THE ERA OF TRUMP

[Smitty-48]

Yeah but if they concentrating all their tunneling in areas around the wall the Americans will know that and can plan accordingly. Bait them into tunneling in areas where they are easier to catch by placing the wall there. If you know where they are going tunnel is it really that much harder to find them? If you have problems seeing under the wall put security measures in place to help to cover that blind spot. If that makes the price tag too high in some portions, then don't build the wall there. Should still reduce tunneling, not increase it, unless I'm missing something.

The wall will be 1600km long, there's no need to concentrate anywhere, there's no way the Americans will be covering the wall with troops or anything like that, they will have hundreds of kilometers of concrete wall in the middle of nowhere, which they can exploit as a shield to block the Americans from seeing what they are doing and then acting to interdict it, it's a big screen, which enables a tunneler to operate undetected and so not interdicted.

Without the wall, you'd spot the activity very quickly, they would stand out like a sore thumb, but with the wall, they have a barrier which they can use to hide behind while they work.

[StCapps]

The wall will be 1600km long, there's no need to concentrate anywhere, there's no way the Americans will be covering the wall with troops or anything like that, they will have hundreds of kilometers of concrete wall in the middle of nowhere, which they can exploit as a shield to block the Americans from seeing what they are doing and then acting to interdict it, it's a big screen, which enables a tunneler to operate undetected and so not interdicted.

Putting it in the middle of nowhere makes little sense, you put where it will reduce illegal immigration flow the most, high traffic areas, there is no need to put it in places that have little illegal immigration flow, obviously.

[Smitty-48]

Another thing I don't like about a wall, is that it actually acts as cover for those who are going to be digging through and/or under it, the wall works in both directions, it blocks US border security from seeing what is going on and then quicly acting against that, I would actually submit, putting a wall up is going to enable the smugglers rather then deter them, they will use the wall as a screen, hug the belt, right up against the wall, making them much harder to detect, and at the same time, much harder to interdict, they are going to be on the Mexican side, with free reign to do as they please, they can move up and down, they can dig, they can hide up against it, it will act as a barrier to protect them rather than stop them.

There's no defense in depth, and the wall restricts American freedom of action to manuever against the threat.

But now Smitty you are thinking about it rationally. As how to make the border tight... which then simply makes anyone wanting to get inside the US take on the even more dangerous trip by sea btw. (and then the US Coastguard can have it's hand full with rescuing people from sinking barges in the Gulf of Mexico). Yet this really in the end isn't about making the border control tighter now.

Why do they have to go by sea? There's 1600km of open border, the immigrants have plenty of room to just walk across the border, the tunnelers under the wall, will be Mexican drug cartels and terrorists, because they want to bring lots of stuff with them, drugs, explosives, etc

[Smitty-48]

The wall will be 1600km long, there's no need to concentrate anywhere, there's no way the Americans will be covering the wall with troops or anything like that, they will have hundreds of kilometers of concrete wall in the middle of nowhere, which they can exploit as a shield to block the Americans from seeing what they are doing and then acting to interdict it, it's a big screen, which enables a tunneler to operate undetected and so not interdicted.

You don't need to put walls in the middle of nowhere. Tunneling in these areas isn't of sufficient volume to warrant it's erection. Putting it in the middle of nowhere makes no sense you put where it will reduce illegal immigration flow, there is no need to put it in places that have little illegal immigration flow, obviously.

There will be 1600km of open border for the immigrants to simply walk across as they do now, I'm not concerned about immigrants tunneling under the wall, that is not who tunnels, there are tunnels right now, and the immigrants are terrified to go anywhere near them, because the tunnelers; are the Cartels.

[StCapps]

There will be 1600km of open border for the immigrants to simply walk across as they do now, I'm not concerned about immigrants tunneling under the wall, that is not who tunnels, there are tunnels right now, and the immigrants are terrified to go anywhere near them, because the tunnelers are the Cartels.

Well walls aren't meant to stop tunnelers. You got to spend money on other border security measures to reduce that shit and having a wall won't exacerbate the ability to detect tunnelers to point where there is no point in building them on any part of the border. There are at least a few stretches of the border that could benefit from the presence of a border wall.

[Smitty-48]

Well walls aren't meant to stop tunnelers. You got to spend money on other border security measures to reduce that shit and having a wall won't exacerbate the ability to detect tunnelers to point where there is no point in building them on any part of the border.

The wall will be an enabler for the tunnelers, as of right now, there is a fence, the Americans can see through it, the Americans can detect them from a long ways off, so they have to dig the tunnels from way back, most of the tunnel is on the approach to the border, what the wall does, is provide a screen which allows the tunnelers to close in right up against the border, using it as a sheild, which means vastly less tunneling, and so vaslty more tunnels laterally across the frontage. They can use the wall, to make exponentially more tunnels, by having lots and lots of much shorter tunnels, rather than the massively labour intensive long tunnels that they have to dig now.

[StCapps]

Well walls aren't meant to stop tunnelers. You got to spend money on other border security measures to reduce that shit and having a wall won't exacerbate the ability to detect tunnelers to point where there is no point in building them on any part of the border.

The wall will be an enabler for the tunnelers, as of right now, there is a fence, the Americans can see through it, the Americans can detect them from a long ways off, so they have to dig the tunnels from way back, most of the tunnel is on the approach to the border, what the wall does, is provide a screen which allows the tunnelers to close in right up against the border, using it as a sheild, which means vastly less tunneling, and so vaslty more tunnels laterally across the frontage. They can use the wall, to make exponentially more tunnels, by having lots and lots of much shorter tunnels, rather than the massively labour intensive long tunnels that they have to dig now.

Why is it easier to get closer to a wall than a fence? I get the easier to see under part, but don't get how it's easier to start and end a tunnel closer to the border if a wall is present instead of a fence. How does that work? That doesn't sound right at all.

[Smitty-48]

Well walls aren't meant to stop tunnelers. You got to spend money on other border security measures to reduce that shit and having a wall won't exacerbate the ability to detect tunnelers to point where there is no point in building them on any part of the border.

Why is it easier to get closer to a wall than a fence? I get the easier to see under part, but don't get how it's easier to start and end a tunnel closer to the border if a wall is present instead of fence. How does that work? That doesn't sound right at all.

A 35 to 50 foot wall is like a monolith, it's going to be yuge apparently, it provides an avenue of approach, just from the sheer size of it, once I get close to the wall, you can't see me, I don't have to start my tunnel from way back to avoid detection, I can move my tunneling operation right into the "shadow" of the wall, the giant monolith, creating a giant blind spot in which to operate.

This tactic is called "hugging the belt".

[StCapps]

Why is it easier to get closer to a wall than a fence? I get the easier to see under part, but don't get how it's easier to start and end a tunnel closer to the border if a wall is present instead of fence. How does that work? That doesn't sound right at all.

A 35 to 50 foot wall is like a monolith, it's going to be yuge apparently, it provides an avenue of approach, just from the sheer size of it, once I get close to the wall, you can't see me, I don't have to start my tunnel from way back to avoid detection, I can move my tunneling operation right into the "shadow" of the wall, the giant monolith, creating a giant blind spot in which to operate.

A shadow makes them that much harder to detect from a distance? Really? A mere shadow and being unable to see under the wall is what's going to lead to exponentially more tunnels?


Giant blind spot sounds like massive embellishment to this layman. But hey what do I know, maybe shadows really are a tunnelers best friend.

[Smitty-48]

A shadow makes them that much harder to detect from a distance? Really? A mere shadow is what's going to lead to exponentially more tunnels?

The "shadow" of a wall is the area in which you cannot see from the other side of the wall, the higher the wall, the deeper the "shadow", a low wall provides almost no shadow, a low wall is actually very difficult to infiltrate, because the "shadow" is not deep at all, but if you build the wall high, with no defense in depth, you've created a deep "shadow", the area where I am in the blind spot on approach is exponentially deeper, and the blind area while I am operating, is exponentially larger.