• US government shutdown fight looms as House set to pass $1.6B border wall funding
    53 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Gorgus;52459199]That's also a likely scenario, but where do you think would the budget go then?[/QUOTE] knowing this administration it'll probably be laundered off to an oil company in St Petersburg or some shit like that
[QUOTE=Govna;52459769]No, it isn't stupid at all. The majority of Americans are opposed to the wall (not to mention the majority of actual construction experts who have examined it; it's ridiculous according to them), yet here they are trying to ram it through anyway. Therefore, tearing the wall down is an entirely legitimate means of protest and resistance. If people feel compelled to do this, then perhaps the government should listen to them next time and not ram through unpopular plans anyway. That seems like common sense to me, but I dunno. Or would you rather people act like a bunch of apathetic cowards and do nothing? What's your brilliant solution?[/QUOTE] why not go to a bit land in the way of the wall (buy it or rent it maybe) and put a big protest camp there that's a hundred times better as an idea than trying to dismantle it after the fact
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;52460797]why not go to a bit land in the way of the wall (buy it or rent it maybe) and put a big protest camp there that's a hundred times better as an idea than trying to dismantle it after the fact[/QUOTE] Eminent domain. They can pay you and just take it.
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;52460801]Eminent domain. They can pay you and just take it.[/QUOTE] the point is to put a big protest camp (or series of camps) in the way to slow down and possibly halt construction and massively inflate the cost of building it potentially enough that the political establishment will either give up (or be forced to stop) due to the costs and time wasted, or it will delay construction long enough for the next president to come in who might just shitcan the entire project
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;52460809]the point is to put a big protest camp (or series of camps) in the way to slow down and possibly halt construction and massively inflate the cost of building it[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure a protest camp would not slow down the construction by much, if at all.
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;52460814]I'm pretty sure a protest camp would not slow down the construction by much, if at all.[/QUOTE] why not you have to spend time, money, manpower, etc on removing all of these people (with the potential for it to get nasty and to get into trouble if the police beat protestors and that sort of thing) and on clearing the land of debris and stuff people might have put down to sabotage construction if its a series of camps along the entire route this exponentially increases costs and time taken, especially for a project of this size
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;52460814]I'm pretty sure a protest camp would not slow down the construction by much, if at all.[/QUOTE] It's true you can't go much slower than nothing
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;52460797]why not go to a bit land in the way of the wall (buy it or rent it maybe) and put a big protest camp there that's a hundred times better as an idea than trying to dismantle it after the fact[/QUOTE] Ah yes an protest camp in the middle of nowhere. That'll show them. Destroy the wall. We need to bring it down. [editline]12th July 2017[/editline] We should also sabotage construction as well. Vandelized and damage construction equipment as well.
[QUOTE=Sky King;52460957]Ah yes an protest camp in the middle of nowhere. That'll show them. Destroy the wall. We need to bring it down.[/QUOTE] for fucks sake the point is that the protest camp is directly in the way of the wall being built. if the wall is being built through the middle of nowhere that's where you're going to have to protest and you can't destroy the wall when it hasn't even been built yet
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;52461013]for fucks sake the point is that the protest camp is directly in the way of the wall being built. if the wall is being built through the middle of nowhere that's where you're going to have to protest and you can't destroy the wall when it hasn't even been built yet[/QUOTE] Well in that case I agree with the protest camp but it will just get taken down by police.
[QUOTE=Sky King;52461066]Well in that case I agree with the protest camp but it will just get taken down by police.[/QUOTE] well if you're willing to risk life and limb to actually physically damage the wall (and being shot by border patrol) I should imagine you'd also be in a position to do a protest camp and be willing to risk being beaten by the police
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;52461082]well if you're willing to risk life and limb to actually physically damage the wall (and being shot by border patrol) I should imagine you'd also be in a position to do a protest camp and be willing to risk being beaten by the police[/QUOTE] Why not both?
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;52460817]why not you have to spend time, money, manpower, etc on removing all of these people (with the potential for it to get nasty and to get into trouble if the police beat protestors and that sort of thing) and on clearing the land of debris and stuff people might have put down to sabotage construction if its a series of camps along the entire route this exponentially increases costs and time taken, especially for a project of this size[/QUOTE] They are just going to get steamrolled by police. If the government is going to build something, you're not going to stop them. That's just the reality of it. Setting up camp does nothing if you're arrested for trespassing on government property and your camp destroyed the day after you set it up.
The wall will never be built because on top of all the issues discussed on thia forum over the past 2 years of this horrible idea being alive, building it will officially delinate (is this the right word) sections of the rio grande to either US or Mexico, depending on where the wall is built. Which means the US is either ceding territory to mexico or intruding on their territory.
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;52461116]They are just going to get steamrolled by police. If the government is going to build something, you're not going to stop them. That's just the reality of it. Setting up camp does nothing if you're arrested for trespassing on government property and your camp destroyed the day after you set it up.[/QUOTE] You heard the man everyone stop protesting there's no point. Just roll over and let the government do what they want.
[QUOTE=RainbowStalin;52461184]You heard the man everyone stop protesting there's no point. Just roll over and let the government do what they want.[/QUOTE] Never said that. Protesting at town hall is not the same as impeding an ongoing construction project.
[URL="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-immigration-wall-exclusive-idUSKBN15O2ZN"]lol he isn't building shit with only $1.6 Billion[/URL]
[QUOTE=Sky King;52461066]Well in that case I agree with the protest camp but it will just get taken down by police.[/QUOTE] If someone's passionate about activism, they won't let the law stop them. Do you think protestors during the Civil Rights Movement just gave up when they were arrested? Hell no, and one of those people became a Senator and just ran for President.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;52460817]why not you have to spend time, money, manpower, etc on removing all of these people (with the potential for it to get nasty and to get into trouble if the police beat protestors and that sort of thing) and on clearing the land of debris and stuff people might have put down to sabotage construction if its a series of camps along the entire route this exponentially increases costs and time taken, especially for a project of this size[/QUOTE] So technically speaking, it might be smarter to destroy an already constructed section. Local police and border patrol can be used for taking down camps, but construction funds would be necessary for repairing the wall. A limited amount of money is budgeted for construction and that budget has to be renegotiated every time it changes. Police budgets are more flexible and they provide a necessary service. Granted going for the wall would be much higher risk.
[QUOTE=GunFox;52461623]So technically speaking, it might be smarter to destroy an already constructed section. Local police and border patrol can be used for taking down camps, but construction funds would be necessary for repairing the wall. A limited amount of money is budgeted for construction and that budget has to be renegotiated every time it changes. Police budgets are more flexible and they provide a necessary service. Granted going for the wall would be much higher risk.[/QUOTE] if you delay construction however, you impose costs on the project and can look sympathetic in the process (passive protesters being turfed out of the way of the wall is more sympathetic than a bunch of guys bombing the wall) if you impose costs and delay construction, it will necessarily cause problems when it turns out the wall is going to cost more and take longer than expected, and so trump will have to allocate more monies to it. the less time he also has to build it, the greater the possibility it won't be finished before he has to leave office. if he's running for re-election, the fact that the wall hasn't been built and progress is going badly might hurt him too
They've a airport.
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;52461187]Never said that. Protesting at town hall is not the same as impeding an ongoing construction project.[/QUOTE] Lol, if you think that the government won't pay any mind to a border protest camp, then surely you must realize that protesting at town hall is an even more fruitless waste of time.
This shit all reminds me of parks and rec. This wall will bakrupt America. It'll be Trumps Ice Town. He'll reappear in 20 years eating calzones and inventing cones of dunshire
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.