posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 06:42 PM
a reply to: dragonridr
It is fencing in a rogue nation... of course that line of defense also means keeping those wishing to flee war and terror that may occur along those
borders at keeping them out as a huge influx of refugees would occur... and then other countires wishing to aid against the inhumane slaughter of
those civilians caught in the cross fire or buttoned up in their homes are secure from the repression of the dictatorship and human rights abuses that
are bound to occur... often those being liberated from such tyranny only see the status quo before hand that was peaceful due to the constant
propaganda pointing fingers at others for that misery as an enemy and why they are not prospering while those in power milk the entire populous with
no personal responsibility to the people only themselves...
So when forces do go in to actually stabilize all that finger pointing and propaganda makes those disrupted from that status quo start pointing
fingers too making the effort much more difficult than need be... all countries have trade and massive profits from that trade. Whether they put it
back into the populous and local economies of that country is the dividing line between corruption and humanitarian. Politics works for all people and
when it doesn't it works for those only wanting power over the people themselves whether that is economic or what have you over an entire market and
their only competition then is each other... of course they conglomerate by constantly buying each other out in an attempt to capitalize on a monopoly
from those conglomerates instead of working for the actual benefit of the people themselves where the service they offer, is only to their own well
being and becomes a detriment to the entire populations local and abroad in such massive rises of power and influence that corrupts.
So it simply goes to show what fences next door to a rogue nation means... Mexico is not a rogue nation next to the US, but some want to build a wall
even though that same political influence implemented the war on drugs to stop the flow of illegal importation across borders of both people and the
drugs which left that government dealing with all the supply trying to reach those in demand of it where a wall becomes a sort of "ground navy" no
different than the blockade runners that tried to cease supply during the American civil war against the British... of course that policy of drugs and
Mexico led to that issue and continuing issue instead of stabilizing sought to eradicate, yet there was never any decrease in the demand despite
trying to control supply which led to most all of global societies ills with the rise of the global black market not only in drugs, but guns, and
human trafficking as well...
of course all of that black market currency funds needed banks so it caused corruption in those areas as well... then tricked over into politics to
either fight for or against those same failed policies instead of move towards more sensible policies. The pander of course was that it was a moral
obligation using political sides ideologies as the opiate of the masses instead of solving the problem. The solution of course is no different than
what several European countries have done which is to legitimize certain industry instead of demonize it or whole entire countries for what is a human
issue, of course seeing these things as an issue is what causes even more issues due to many not seeing it as an issue... so of course the common
sense policy is to legitimize those industries and regulate the other ones already legitimate instead of the legitimate looking to keep building their
power that is just as much detriment to the entire world as to the side made illegal.
So of course those without any solutions to such things as power and resource hoarding turn to just wanting to hold it for themselves build walls, as
an individual? This turns into dictatorships.