It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Vatican City wall built to keep out Muslims...GO TRUMP!

page: 3
34
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe


The fact you aren't seeing the hypocrisy in a statement made by one of the most controlling and politically powerful heads of state in the world IS odd though.


There is no hypocrisy. The wall was built over 1000 years ago, not in modern times. Over the last 1000 years it is no longer a "wall to keep out Muslims" but a piece of historical Architecture that happens to exist.

Should we tear town the Colosseum because it was used as an arena for slaves, etc to fight? Or the Great Wall of China because it was to keep out an invading army? Or all the walls around all the castles in Europe? Or what about places such as Auschwitz?


Hmmm...not really silly at all actually.


Actually, not just silly, but really silly. The fact you can't see how silly that argument/comparison is IS odd, though.




posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 05:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Liquesence
The wall was erected to keep out a conquering force


Exactly! This is exactly the same function the wall along America's southern border will serve in 2017.


So.....What conquering force is this of which you speak, exactly?

There is none.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 05:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Honestly, it's a laughable comparison.

Vatican City is around 100 acres. It's like building fences or walls around a large estate.

The US is just a little bit bigger and is still accessible by sea. Ask a Cuban.


It's a country and it built the wall to keep out a specific people and the wall still stands...how is it laughable? Just because of size?



Yes, size does matter. Building a wall around Vatican City, much like an estate, is financially reasonable. Building a wall on only one side of an entire nation's border, which is thousands of miles, is not. It's actually quite stupid, considering it may not be very effective and there are still many ways people can get in this country.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
Point being, where does the wall stop? Do we surround ourselves with border and sea walls, sealing ourselves off from the rest of the world?


Would you rather drink water from a firehose or from a garden hose? If you dropped a bag of marbles on a hillside, would you rather see them rolling hilly nilly down the side with no channelization, or would picking them up be much easier with them finding a consolidated flowpath? If you had to shovel snow would you rather have a modest 20' wide driveway to deal with or a continuous driveway across the whole front of your property to shovel.

Where the wall stops, other methods of enforcement begin. The flying into Canada thing is ridiculous... we're not talking about people with passports and thousands of dollars to buy airline ticket here and you know that.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 05:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
Yeah only we have kind of moved on once the year 855

Saying that the pope done it over a thousand years ago so it's ok for trump to do it now is honestly stupid


Who didn't build walls back then to keep enemies out?


Oh, so you agree that immigrants and refugees can be "enemies"???



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 05:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Liquesence
The wall was erected to keep out a conquering force


Exactly! This is exactly the same function the wall along America's southern border will serve in 2017.



In 2014, 60,000 illegal unaccompanied "children" swarmed over our southern border. Many came all the way through Mexico from Central America and the Mexican government did not try to stop their invasion. In other words, they allowed them to trek all the way to our borders and then step right on in.

What if the same thing happens this year, or next year, or the year after? What if it's not "children" next time? What if it's not 60,000, but 120,000, or more?

Without a wall and extra security and more modern technology to stop a march such as that, what can we do? I don't think the wall that is being planned now will be a typical concrete or metal structure.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 05:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Liquesence
The wall was erected to keep out a conquering force


Exactly! This is exactly the same function the wall along America's southern border will serve in 2017.


So.....What conquering force is this of which you speak, exactly?

There is none.


www.fairus.org...

Oh there certainly is a conquering force... along with a sad number of Americans living in denial of it.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 05:40 PM
link   
those who believe Trump is going to erect a massive wall along the US-Mexico border, raise their hands:



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 05:42 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6



Would you rather drink water from a firehose or from a garden hose? If you dropped a bag of marbles on a hillside, would you rather see them rolling hilly nilly down the side with no channelization, or would picking them up be much easier with them finding a consolidated flowpath? If you had to shovel snow would you rather have a modest 20' wide driveway to deal with or a continuous driveway across the whole front of your property to shovel.


I think that is part of the problem on issues such as these. People believe there are only two options. This issue is much more complex and we are not better served by limiting ourselves to the most basic of thinking.



Where the wall stops, other methods of enforcement begin.


So even you admit that the wall will not be the end-all, be-all of this immigration issue. If that's the case, don't you think it's possible the resources are better spent elsewhere?



The flying into Canada thing is ridiculous... we're not talking about people with passports and thousands of dollars to buy airline ticket here and you know that.


Where there is a will, there is a way.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 05:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Liquesence
The wall was erected to keep out a conquering force


Exactly! This is exactly the same function the wall along America's southern border will serve in 2017.


So.....What conquering force is this of which you speak, exactly?

There is none.


www.fairus.org...

Oh there certainly is a conquering force... along with a sad number of Americans living in denial of it.


No, "illegals" aren't a "conquering force." That kind of thinking is, frighteningly, delusional.

And using FAIR as a source? lol Carry on, then.

There are criminals in every group of people; that doesn't mean the entire group, or even a majority, is criminal.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 05:48 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Invasions don't happen by people flying into Canada with a passport and walking over the border.

Invasions are mass exoduses out of and into places on foot, in caravans, on land.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 05:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence
There are criminals in every group of people; that doesn't mean the entire group, or even a majority, is criminal.



Uhm, by definition anyone entering the US illegally is criminal. Try again.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 05:53 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Nobody ever said the Wall was going to be a panacea, it's simply one piece of the puzzle. A piece that has been missing for a long while now and has finally found its way back onto the card table to be put in place. I'm fine with the resources being spent on the damn wall, ESPECIALLY if we tear up NAFTA and flip the massive savings and recovery we'll see from getting out from under that bad deal into the funding source for the Wall.

I approach this speaking in absolutes because that's how you deal with problems that have been long ignored. You don't waste even more time mamby pambying your way through ridiculous BS meetings and discussions... we've been doing that for years. You extract your thumb from your ass and get the job done. Build the damn Wall.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 05:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: introvert

Invasions don't happen by people flying into Canada with a passport and walking over the border.

Invasions are mass exoduses out of and into places on foot, in caravans, on land.



Illegal immigration has been at net zero for some time now. There is no invasion or mass exodus.

You guys believe in bull# fantasy.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 06:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
Illegal immigration has been at net zero for some time now. There is no invasion or mass exodus.

You guys believe in bull# fantasy.


It has not been at zero. The past few administrations have cooked the books by classifying what used to be called a "return" to what is called a "removal." Removals involve ICE and are deportations, returns involve only the Border Patrol and aren't logged as deportations. Returns have gone down by as much as removals have gone up... meaning unless we're catching them all, the numbers coming in still exceed the numbers shipped back out.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 06:03 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6



Nobody ever said the Wall was going to be a panacea, it's simply one piece of the puzzle. A piece that has been missing for a long while now and has finally found its way back onto the card table to be put in place.


A very expensive and potentially-ineffective piece. It's like buying a whole new puzzle set trying to find the one piece you lost...all for the sake of the satisfaction of finishing it.

Once a puzzle is complete, the satisfaction is over and it no longer serves a purpose. Unless you like to stare at it. I'm sure many will enjoy staring directly in to the wall.



I'm fine with the resources being spent on the damn wall


So much for conservatism, huh?



ESPECIALLY if we tear up NAFTA and flip the massive savings and recovery we'll see from getting out from under that bad deal into the funding source for the Wall.


It's not that simple. That's the problem.



I approach this speaking in absolutes because that's how you deal with problems that have been long ignored. You don't waste even more time mamby pambying your way through ridiculous BS meetings and discussions... we've been doing that for years. You extract your thumb from your ass and get the job done. Build the damn Wall.


Again, not that simple. There may be repercussions for such actions that will not be discovered unless a discussion takes place.

You are taking a "duct-tape" approach and eventually, no matter what, professionals will have to come in to fix that which you tried to fix yourself and that may cost us more in the long run.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 06:05 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Thousands of dollars? You can get roundtrip tickets to Mexico for $500.

Passport? Do you mean Visa? There are a lot of methods to enter the US legally that can just be abandoned.

You can even have a Visa Waiver, and still enter the US undocumented. There are cards specifically for crossing the border, there are various types of work permits and student endorsements.

You cannot control any of these people once they are here, that is the issue. Any of them at any time can just choose to be illegal. If that's not a problem, then neither the people walking across. Security is pointless with obvious weakness.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 06:07 PM
link   
a reply to: MacK80

Why do you think I'm a closed borders guy?



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 06:09 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6



It has not been at zero. The past few administrations have cooked the books by classifying what used to be called a "return" to what is called a "removal." Removals involve ICE and are deportations, returns involve only the Border Patrol and aren't logged as deportations. Returns have gone down by as much as removals have gone up... meaning unless we're catching them all, the numbers coming in still exceed the numbers shipped back out.


Cooked the books? That's a big claim. Can you provide some statistics that show "Returns have gone down by as much as removals have gone up"?

I'm willing to look at those numbers.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 06:12 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Every expenditure of money on the federal level carries risk of being ineffectual, Look at the money arguably wasted on NASA, Solydra, the bank bailouts, welfare, Obamacare, foreign aid, etc. Conservatives are willing to spend on tangible items, like security, the military, infrastructure. These things conserve what must be protected for America to remain America.

Actually I'm talking about to opposite of the duct tape approach. I'm talking about the "OK, the door to the house is broken, instead of doing nothing, jerry rigging a lock, or nailing plywood over the broken door let's install a new freaking door with solid locks and a sturdy frame that will keep this door from being broken again.




top topics



 
34
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join