the additional expense would be minimal.

https://livability.com/tx/del-rio/business/laughlin-air-force-base-in-del-rio-tx

archie bunker Loc: Texas

Like myself, and many others keep saying, build barriers where feasable, and use technology, manpower, and gunpowder elsewhere.
Nobody is saying wall off the entire border because it can't be done!

buffalo Loc: Texas

The feasible barriers will have to be built in some areas as far a a mile from the Rio Grande. ANY barriers, no matter hwere they are built will entail building them on private land. That ain't gonna set well with those that will have land taken from them. AS I said, bushie's 2006 Border Security Act still has lawsuits against the government taking their land that have NOT been settled to this day. That is why the current barriers built as the 2006 act called for are incomplete and basically useless.

archie bunker Loc: Texas

You're talking about one section of the border. I'm talking about the entire border. The Rio Grande doesn't run from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico.
There are areas where barriers aren't possible. What's so damn hard to understand about that? Build them where they can be built, build them right, and use other means elsewhere. Jeeze! This ain't rocket surgery!

JoyV

Has Trump said he will ignore the border along CA, AZ, NM, and west TX to build a wall along the southern Rio Grande? Tell me wall opposer, why should the conditions along one stretch of the border negate building a wall where conditions are amenable to a wall and badly needed? Is it because that is what Obama did? Ignored the border areas where a wall was badly needed and could be built right on the border, for areas where it wasn't feasible and his only WISE solution was to build in well inward of the border, cutting through private property, putting in gates on the private properties so property owners (and i******s) could access both sides of the wall. If you have a problem with what Obama did, complain about him, not those of us wanting a real solution!

JoyV

"with permission to act as if their home was being invaded." Because it IS!

JoyV

But especially it isn't about only a wall on the southern Rio Grande! Or only build a wall along any portion of our border IF it could be built along the southern Rio Grande. It is a childish rationalization devoid of logic.

archie bunker Loc: Texas

Thank you! Why is this so hard to understand?