Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
"Punching Up" in California and New Mexico
Comments
-
ThomasFremont said:
Are we putting armed guards with shoot to kill orders everywhere? No. And people still got through.TurdBuffer said:
Berlin from 1962 to 1990 says "Hi."ThomasFremont said:
The wall eliminates nothing. You just have to go over or under it. It’s not a magical barrier. Yeah they won’t be able to just stroll across, but so what. They will climb over or tunnel under like they already do. What resource does the wall free up for patrolling those other ways? None. It drains resources. I hope this helps but I know it won’t.Pitchfork51 said:
Yes. They will change their approach because the ways are more limited.ThomasFremont said:
Your assumption that a wall makes their chances of success “much lower” is the root problem here. It won’t. It will change their approach. Nothing more. It’s an illusion and a waste of you think a wall solves anythingPitchfork51 said:
So if something is really difficult, and expensive, and they hear from credible sources that their chances of succeeding are much lower.....it won't deter anyone?ThomasFremont said:
No it won’t. And you’re dumb if you think it will.Pitchfork51 said:
not at all. dont give a fuck about the peopleThomasFremont said:
Now you care about the coyotes preying on the innocent?Pitchfork51 said:
Holy fuck.ThomasFremont said:
I’m glad we agree that the wall does nothing to address the underlying issues.Pitchfork51 said:ThomasFremont said:
No. It’s outdated and ineffective. You think some immigrant family is gonna risk everything, but then give up simply because there is a bigger wall?Pitchfork51 said:
okay so a bunch of poor miserable people traipsing through the desert carrying ladders and ropes and explosives.ThomasFremont said:
Tunnels, ladders, ropes, boats, airplanes, explosives...these are just a few easy ways to deal with a wall. Throwing a shit ton of money at the wall to have it maybe stop less than 40% (and that’s a very generous estimate) is FS. They will just come another way.Pitchfork51 said:
It makes it far far more difficult. Therefore allowing us to focus on the narrower scope of ways they can actually get in2001400ex said:
If you think building a wall will stop the other 40%, you are FS. You clearly have never been down by the border.Pitchfork51 said:"Most come in legally" might be the dumbest of all the lefts arguments.
Okay if 60 percent come in and overstay their visas, but we stop majority of the other 40 percent.....
Then that makes a huge fucking difference!!
"Most come in legally! What's the point of even trying to stop anyone at all!"
Honestly if this weren't a bizarre political thing no one would disagree with it.
It's fucking absurd the lengths the left are going to with this.
I can't believe I even have to explain it.
Do you not see that the degree of difficulty is about a million times more?
And if they start blowing shit up it wont be hard to find and stop them.
Many will not attempt it. The ones that do now only have limited routes which can be monitored much more easily.
You can't be this fucking dense.
Just come out and say it. It's mean and a symbol of racism and you'll lose points with your friends if you admit that it will do somehting.
No. I think they are going to not go in the first place or go through a much more difficult, expensive, and less likely to be successful route.
They sure as fuck aren't gonna climb over it or blow it up.
Many would not attempt at all because of the difficulty/cost and then many others would not make it because of the difficulty.
The whole point of a wall is you cant just stroll through it!
Not to mention all these poor miserable fuckers in South/Central America that only hear about stuff second hand and get duped by the coyotes would definitely hear about a big ass wall and the extra difficulty.
So not only is it effective in general, it is a major deterrent too.
Thanks for the laugh.
I'm saying that most of what they hear comes from shady people who are trying to get their money and probably tell them how easy it is and how great it'll be.
So when they hear from legit sources that the US said fuck you latin american cunts it'll be a deterrent.
You have to be kidding
You know whats easier to monitor? Fewer routes.
But hey, any time you can take a page out of the East German/USSR playbook, you gotta do it.
You bet your ass you do!
-
Michelle Kwan 4 life!PurpleThrobber said:ThomasFremont said:
Are we putting armed guards with shoot to kill orders everywhere? No. And people still got through.TurdBuffer said:
Berlin from 1962 to 1990 says "Hi."ThomasFremont said:
The wall eliminates nothing. You just have to go over or under it. It’s not a magical barrier. Yeah they won’t be able to just stroll across, but so what. They will climb over or tunnel under like they already do. What resource does the wall free up for patrolling those other ways? None. It drains resources. I hope this helps but I know it won’t.Pitchfork51 said:
Yes. They will change their approach because the ways are more limited.ThomasFremont said:
Your assumption that a wall makes their chances of success “much lower” is the root problem here. It won’t. It will change their approach. Nothing more. It’s an illusion and a waste of you think a wall solves anythingPitchfork51 said:
So if something is really difficult, and expensive, and they hear from credible sources that their chances of succeeding are much lower.....it won't deter anyone?ThomasFremont said:
No it won’t. And you’re dumb if you think it will.Pitchfork51 said:
not at all. dont give a fuck about the peopleThomasFremont said:
Now you care about the coyotes preying on the innocent?Pitchfork51 said:
Holy fuck.ThomasFremont said:
I’m glad we agree that the wall does nothing to address the underlying issues.Pitchfork51 said:ThomasFremont said:
No. It’s outdated and ineffective. You think some immigrant family is gonna risk everything, but then give up simply because there is a bigger wall?Pitchfork51 said:
okay so a bunch of poor miserable people traipsing through the desert carrying ladders and ropes and explosives.ThomasFremont said:
Tunnels, ladders, ropes, boats, airplanes, explosives...these are just a few easy ways to deal with a wall. Throwing a shit ton of money at the wall to have it maybe stop less than 40% (and that’s a very generous estimate) is FS. They will just come another way.Pitchfork51 said:
It makes it far far more difficult. Therefore allowing us to focus on the narrower scope of ways they can actually get in2001400ex said:
If you think building a wall will stop the other 40%, you are FS. You clearly have never been down by the border.Pitchfork51 said:"Most come in legally" might be the dumbest of all the lefts arguments.
Okay if 60 percent come in and overstay their visas, but we stop majority of the other 40 percent.....
Then that makes a huge fucking difference!!
"Most come in legally! What's the point of even trying to stop anyone at all!"
Honestly if this weren't a bizarre political thing no one would disagree with it.
It's fucking absurd the lengths the left are going to with this.
I can't believe I even have to explain it.
Do you not see that the degree of difficulty is about a million times more?
And if they start blowing shit up it wont be hard to find and stop them.
Many will not attempt it. The ones that do now only have limited routes which can be monitored much more easily.
You can't be this fucking dense.
Just come out and say it. It's mean and a symbol of racism and you'll lose points with your friends if you admit that it will do somehting.
No. I think they are going to not go in the first place or go through a much more difficult, expensive, and less likely to be successful route.
They sure as fuck aren't gonna climb over it or blow it up.
Many would not attempt at all because of the difficulty/cost and then many others would not make it because of the difficulty.
The whole point of a wall is you cant just stroll through it!
Not to mention all these poor miserable fuckers in South/Central America that only hear about stuff second hand and get duped by the coyotes would definitely hear about a big ass wall and the extra difficulty.
So not only is it effective in general, it is a major deterrent too.
Thanks for the laugh.
I'm saying that most of what they hear comes from shady people who are trying to get their money and probably tell them how easy it is and how great it'll be.
So when they hear from legit sources that the US said fuck you latin american cunts it'll be a deterrent.
You have to be kidding
You know whats easier to monitor? Fewer routes.
But hey, any time you can take a page out of the East German/USSR playbook, you gotta do it.
You bet your ass you do! -
Kristi Yamaguchi >>>>>>>>>>> Michelle KwanThomasFremont said:
Michelle Kwan 4 life!PurpleThrobber said:ThomasFremont said:
Are we putting armed guards with shoot to kill orders everywhere? No. And people still got through.TurdBuffer said:
Berlin from 1962 to 1990 says "Hi."ThomasFremont said:
The wall eliminates nothing. You just have to go over or under it. It’s not a magical barrier. Yeah they won’t be able to just stroll across, but so what. They will climb over or tunnel under like they already do. What resource does the wall free up for patrolling those other ways? None. It drains resources. I hope this helps but I know it won’t.Pitchfork51 said:
Yes. They will change their approach because the ways are more limited.ThomasFremont said:
Your assumption that a wall makes their chances of success “much lower” is the root problem here. It won’t. It will change their approach. Nothing more. It’s an illusion and a waste of you think a wall solves anythingPitchfork51 said:
So if something is really difficult, and expensive, and they hear from credible sources that their chances of succeeding are much lower.....it won't deter anyone?ThomasFremont said:
No it won’t. And you’re dumb if you think it will.Pitchfork51 said:
not at all. dont give a fuck about the peopleThomasFremont said:
Now you care about the coyotes preying on the innocent?Pitchfork51 said:
Holy fuck.ThomasFremont said:
I’m glad we agree that the wall does nothing to address the underlying issues.Pitchfork51 said:ThomasFremont said:
No. It’s outdated and ineffective. You think some immigrant family is gonna risk everything, but then give up simply because there is a bigger wall?Pitchfork51 said:
okay so a bunch of poor miserable people traipsing through the desert carrying ladders and ropes and explosives.ThomasFremont said:
Tunnels, ladders, ropes, boats, airplanes, explosives...these are just a few easy ways to deal with a wall. Throwing a shit ton of money at the wall to have it maybe stop less than 40% (and that’s a very generous estimate) is FS. They will just come another way.Pitchfork51 said:
It makes it far far more difficult. Therefore allowing us to focus on the narrower scope of ways they can actually get in2001400ex said:
If you think building a wall will stop the other 40%, you are FS. You clearly have never been down by the border.Pitchfork51 said:"Most come in legally" might be the dumbest of all the lefts arguments.
Okay if 60 percent come in and overstay their visas, but we stop majority of the other 40 percent.....
Then that makes a huge fucking difference!!
"Most come in legally! What's the point of even trying to stop anyone at all!"
Honestly if this weren't a bizarre political thing no one would disagree with it.
It's fucking absurd the lengths the left are going to with this.
I can't believe I even have to explain it.
Do you not see that the degree of difficulty is about a million times more?
And if they start blowing shit up it wont be hard to find and stop them.
Many will not attempt it. The ones that do now only have limited routes which can be monitored much more easily.
You can't be this fucking dense.
Just come out and say it. It's mean and a symbol of racism and you'll lose points with your friends if you admit that it will do somehting.
No. I think they are going to not go in the first place or go through a much more difficult, expensive, and less likely to be successful route.
They sure as fuck aren't gonna climb over it or blow it up.
Many would not attempt at all because of the difficulty/cost and then many others would not make it because of the difficulty.
The whole point of a wall is you cant just stroll through it!
Not to mention all these poor miserable fuckers in South/Central America that only hear about stuff second hand and get duped by the coyotes would definitely hear about a big ass wall and the extra difficulty.
So not only is it effective in general, it is a major deterrent too.
Thanks for the laugh.
I'm saying that most of what they hear comes from shady people who are trying to get their money and probably tell them how easy it is and how great it'll be.
So when they hear from legit sources that the US said fuck you latin american cunts it'll be a deterrent.
You have to be kidding
You know whats easier to monitor? Fewer routes.
But hey, any time you can take a page out of the East German/USSR playbook, you gotta do it.
You bet your ass you do! -
@Meek TRUE???dnc said:
Kristi Yamaguchi >>>>>>>>>>> Michelle KwanThomasFremont said:
Michelle Kwan 4 life!PurpleThrobber said:ThomasFremont said:
Are we putting armed guards with shoot to kill orders everywhere? No. And people still got through.TurdBuffer said:
Berlin from 1962 to 1990 says "Hi."ThomasFremont said:
The wall eliminates nothing. You just have to go over or under it. It’s not a magical barrier. Yeah they won’t be able to just stroll across, but so what. They will climb over or tunnel under like they already do. What resource does the wall free up for patrolling those other ways? None. It drains resources. I hope this helps but I know it won’t.Pitchfork51 said:
Yes. They will change their approach because the ways are more limited.ThomasFremont said:
Your assumption that a wall makes their chances of success “much lower” is the root problem here. It won’t. It will change their approach. Nothing more. It’s an illusion and a waste of you think a wall solves anythingPitchfork51 said:
So if something is really difficult, and expensive, and they hear from credible sources that their chances of succeeding are much lower.....it won't deter anyone?ThomasFremont said:
No it won’t. And you’re dumb if you think it will.Pitchfork51 said:
not at all. dont give a fuck about the peopleThomasFremont said:
Now you care about the coyotes preying on the innocent?Pitchfork51 said:
Holy fuck.ThomasFremont said:
I’m glad we agree that the wall does nothing to address the underlying issues.Pitchfork51 said:ThomasFremont said:
No. It’s outdated and ineffective. You think some immigrant family is gonna risk everything, but then give up simply because there is a bigger wall?Pitchfork51 said:
okay so a bunch of poor miserable people traipsing through the desert carrying ladders and ropes and explosives.ThomasFremont said:
Tunnels, ladders, ropes, boats, airplanes, explosives...these are just a few easy ways to deal with a wall. Throwing a shit ton of money at the wall to have it maybe stop less than 40% (and that’s a very generous estimate) is FS. They will just come another way.Pitchfork51 said:
It makes it far far more difficult. Therefore allowing us to focus on the narrower scope of ways they can actually get in2001400ex said:
If you think building a wall will stop the other 40%, you are FS. You clearly have never been down by the border.Pitchfork51 said:"Most come in legally" might be the dumbest of all the lefts arguments.
Okay if 60 percent come in and overstay their visas, but we stop majority of the other 40 percent.....
Then that makes a huge fucking difference!!
"Most come in legally! What's the point of even trying to stop anyone at all!"
Honestly if this weren't a bizarre political thing no one would disagree with it.
It's fucking absurd the lengths the left are going to with this.
I can't believe I even have to explain it.
Do you not see that the degree of difficulty is about a million times more?
And if they start blowing shit up it wont be hard to find and stop them.
Many will not attempt it. The ones that do now only have limited routes which can be monitored much more easily.
You can't be this fucking dense.
Just come out and say it. It's mean and a symbol of racism and you'll lose points with your friends if you admit that it will do somehting.
No. I think they are going to not go in the first place or go through a much more difficult, expensive, and less likely to be successful route.
They sure as fuck aren't gonna climb over it or blow it up.
Many would not attempt at all because of the difficulty/cost and then many others would not make it because of the difficulty.
The whole point of a wall is you cant just stroll through it!
Not to mention all these poor miserable fuckers in South/Central America that only hear about stuff second hand and get duped by the coyotes would definitely hear about a big ass wall and the extra difficulty.
So not only is it effective in general, it is a major deterrent too.
Thanks for the laugh.
I'm saying that most of what they hear comes from shady people who are trying to get their money and probably tell them how easy it is and how great it'll be.
So when they hear from legit sources that the US said fuck you latin american cunts it'll be a deterrent.
You have to be kidding
You know whats easier to monitor? Fewer routes.
But hey, any time you can take a page out of the East German/USSR playbook, you gotta do it.
You bet your ass you do! -
Meh, plain and simple, the wall isn't a cost effective management of immigration. Will it deter some people? Sure, it'll just cost billions to build and then maintain. Just one more government boondoggle. Creating better, simpler, and more enforceable immigration laws (and then actually enforcing them) would be more cost efficient and effective.
-
Communists are far more concerned with emigration then immigration. HTH.ThomasFremont said:
Are we putting armed guards with shoot to kill orders everywhere? No. And people still got through.TurdBuffer said:
Berlin from 1962 to 1990 says "Hi."ThomasFremont said:
The wall eliminates nothing. You just have to go over or under it. It’s not a magical barrier. Yeah they won’t be able to just stroll across, but so what. They will climb over or tunnel under like they already do. What resource does the wall free up for patrolling those other ways? None. It drains resources. I hope this helps but I know it won’t.Pitchfork51 said:
Yes. They will change their approach because the ways are more limited.ThomasFremont said:
Your assumption that a wall makes their chances of success “much lower” is the root problem here. It won’t. It will change their approach. Nothing more. It’s an illusion and a waste of you think a wall solves anythingPitchfork51 said:
So if something is really difficult, and expensive, and they hear from credible sources that their chances of succeeding are much lower.....it won't deter anyone?ThomasFremont said:
No it won’t. And you’re dumb if you think it will.Pitchfork51 said:
not at all. dont give a fuck about the peopleThomasFremont said:
Now you care about the coyotes preying on the innocent?Pitchfork51 said:
Holy fuck.ThomasFremont said:
I’m glad we agree that the wall does nothing to address the underlying issues.Pitchfork51 said:ThomasFremont said:
No. It’s outdated and ineffective. You think some immigrant family is gonna risk everything, but then give up simply because there is a bigger wall?Pitchfork51 said:
okay so a bunch of poor miserable people traipsing through the desert carrying ladders and ropes and explosives.ThomasFremont said:
Tunnels, ladders, ropes, boats, airplanes, explosives...these are just a few easy ways to deal with a wall. Throwing a shit ton of money at the wall to have it maybe stop less than 40% (and that’s a very generous estimate) is FS. They will just come another way.Pitchfork51 said:
It makes it far far more difficult. Therefore allowing us to focus on the narrower scope of ways they can actually get in2001400ex said:
If you think building a wall will stop the other 40%, you are FS. You clearly have never been down by the border.Pitchfork51 said:"Most come in legally" might be the dumbest of all the lefts arguments.
Okay if 60 percent come in and overstay their visas, but we stop majority of the other 40 percent.....
Then that makes a huge fucking difference!!
"Most come in legally! What's the point of even trying to stop anyone at all!"
Honestly if this weren't a bizarre political thing no one would disagree with it.
It's fucking absurd the lengths the left are going to with this.
I can't believe I even have to explain it.
Do you not see that the degree of difficulty is about a million times more?
And if they start blowing shit up it wont be hard to find and stop them.
Many will not attempt it. The ones that do now only have limited routes which can be monitored much more easily.
You can't be this fucking dense.
Just come out and say it. It's mean and a symbol of racism and you'll lose points with your friends if you admit that it will do somehting.
No. I think they are going to not go in the first place or go through a much more difficult, expensive, and less likely to be successful route.
They sure as fuck aren't gonna climb over it or blow it up.
Many would not attempt at all because of the difficulty/cost and then many others would not make it because of the difficulty.
The whole point of a wall is you cant just stroll through it!
Not to mention all these poor miserable fuckers in South/Central America that only hear about stuff second hand and get duped by the coyotes would definitely hear about a big ass wall and the extra difficulty.
So not only is it effective in general, it is a major deterrent too.
Thanks for the laugh.
I'm saying that most of what they hear comes from shady people who are trying to get their money and probably tell them how easy it is and how great it'll be.
So when they hear from legit sources that the US said fuck you latin american cunts it'll be a deterrent.
You have to be kidding
You know whats easier to monitor? Fewer routes.
But hey, any time you can take a page out of the East German/USSR playbook, you gotta do it. -
Well right there is your problem. Enforcing the law is racist.UW_Doog_Bot said:Meh, plain and simple, the wall isn't a cost effective management of immigration. Will it deter some people? Sure, it'll just cost billions to build and then maintain. Just one more government boondoggle. Creating better, simpler, and more enforceable immigration laws (and then actually enforcing them) would be more cost efficient and effective.
-
ThomasFremont said:
Are we putting armed guards with shoot to kill orders everywhere? No. And people still got through.TurdBuffer said:
Berlin from 1962 to 1990 says "Hi."ThomasFremont said:
The wall eliminates nothing. You just have to go over or under it. It’s not a magical barrier. Yeah they won’t be able to just stroll across, but so what. They will climb over or tunnel under like they already do. What resource does the wall free up for patrolling those other ways? None. It drains resources. I hope this helps but I know it won’t.Pitchfork51 said:
Yes. They will change their approach because the ways are more limited.ThomasFremont said:
Your assumption that a wall makes their chances of success “much lower” is the root problem here. It won’t. It will change their approach. Nothing more. It’s an illusion and a waste of you think a wall solves anythingPitchfork51 said:
So if something is really difficult, and expensive, and they hear from credible sources that their chances of succeeding are much lower.....it won't deter anyone?ThomasFremont said:
No it won’t. And you’re dumb if you think it will.Pitchfork51 said:
not at all. dont give a fuck about the peopleThomasFremont said:
Now you care about the coyotes preying on the innocent?Pitchfork51 said:
Holy fuck.ThomasFremont said:
I’m glad we agree that the wall does nothing to address the underlying issues.Pitchfork51 said:ThomasFremont said:
No. It’s outdated and ineffective. You think some immigrant family is gonna risk everything, but then give up simply because there is a bigger wall?Pitchfork51 said:
okay so a bunch of poor miserable people traipsing through the desert carrying ladders and ropes and explosives.ThomasFremont said:
Tunnels, ladders, ropes, boats, airplanes, explosives...these are just a few easy ways to deal with a wall. Throwing a shit ton of money at the wall to have it maybe stop less than 40% (and that’s a very generous estimate) is FS. They will just come another way.Pitchfork51 said:
It makes it far far more difficult. Therefore allowing us to focus on the narrower scope of ways they can actually get in2001400ex said:
If you think building a wall will stop the other 40%, you are FS. You clearly have never been down by the border.Pitchfork51 said:"Most come in legally" might be the dumbest of all the lefts arguments.
Okay if 60 percent come in and overstay their visas, but we stop majority of the other 40 percent.....
Then that makes a huge fucking difference!!
"Most come in legally! What's the point of even trying to stop anyone at all!"
Honestly if this weren't a bizarre political thing no one would disagree with it.
It's fucking absurd the lengths the left are going to with this.
I can't believe I even have to explain it.
Do you not see that the degree of difficulty is about a million times more?
And if they start blowing shit up it wont be hard to find and stop them.
Many will not attempt it. The ones that do now only have limited routes which can be monitored much more easily.
You can't be this fucking dense.
Just come out and say it. It's mean and a symbol of racism and you'll lose points with your friends if you admit that it will do somehting.
No. I think they are going to not go in the first place or go through a much more difficult, expensive, and less likely to be successful route.
They sure as fuck aren't gonna climb over it or blow it up.
Many would not attempt at all because of the difficulty/cost and then many others would not make it because of the difficulty.
The whole point of a wall is you cant just stroll through it!
Not to mention all these poor miserable fuckers in South/Central America that only hear about stuff second hand and get duped by the coyotes would definitely hear about a big ass wall and the extra difficulty.
So not only is it effective in general, it is a major deterrent too.
Thanks for the laugh.
I'm saying that most of what they hear comes from shady people who are trying to get their money and probably tell them how easy it is and how great it'll be.
So when they hear from legit sources that the US said fuck you latin american cunts it'll be a deterrent.
You have to be kidding
You know whats easier to monitor? Fewer routes.
But hey, any time you can take a page out of the East German/USSR playbook, you gotta do it.
Do you think more people would have crossed if there was no wall, or the exact same amount?
Think hard. It's a really difficult question.
-
Not very many got through. HTHThomasFremont said:
Are we putting armed guards with shoot to kill orders everywhere? No. And people still got through.TurdBuffer said:
Berlin from 1962 to 1990 says "Hi."ThomasFremont said:
The wall eliminates nothing. You just have to go over or under it. It’s not a magical barrier. Yeah they won’t be able to just stroll across, but so what. They will climb over or tunnel under like they already do. What resource does the wall free up for patrolling those other ways? None. It drains resources. I hope this helps but I know it won’t.Pitchfork51 said:
Yes. They will change their approach because the ways are more limited.ThomasFremont said:
Your assumption that a wall makes their chances of success “much lower” is the root problem here. It won’t. It will change their approach. Nothing more. It’s an illusion and a waste of you think a wall solves anythingPitchfork51 said:
So if something is really difficult, and expensive, and they hear from credible sources that their chances of succeeding are much lower.....it won't deter anyone?ThomasFremont said:
No it won’t. And you’re dumb if you think it will.Pitchfork51 said:
not at all. dont give a fuck about the peopleThomasFremont said:
Now you care about the coyotes preying on the innocent?Pitchfork51 said:
Holy fuck.ThomasFremont said:
I’m glad we agree that the wall does nothing to address the underlying issues.Pitchfork51 said:ThomasFremont said:
No. It’s outdated and ineffective. You think some immigrant family is gonna risk everything, but then give up simply because there is a bigger wall?Pitchfork51 said:
okay so a bunch of poor miserable people traipsing through the desert carrying ladders and ropes and explosives.ThomasFremont said:
Tunnels, ladders, ropes, boats, airplanes, explosives...these are just a few easy ways to deal with a wall. Throwing a shit ton of money at the wall to have it maybe stop less than 40% (and that’s a very generous estimate) is FS. They will just come another way.Pitchfork51 said:
It makes it far far more difficult. Therefore allowing us to focus on the narrower scope of ways they can actually get in2001400ex said:
If you think building a wall will stop the other 40%, you are FS. You clearly have never been down by the border.Pitchfork51 said:"Most come in legally" might be the dumbest of all the lefts arguments.
Okay if 60 percent come in and overstay their visas, but we stop majority of the other 40 percent.....
Then that makes a huge fucking difference!!
"Most come in legally! What's the point of even trying to stop anyone at all!"
Honestly if this weren't a bizarre political thing no one would disagree with it.
It's fucking absurd the lengths the left are going to with this.
I can't believe I even have to explain it.
Do you not see that the degree of difficulty is about a million times more?
And if they start blowing shit up it wont be hard to find and stop them.
Many will not attempt it. The ones that do now only have limited routes which can be monitored much more easily.
You can't be this fucking dense.
Just come out and say it. It's mean and a symbol of racism and you'll lose points with your friends if you admit that it will do somehting.
No. I think they are going to not go in the first place or go through a much more difficult, expensive, and less likely to be successful route.
They sure as fuck aren't gonna climb over it or blow it up.
Many would not attempt at all because of the difficulty/cost and then many others would not make it because of the difficulty.
The whole point of a wall is you cant just stroll through it!
Not to mention all these poor miserable fuckers in South/Central America that only hear about stuff second hand and get duped by the coyotes would definitely hear about a big ass wall and the extra difficulty.
So not only is it effective in general, it is a major deterrent too.
Thanks for the laugh.
I'm saying that most of what they hear comes from shady people who are trying to get their money and probably tell them how easy it is and how great it'll be.
So when they hear from legit sources that the US said fuck you latin american cunts it'll be a deterrent.
You have to be kidding
You know whats easier to monitor? Fewer routes.
But hey, any time you can take a page out of the East German/USSR playbook, you gotta do it. -
Fewer. Now do the cost/benefit analysis like anyone should do before taking action.Pitchfork51 said:ThomasFremont said:
Are we putting armed guards with shoot to kill orders everywhere? No. And people still got through.TurdBuffer said:
Berlin from 1962 to 1990 says "Hi."ThomasFremont said:
The wall eliminates nothing. You just have to go over or under it. It’s not a magical barrier. Yeah they won’t be able to just stroll across, but so what. They will climb over or tunnel under like they already do. What resource does the wall free up for patrolling those other ways? None. It drains resources. I hope this helps but I know it won’t.Pitchfork51 said:
Yes. They will change their approach because the ways are more limited.ThomasFremont said:
Your assumption that a wall makes their chances of success “much lower” is the root problem here. It won’t. It will change their approach. Nothing more. It’s an illusion and a waste of you think a wall solves anythingPitchfork51 said:
So if something is really difficult, and expensive, and they hear from credible sources that their chances of succeeding are much lower.....it won't deter anyone?ThomasFremont said:
No it won’t. And you’re dumb if you think it will.Pitchfork51 said:
not at all. dont give a fuck about the peopleThomasFremont said:
Now you care about the coyotes preying on the innocent?Pitchfork51 said:
Holy fuck.ThomasFremont said:
I’m glad we agree that the wall does nothing to address the underlying issues.Pitchfork51 said:ThomasFremont said:
No. It’s outdated and ineffective. You think some immigrant family is gonna risk everything, but then give up simply because there is a bigger wall?Pitchfork51 said:
okay so a bunch of poor miserable people traipsing through the desert carrying ladders and ropes and explosives.ThomasFremont said:
Tunnels, ladders, ropes, boats, airplanes, explosives...these are just a few easy ways to deal with a wall. Throwing a shit ton of money at the wall to have it maybe stop less than 40% (and that’s a very generous estimate) is FS. They will just come another way.Pitchfork51 said:
It makes it far far more difficult. Therefore allowing us to focus on the narrower scope of ways they can actually get in2001400ex said:
If you think building a wall will stop the other 40%, you are FS. You clearly have never been down by the border.Pitchfork51 said:"Most come in legally" might be the dumbest of all the lefts arguments.
Okay if 60 percent come in and overstay their visas, but we stop majority of the other 40 percent.....
Then that makes a huge fucking difference!!
"Most come in legally! What's the point of even trying to stop anyone at all!"
Honestly if this weren't a bizarre political thing no one would disagree with it.
It's fucking absurd the lengths the left are going to with this.
I can't believe I even have to explain it.
Do you not see that the degree of difficulty is about a million times more?
And if they start blowing shit up it wont be hard to find and stop them.
Many will not attempt it. The ones that do now only have limited routes which can be monitored much more easily.
You can't be this fucking dense.
Just come out and say it. It's mean and a symbol of racism and you'll lose points with your friends if you admit that it will do somehting.
No. I think they are going to not go in the first place or go through a much more difficult, expensive, and less likely to be successful route.
They sure as fuck aren't gonna climb over it or blow it up.
Many would not attempt at all because of the difficulty/cost and then many others would not make it because of the difficulty.
The whole point of a wall is you cant just stroll through it!
Not to mention all these poor miserable fuckers in South/Central America that only hear about stuff second hand and get duped by the coyotes would definitely hear about a big ass wall and the extra difficulty.
So not only is it effective in general, it is a major deterrent too.
Thanks for the laugh.
I'm saying that most of what they hear comes from shady people who are trying to get their money and probably tell them how easy it is and how great it'll be.
So when they hear from legit sources that the US said fuck you latin american cunts it'll be a deterrent.
You have to be kidding
You know whats easier to monitor? Fewer routes.
But hey, any time you can take a page out of the East German/USSR playbook, you gotta do it.
Do you think more people would have crossed if there was no wall, or the exact same amount?
Think hard. It's a really difficult question.
Doesn't have quite the same shine after that IMO.
