or both. I would think giving away private contracts for the work would be how they prefer to go. The most alarming part of this is using military to enforce a president's agenda. He mainly needs the visuals of a large scale project building border wall portions for his political base. They think if they vote for Trump that he will be the one to carry out racist agenda, by force if necessary. There are already military bases, including troops in Texas. All of the southern states have large military bases because without them bringing the federal money, those states would be in even worse shape economically. Also, Texas is getting bluer and 2020 is coming quick (not quick enough for me). Hoping a democrat from Texas wins in 2020, if not Elizabeth Warren from Mass.

The wall's a great idea if we're attacked by Huns, guys on horseback or hoards with lances, pitchforks or swords.

Otherwise you're taking land from multi-generational owners. How do you think that'll go?

The "overpower resistance" is likely to come from both sides of the political spectrum.

But it's on land that is owned by someone who doesn't want fences built on their property.
I don't think anyone is against a barrier in specific areas to discourage casual illegal crossings.

Walls and fences are both barriers.

There are places on our border where a wall is a better choice of barrier than a fence. We have walls on part of our border today. These are generally constructed near urban centers in order to make crossing and slipping quickly into an urban environment harder.

There are places on our border where a wall isn't going to help much - you can't monitor and respond quickly to someone putting up a ladder and simply climbing over. A fence might make sense in some of these places simply to force the easier crossings away from population centers. A giant wall in the middle of the desert is absurd, and a fence is only marginally better (though the fence helps deter or slow vehicle crossings).

And you're right - people don't seem to argue "we can't have barriers in specific areas", but that's only because of your word choice. If you tried to argue "Nobody is against a wall in specific areas", then I'm not sure you'd still be correct.

Trump doesn't say "barrier" or "fence", he says "wall".

We don't say "No fence" or "No barrier", we say "no wall".

There's a gulf of political difference between "barrier" and "wall", when in reality there may be none, other than the question of "how long should it be, and on which sections of the border should we have one?"

I'm not insensitive to the fact that allowing Trump to build anything that looks like a wall is handing him a political victory of sorts, but that's politics rather than practical border policy.

so it's also a big deal for our food supply Monarchs have been on the decline.

More from the article

snip

Heavy construction equipment was expected to arrive starting Monday, U.S. Customs and Border Protection said. A photo posted by the nonprofit National Butterfly Center shows an excavator parked next to its property.

snip

Maps released by CBP show construction would cut through the butterfly center, a nearby state park, and a century-old Catholic chapel next to the river.

snip

The National Butterfly Center released the text of an email sent by an attorney from the U.S. Department of Justice. The lawyer, Cliff Stevens, says in the email that construction will begin in mid-February "on federally owned land east of Bentsen State Park."

Directly east of Bentsen State Park is a refuge tract called El Morillo Banco, which is between the state park and the butterfly center. DOJ declined to comment on the email, and CBP did not respond to several requests for comment.

With family, friends and girlfriends.

It's right on the Rio Grande.

We were never robbed or raped or murdered.

Evah.

And if you go down to the river - through the heavy brush - you don't see human footprints emerging from the RG.

You see deer, peccary, bird and ocelot tracks.

This is bullshit.

I never saw hoards of "illegals" passing through it.

This is fucking bullshit and serves double duty - bigotry and destruction of unique ecosystems "greenies" cherish.

Fuck

Trump.

Yup

That this would require US land to be redesignated as Mexico's property?

Does Mexico have a say so in the matter?

Clearly the effect this has had, on the individuals actually on the land, hasn't been considered. Their objections are being reported and ignored.

If it can be done here, are any of us safe, if the president should decide to build other vanity projects elsewhere? In my backyard, perhaps? Or yours?

I'm beyond livid about all of this. In fact, it makes me physically ill.

The effect on our food supply by the additional loss of the beautiful and necessary pollinators, that will die due to habitat loss, should have us all worried.

What makes us think that the power grab stops here?

and was met with lawsuits by landowners? Don't they have some standing in the courts from those previous lawsuits?

....so I assume they know how to overcome the lawsuits eventually.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico%E2%80%93United_States_barrier