BTW, I am so very tired of being reminded you can't build a wall in a river or it's not needed on a high bluff. Mainly walls are needed in high population areas where a border runner can quickly disappear into a city population. The wall segments simply channel the migrants into POE's or into more open areas where they can be processed or apprehended. Patrols and drones can handle the rural areas just fine. But the libs dismiss the entire concept with the superficial "you can't build a wall in a river."

Because we already have pretty robust physical barriers in high population areas. For obvious reasons. Where the "Build the Wall" crowd is proposing to build the wall are in those rural areas away from the population centers. And that's where the asylees are crossing, because that's where they can get into U.S. territory before encountering a fence.

The border problems that are driving the issue right now aren't from border runners quickly disappearing into a population - they're from people who are apprehended by the Border Patrol and/or ICE, and that we can't do anything with because we have a multi-year backlog in processing them. Which is why we keep saying that you can't solve that problem with a wall. Because those people aren't trying to slip into the U.S. undetected, and they're mostly crossing in rural areas in Texas.

We don't need more wall, because the problems are arising from the population and in the areas that a wall can't address.

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.