Talk about obnoxious...

[Occhidiangela]

The wall is part of it.  I would think you understand this, but since you are playing naive for the forum Ill explain it.

Walls make a point that slows people down and in turn makes it easier to intercept them.

Sure shooting to kill would make the "wall" more effective, but just because you dont primarily use lethal force does not mean its impossible to largely secure a border.

If you are going to attempt to have any restrictions at all on the border its common sense to use all the simple and effective tools. Sure they arent absolute, but used in conjunction with gaurds its much better than what we have now.
[right][snapback]106684[/snapback][/right]

Naive?

I happen to know exactly what I am talking about, Ghost, whereas I am not so sure you do.

I lived in West Berlin for three years, when the Wall was still up. The reason the wall worked was not because it was hard to scale, or because it presented a barrier. What made it work as a barrier was the defense in depth; the death strips which were half mile wide areas that created perfect fields of fire; the series of watchtowers; searchlights, and men in them. Armed men. The Volkspolezei. Men with orders to shoot to kill. Which they did.

The Southwest border of the US would need to be similarly backed up if a "wall" or a "fence" were constructed. Otherwise, any such barrier merely presents one more obstacle beyond the River that is already there. (Not the most daunting of obstacles.)

I used to report illegals coming across the Tijuana river in Imperial Beach, California. I'd spot them in my helicopter when I was giving instructional flights. I'd call the tower to alert the local border patrol/INS crew. This was early 1990's.

I was eventually asked to "stop doing border patrol's work." That is politics. I was told it wasn't the military's job.

The political will is absent, still, to secure the border. I don't know if it will ever grow to a sufficient level to get it right. The internal rot may be too deep.

Alram makes an interesting point about how to build a wall, and who might.

No wall will prevent the influence of internal rot. There is an inceitive to hire illegals, to pay them low wages, to keep them off the tax roles, to not pay into SS or Medicare, et cetera. Unless that incentive is taken away, the monetary incentive will remain.

It takes political will to hammer those who, already in this country, are scofflaws, who not infrequently work to sponsor legislation, or to pedal influence, to NOT enforce the laws. My county is full of such filth.

The wall is at best a symbol. From Brownsville to San Diego? A pointless expense. The true threat is internal corrupution, treason, and the lack of political will to retain control of our sovereign nation. The lack of will to enforce Article IV, section 4, of the Constitution of the United States. That is best done with men, with an integrated surveillance package, and with permissive RoE, per my previous posts. When the word gets out that you will die trying to cross the river, the invasion will slow down.

Walls can't stop that. Only people can. The wall would be an expense as pointless as the Maginot Line.

Occhi