As a French person I feel like it's my duty to explain strikes to you. - AdrienIer

Create an account  

 
American Politics Discussion Thread

(January 25th, 2024, 20:57)greenline Wrote: If this razor wire is entirely ineffective and pointless, why is the federal government in such a hurry to tear it down, again?

I didn't say it was pointless; it's as performative as the Governor bussing migrants to DC.
Reply

Why does the federal government feel the need to go to such lengths to shut down a merely performative measure?

If it is getting people killed or injured in the Rio Grande, then it is actually serving as a barrier to entry, which is what it was built to do.
Reply

(January 25th, 2024, 21:07)greenline Wrote: Why does the federal government feel the need to go to such lengths to shut down a merely performative measure?

If it is getting people killed or injured in the Rio Grande, then it is actually serving as a barrier to entry, which is what it was built to do.

If you think the way to keep migrants out is to kill them all, we're done here, because you've lost your humanity.
Reply

Ever heard of a firing order and minefields? It used to be the norm pre-1990.
Reply

(January 26th, 2024, 01:49)Boro Wrote: Ever heard of a firing order and minefields? It used to be the norm pre-1990.

You need to provide sources. MINEFIELDS? Come on.
Reply

(January 25th, 2024, 20:41)Dreylin Wrote:
(January 25th, 2024, 18:12)darrelljs Wrote: Trump is seeing this three moves ahead...once in charge he'll put a few poison pills in it, then blame Democrats when it fails to pass.  Thus it will remain an ongoing source of motivation for his based to get out and vote.  The last thing he needs is this to go away.

Darrell

You really think a man who spend his New Hampshire victory speech railing against his opponent for not immediately bowing out is thinking 3 moves ahead?

Never underestimate your enemy.

Darrell
Reply

(January 26th, 2024, 05:53)Cyneheard Wrote:
(January 26th, 2024, 01:49)Boro Wrote: Ever heard of a firing order and minefields? It used to be the norm pre-1990.

You need to provide sources. MINEFIELDS? Come on.

Xantrho from a WW2 history forum Wrote:It was calculated by Soviet Military staff by 1943.

The idea was that by attacking through the minefield as quickly as possible and eliminating the weak resistence the usually guards a minefield protected area, that fewer casulaties would occur that trying to clear the field under fire and allowing the Germans the opportunity to reinforce the defense.

In this case, it actually is the better option on the Eastern Front. The Germans lacked the manpower to defend in force and had to rely on mobility to stop attacks. Minefields provided trip wires and delays to allow this mobile force time to react. By moving quickly, the Soviets were often able to throw the defense into disarray and acheive objectives with reduced casualties.

Plus, demolition engineers take time and training, the squads that were thrown against the minefields didn't. These were often people recently released from prison.

I've read a number of Soviets accounts of how the minefields were cleared. They were actually appalled to learn that Americans wasted, in the Soviets minds, the lives of skilled engineers in trying to clear the minefield.

Edit: Although a quick fact check casts doubts on the veracity of this account.

https://www.tankarchives.ca/2017/04/zhuk...ields.html

Darrell
Reply

(January 25th, 2024, 21:49)Cyneheard Wrote: If you think the way to keep migrants out is to kill them all, we're done here, because you've lost your humanity.

The actual outcome would be that most of the migrants simply turn away from the fence, rather then tear themselves to pieces on it. This shouldn't be difficult to imagine.
Reply

Or they go to a different place on the border. Or they get human trafficked in. Or they cut the wire / circumvent. Or most is not all, some will still try causing increase in death. Again, bad. Most of these options are bad.

I do listen to conservative radio, but you know not crazy ones and the morning host had a poll. Small sample size of 300+ but question was "why don't you think anything will be done about the border". And mind you this is a conservative radio host with a conservative audience. 47% pure politics, 30% Trump, 13% Biden.
Reply

I'm not understanding how these scenarios are worse than letting them in unimpeded. The border will not be perfectly secure, but that doesn't give a reason to tear up the fencing unless your underlying motivation is to let as many migrants in as possible.

Immigration, both legal and illegal, heavily decreased during Trump's term, which would explain the voter base of the GOP committing to his reelection, despite whatever this poll claims.
Reply



Forum Jump: