By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
sundin13 on 30 June 2021
Edit Thread
Pemalite said:
sundin13 said:

Except Australia is a fucking island, my guy. What are you trying to prove? No shit it's borders are more secure than America's. It's only real neighbors are fish. 

That it can be done.
Ocean or not, people still crossed it. Allot.

And that is why we implemented the Pacific solution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Solution

sundin13 said:

The fact is, Democrats are presenting real solutions to a lot of immigration related issues, while Republicans are yelling "BIG WALL! BIG WALL!", taking the most braindead approach to immigration and spending a ton of money to miss nearly the entire fucking problem.

My point is that the shit-flinging between the Democrats and Republicans needs to stop, it's getting immature at this point.
The *real* solution is likely somewhere in the middle which brings in aspects from both sides of the political divide. - The wall will absolutely help, but it is only -one- tool, not the entire solution.

Which again... Is my point. The left-wing and right-wing here eventually settled on the Pacific solution as the right solution for our issues, but it brought forth key aspects from both the left and the rights political mandates.

Plus the cost of the wall should ultimately be redundant anyway, especially at the moment.
One of the best ways to stimulate the economy is to invest in infrastructure/nation building programs, which this walls falls under. It's jobs.

According to that link, "The Pacific Solution" was a means of dealing with asylum seekers. Asylum is a legal process and is not the same as illegal immigration. Personally, I wouldn't have a problem if we had adequately funded holding centers and a quick process that was able to handle asylum claims. Such a thing does not exist in the US, and the Republican party does not seem to have any interest in any step of the process (Accepting asylum seekers, holding asylum seekers and processing asylum claims). 

As for the wall, the claim that it would "absolutely help" is dubious. The reason most of these areas are lacking walls is because they have natural borders are are generally considered low traffic areas (in some areas, we would literally have to build a wall over a mountain). We already have walls in the areas that need walls. It would be like in Australia if you built a big wall in the ocean. Sure, it might stop someone, but it wouldn't really provide much value for the cost, and the movement of people shouldn't be considered a high priority, because it doesn't really cause much harm. The main criticism of the wall is that it is burning money that could be spent elsewhere just so the Republicans can feel good. There is also the environmental cost to consider.

Overall, the Repubicans never presented anything demonstrating that the wall would do literally anything to help, and neither have you.