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.

 

Trump's border wall prototypes virtually impassable, pass rigorous testing

page: 8
23
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 04:22 PM
link   
'Desierto' wasn't just some horror thriller fiction film was it? It was actually a Trump supporter fetish film on how you people really want to sort this issue out...

Who needs to waste 25 billion dollars on a wall, plus the extra cost of surveillance drones and motion detectors... when you've got a blind sense of savage patriotism... and the fire power to back it up... lol



...Just saying.




posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 05:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Xenogears

I think people are missing the point. If tech is going to do the heavy lifting then you don't even need a "wall", impassable or otherwise. It is just marketing.

Tunnels are not easy but they are used. Why have these sensors you speak of not been used before now? Is sensor tech just now becoming available?


AS the OP states the wall is only for some areas, fences in others. Sensors and security increases over the border. All that takes funding.



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 05:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Xenogears

The article also made a big deal of the prototypes being "virtually impassable", why?

Of course it takes funding but why wasn't it funded before?



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 06:09 PM
link   
It amazes me no matter how many times it is said people against the wall think this is (771–476 BC) and we are building the Great Wall of China. Or are they pretending to be stupid?

This is 2018, we have put people on the moon, made cell phones with the processing power many times more than a room full of computers used to have in the 60/70/80s. We have sensors, electricity, cameras, barbed wire , mines, drones etc etc etc etc

Using this technology on the wall and the people saying its gonna be as easy as getting a ladder to pass it are just being disingenuous.


Anyone who thinks the wall combined with modern technology will not make it EXTREMELY harder to get across the border is just a liberal who doesn't want the wall because they want illegal immigration to continue. Saying a wall with technology won't significantly impact people crossing is a damn lie and the liberals know this.

Lets be honest.


edit on 31-1-2018 by ker2010 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 06:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Xenogears

The article also made a big deal of the prototypes being "virtually impassable", why?

Of course it takes funding but why wasn't it funded before?


Trump said the Mexicans are going to pay for it. Why do we even need funding?



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 06:19 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

And if Mexico wrote a check tomorrow for the wall would you be all for it? Let me guess.... hmmmmmm NO



edit on 31-1-2018 by ker2010 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 06:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Xenogears

The article also made a big deal of the prototypes being "virtually impassable", why?

Of course it takes funding but why wasn't it funded before?


Trump said the Mexicans are going to pay for it. Why do we even need funding?


And the Clintons and Obama said in the past we need a secure border and to do something about illegal immigration...



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 06:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: ker2010
a reply to: olaru12

And if Mexico wrote a check tomorrow for the wall would you be all for it? Let me guess.... hmmmmmm NO




I think it's a waste of money. It will never be built anyway. It will be tied up in the courts for years... Private land owners don't want no stupid wall and eminent domain will still be challenged in the courts.

The wall is just a symbol Trump uses to unite his base.


www.newsweek.com...
edit on 31-1-2018 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 06:24 PM
link   
If Americans would stop buying their stupid drugs, that would cut back on some of it. But noooo, that puts the effort and responsibility back on us.



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 06:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Xenogears

The article also made a big deal of the prototypes being "virtually impassable", why?

Of course it takes funding but why wasn't it funded before?


Trump said the Mexicans are going to pay for it. Why do we even need funding?


Ford announced they are moving some production from Mexico back domestically early in the presidency. Washing machines from Mexico just got hit with a tariff. NAFTA is being renegotiated. I think they are paying.



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Great. Now all we need is for Mexico to write that check.
Who's gonna pay for the wall?
Mexico!
Who's gonna pay for the wall?
Mexico!

Who? Mexico!!!


who? we are 😩



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 06:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Xenogears

The article also made a big deal of the prototypes being "virtually impassable", why?

Of course it takes funding but why wasn't it funded before?


The previous administration wasn't so anti illegal immigrant in practice it seems.

As for mexico paying. Even if tariffs are imposed and manufacturing is moved over to the U.S side. It is not like that money is automatically allocated to the wall. And it will take time for the money to flow.

The wall is also paid, by reducing drug trade and criminal activity, which also funds mexico and its cartels.



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 07:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xenogears
The previous administration wasn't so anti illegal immigrant in practice it seems.

I never said anything about the previous admin, one way or the other.


As for mexico paying. Even if tariffs are imposed and manufacturing is moved over to the U.S side. It is not like that money is automatically allocated to the wall. And it will take time for the money to flow.

I never said anything about mexico paying for it or not.


The wall is also paid, by reducing drug trade and criminal activity, which also funds mexico and its cartels.

Not really seeing how defunding the cartels (if it even works) is going to do that.

Either way my question was about why the sensors have not been funded if they are available.


edit on 31-1-2018 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Wow, Republicans supporting evidence-based reasoning! What has the world come to? I'm glad to know that the evidence shows that the walls are effective at keeping out illegal immigrants.

Next, maybe we could work on constructing legal ways for people from Mexico and Central America to immigrate here? There is a demand for the workforce that these people bring to the country, and they are able to improve the lives of themselves and their relatives by working here.

If you as a reader don't like that idea, remember, that is the direction Trump is headed - for example, when he was willing to protect DACA recipients and the like in exchange for wall funding.
edit on 31pmWed, 31 Jan 2018 19:57:07 -0600kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 08:04 PM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

From upstream discussing going after businesses' illegall hiring practices and saying I was for stiff penalties:



Being for a wall doesn't stop me from wanting to do other things as well. I'm even for a path to residency for dreamers. And expanded work visas for (legal) migrant workers to get them paying taxes and on the books. Like I said above, it isn't "either or".


I know I'm not everybody, but it seems like the position presented is a bit of a strawman. I just want firm border security so we don't have a repeat of this 15-30 yrs later (failed Reagan amnesty).



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 09:48 PM
link   
Satire:




posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 10:46 PM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

Yeah, the opioid epidemic, I think that got a boost, not from the heroin that came into the USA but from the pharmaceutical companies, that pushed drugs that were far more potent than heroin to the doctors who then passed it it onto the patients, causing that outbreak to happen. And when that started to dry up as it were with stronger regulation on such, people turned to the illegal narcotics for an addiction that started here in the USA.


This wall is not going to stop the drugs from coming across the border. The cartels too well embedded on both sides of the borders. They don't just sit back and idle, but act, sometimes with the proficiency of a military person. And there is more to think that this will only escalate. The cartels are well armed, and have the local population cowed, acting without fear in Mexico, even with the military in Mexico. And there are reports that the cartels are far better armed than the Mexican military and their police force. So if they are that organized, and well armed, what good really is a wall going to do against them? If I was in charge of the cartels, I would say that the first thing I would do, would be have eyes on the border, watching and seeing everything that is going on, on both sides of the border, and reporting back, waiting and then getting stuff in through other routes, waiting until the most opportune time and then starting to do counter work against it. So how good would this wall be?

I still say that the first way to stop this would be to increase the funding to the border patrol and remove the gloves and redtape that bind them. While I would not advocate the militrization of the border, however, using that are for military exercises, where the US military would be there practicing and it would also serve as a deterrent in some areas. That way it would be a win/win for the US, the border would be patrolled and the US military would be able to practice in some of the more rugged terrain in the country that would be similar to other parts of the world, like say the Middle east and Afghanistan.



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 11:06 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Could you not sail a boat around it ?

Humans are masters of tunnelling these days too....

Waste of cash i reckon.



posted on Feb, 1 2018 @ 07:21 AM
link   
a reply to: scubagravy

The wall is a component of what I like to call gubmint.

Gubmint is all the sleazy things that governments and political parties do. The wall is an example of "bad planning on purpose". Like the $600 toilet seats that went to Iraq during the Bush 43 administration, its purpose is to send money from the US treasury into the pockets of building contractors. It's also a make work project. Trump couldn't make a case for something like a "Tower of Babel" replica in Kansas, but selling people on the idea of a wall on the southern border to stop drug traffickers and rapists from getting into the country was doable.

The wall, like a lot of bad planning on purpose projects will become an endless boondoggle or money pit, always needing to be upgraded and improved or to be torn down and rebuilt. It's a classic. P.T. Barnum would have loved it.
edit on 1-2-2018 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2018 @ 10:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: scubagravy
a reply to: face23785

Could you not sail a boat around it ?

Humans are masters of tunnelling these days too....

Waste of cash i reckon.


Do you lock your house or your car? I mean, if someone really wants in, they'll find a way. But it deters some people who don't want to go to such lengths. Same concept. Sure some people have the time, money and resources to dig a tunnel or evade the Coast Guard, but not everyone does.



new topics




 
23
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join