The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Trump's Wall and the Rio Grande

Doesn't really matter, fence or wall if the question is sacrificing the Rio Grande to Mexico to build it, Texans will resist that idea. Water Rights is a fighting issue in that part of the country.
 
Stardreamer said:
Doesn't really matter, fence or wall if the question is sacrificing the Rio Grande to Mexico to build it, Texans will resist that idea. Water Rights is a fighting issue in that part of the country.
Click to expand...
Yes. It doesn't matter who voted for it, it was a bad idea and the people in Texas whose land was divided and separated from the river were never asked.

And a fact check.

The legislation was H.R. 6061 aka the Secure Fence Act of 2006.

The House Vote was Aye: R-219 D-64 Nay: R-6 D-131 I-1 Present: D-1
The Senate Vote was Aye: R-54 D-26 Nay: R-1 D-17

The Bill was signed by Pres George W Bush on 26-Oct-2006.
 
KaraBulut said:
Yes. It doesn't matter who voted for it, it was a bad idea and the people in Texas whose land was divided and separated from the river were never asked.

And a fact check.

The legislation was H.R. 6061 aka the Secure Fence Act of 2006.

The House Vote was Aye: R-219 D-64 Nay: R-6 D-131 I-1 Present: D-1
The Senate Vote was Aye: R-54 D-26 Nay: R-1 D-17

The Bill was signed by Pres George W Bush on 26-Oct-2006.
Click to expand...

Seems to me this is a good place for a "Second Amendment remedy": landowners should just remove any fence on their land.

And if there's a way to do it, they should go to the World Court and sue the U.S. government for damages.
 
^ it's like he makes promises not even knowing that he can't keep them and then scales them back to something that was already happening and takes credit for them as if he'd actually done something.
 
kallipolis said:
^Or, Trump is a fantasist.
Click to expand...

Latest quote about the wall:
Trump also told reporters on the plane it was important that border agents and others should be able to see through the wall so they could be aware of oncoming dangers.

"As horrible as it sounds, when they throw the large sacks of drugs over, and if you have people on the other side of the wall, you don't see them. They hit you on the head with 60 pounds of stuff? It's over," Trump said.
Click to expand...

hqdefault.jpg
 
^and, comic character.

Perhaps Disney Studios would consider making a cartoon feature starring Donny Trump. In the leading role..of course.
 
There is no reason the wall has to be exactly on the border, and no, we are ceding land to Mexico by moving it back from the exact border. Limiting immigration was the single most important issue which distinguished him from he pack and got him elected. Since immigrants and hispanics overwhelming vote democrat, controlling immigration is critical to saving our democracy; a one party system is no democracy.
 
Seriously, even the best SNL writers couldn't come up with stuff like this.
 
When JFK announced to goal of sending a man to the moon he did not have the details worked out. Reasonable people do not expect the president to have all the details worked out when he announces a plan. Obama promised healthcare but left it to Congress to figure out something to pass. So, no Trump had not surveyed the path of the wall.
 
Benvolio said:
There is no reason the wall has to be exactly on the border, and no, we are ceding land to Mexico by moving it back from the exact border. Limiting immigration was the single most important issue which distinguished him from he pack and got him elected. Since immigrants and hispanics overwhelming vote democrat, controlling immigration is critical to saving our democracy; a one party system is no democracy.
Click to expand...

Let me fix that:

"There is no reason [for] the wall."

A border wall is a nineteenth-century solution for a twenty-first century problem.
 
^ The Great Wall of China didn't keep out the 'bad guys'. What makes Trump and his supporters think Trump's wall will keep out the Mexicans?
 
We may need to electrify it, and it will in any event provide provide infrastructure jobs.
 
KaraBulut said:
Fixed again. :badgrin:
History_The_Great_Wall_of_China_45274_reSF_HD_1104x622-16x9.jpg
Click to expand...

gsdx said:
^ The Great Wall of China didn't keep out the 'bad guys'. What makes Trump and his supporters think Trump's wall will keep out the Mexicans?
Click to expand...

Actually the Great Wall is a good example when its actual purpose is considered: it wasn't expected to stop intruders; there weren't enough soldiers for it to accomplish that. What it was meant to do, and did mostly fairly well, was slow them down, make it possible to know where they'd come from, and mobilize an interception force to catch them before they got away. Except for some actual invasions, the Wall was effective, especially as a border control so taxes could be levied on trade and as a transportation route for border forces. For its purposes, it was a high-tech solution for its time.

So its lesson is to look to the best available tech -- and these days a wall isn't the answer. The keys to a solution are in what the Great Wall was meant to actually accomplish, especially in finding intruders and responding to intercept them. We don't need large watch towers for that, and we certainly don't need a wall to slow down intruders -- it isn't possible to move fast anyway when you're trying to sneak through somewhere. The technology we have for noticing intruders is called "drones", and indeed they could also be used to slow down intruders -- they could even be used to offer to drop water if the people will stop and stay put. The one thing from the Great Wall that remains essentially the same is response forces. So the modern version of the Great Wall would be a series of border stations with response squads waiting on information from people manning drones (not to exclude motion sensors, etc.).

Yes, that will mean that determined people could get through -- but we already know that determined people manage to cross existing sections of wall. But since for a wall to be effective it would need exactly the same things as no wall at all -- observation and reaction forces -- the wall itself constitutes nothing but a foolish symbol.
 
China's Great Wall was never breached but a general opened a gate and let the Mongol army through. So, a wall is only as good as those given the task of protecting it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top