Critiquing the boarder wall for ( Br John . )

Oh ya immigrants can cut through a steel wall over a feet thick that sounds very capable of them . More drones is a good idea but still very costly and has it's down sides . The drones can be shot down or EMPs could be used . The drones can even be hacked ,heck if you shine a high powered Lazer at one it won't see anything . The wall is meant for corralling migrants to fixed points so they don't slip through the cracks , it's a start . Heck it would be better than spending 200+ billion on the illegal immigrants .

And just in case it wasn't clear.

when I said walls slowed down invaders, I mean they slowed down armies so that they could shoot or kill them as they entered. This only goes for people attacking in large numbers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hexTvbCilFU

It should also be obvious that castle walls weren't just designed to keep out invaders but archers' arrows, while giving the castle's archers higher ground so they could shoot farther than the enemy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3TddqkEoJ4

We also know that armies developed weapons and tactics to get over walls. One of them was essentially a structure that blocked arrows while they positioned it next to the wall, allowing the soldiers inside to simply cross over to the top. Of course the easiest way over the border wall just depends on where you want to cross. You could cut through it, tunnel under it, or you could just bring a ladder or two and lay whatever you want over top of the fence. Even if its electrified you can simply insulate the ladder with rubber.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOqXgO0MFbQ

A wall is truly weak and ineffective. It's only because Trump said it that his supporters think its a great idea.

Malicious wrote: Oh ya immigrants can cut through a steel wall over a feet thick that sounds very capable of them . More drones is a good idea but still very costly and has it's down sides . The drones can be shot down or EMPs could be used . The drones can even be hacked ,heck if you shine a high powered Lazer at one it won't see anything . The wall is meant for corralling migrants to fixed points so they don't slip through the cracks , it's a start . Heck it would be better than spending 200+ billion on the illegal immigrants .

um... how exactly would a wall corral anyone to fixed points? Explain that to us. We're not talking about your neighbors fence where you have to ask your neighbor so you can get the ball that landed in his yard. This is miles of wall that has ALREADY been cut through by smugglers within minutes using a $100 saw from Home Depot. Watch this video of Trump saying "you can cut through any wall" after reports of people cutting through his new border wall. Please watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCkIva2L-B0

The wall isn't there to stop them but to slow them down , if they cut through it or climb over it then it's slowing them down and allowing for a quicker response from the boarder patrol . By corralling them I mean if they don't have the ( tools ) to get past it then they will try to go to a spot where there is no wall aka corralling them to a spot that will be monitored better . Ya they could cut through it and we can repair it . They can use latters but it will slow them down allowing for them to be caught . Heck I vote for a type of DMZ like the one separating north and south Korea . We used similar tactics when gaining territory from Mexico , send people in then take the land . And no I'm not necessarily saying that is what's going on either . We need to make there countries better not make ours worse . We build up countries economies around the world but for what oil or strategical advantage ? We need to help there countries not for what we will get but to help there people .

The wall is antithetical to the doctrine of this order.

Jedi Believe

In the Force, and in the inherent worth of ALL LIFE within it.
In the SANCTITY OF THE HUMAN PERSON. WE OPPOSE the use of torture and CRUEL or UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT, INCLUDING the DEATH penalty.
In a society governed by laws GROUNDED IN REASON and COMPASSION, NOT in FEAR or PREJUDICE
In a society that DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF sexual orientation or circumstances of birth such as gender, ethnicity and NATIONAL ORIGIN.
In the ETHIC OF RECIPROCITY , and how moral concepts are not absolute but vary by culture, religion and over time.
In the positive influence of spiritual growth and awareness on society.
In the importance of freedom of conscience and SELF-DETERMINATION within religious,POLITICAL AND OTHER STRUCTURES.
In the separation of religion and government and the FREEDOMs OF speech, ASSOCIATION and expression.

https://www.templeofthejediorder.org/doctrine-of-the-order#JediBelieve

The wall is antithetical to the doctrine of this order.

It seems to me that the doctrine (possibly carefully and intentionally) does not say much about national interests. The "face value" purpose of "The Wall" is to safeguard the USA's people against all sorts of boogey men.

Whether that is what it actually achieves notwithstanding, I don't know that efforts taken to protect a particular group of people is, by default, against the doctrine.




Anyway, since you don't discriminate, can I have fifty bucks?

Everyone responding probably has good intentions. Some don't understand clearly what the discussion is about and what it's not.

An example would be debating the most humane way to execute someone. I'm against the Death Penalty. That's not the issue. Assuming someone is going to be executed, what is the most humane way to do so?

With me so far?

What we are discussing here is: assuming the goal is to keep someone from illegally (unauthorized) crossing the Mexico US border, a wall along the [entire] border is the best way. It's not if someone should be allowed to cross the border which is a different discussion.

james sand

You're clearly wrong. Unless you don't consider national interests to be part of "society" of which the doctrine speaks directly.

Br John
Your rank and slippery language makes it very clear that you know better than to promote values that go against the doctrine of the Jedi order.

" to keep someone from illegally (unauthorized) crossing the Mexico US border"

is in direct conflict with

"...a society that DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF ... ethnicity and NATIONAL ORIGIN."

KerouacsGhost wrote: Br John
Your rank and slippery language makes it very clear that you know better than to promote values that go against the doctrine of the Jedi order.

" to keep someone from illegally (unauthorized) crossing the Mexico US border"

is in direct conflict with

"...a society that DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF ... ethnicity and NATIONAL ORIGIN."

That is not, is not, what we are discussing. I'm not for the Death Penalty either, but if someone is going to be executed I can discuss the most humane way to do it.

What do you not understand about "Assuming the goal is to keep people from crossing a border ...." ?

It is not, is not, about if we should let them cross the border.

Br. John wrote: ...We are debating if Trump's Big Beautiful Wall is a good or bad idea....

When reading your comments about the beauty of a death machine designed to discriminate on the basis of ethnicity and national origin it becomes very clear that you are the one who does not understand.

Do you really think the members of the temple are not capable of seeing through the manner in which you've crafted your argument? Do you think they don't understand why?

You have made value judgements ( the beauty of proposed wall) which make it very clear that you support a society which violates the doctrine of this order.

Darkside much?

KerouacsGhost wrote:

Br. John wrote: ...We are debating if Trump's Big Beautiful Wall is a good or bad idea....

When reading your comments about the beauty of a death machine designed to discriminate on the basis of ethnicity and national origin it becomes very clear that you are the one who does not understand.

Do you really think the members of the temple are not capable of seeing through the manner in which you've crafted your argument? Do you think they don't understand why?

You have made value judgements ( the beauty of proposed wall) which make it very clear that you support a society which violates the doctrine of this order.

Darkside much?

Read much? I did not start this topic. Throughout this debate I've shown why the wall is a bad idea for many reasons.

What posts do argue for a wall in? List the post numbers

Trump calls it "A big beautiful wall", idiot. That's why I say Trump's big beautiful wall. Nowhere have I argued for it

Malicious, I'm curious what was the intended meaning of the title you made for this topic?

"Critiquing the boarder wall for (Br John .)"

Did you make this post for Br. John?

Do you really think the members of the temple are not capable of seeing through the manner in which you've crafted your argument? Do you think they don't understand why?

You have made value judgements ( the beauty of proposed wall) which make it very clear that you support a society which violates the doctrine of this order.

Darkside much?

What...?

I think this is one of those "not even wrong" moments....

anyway -

What we are discussing here is: assuming the goal is to keep someone from illegally (unauthorized) crossing the Mexico US border, a wall along the [entire] border is the best way. It's not if someone should be allowed to cross the border which is a different discussion.

A wall seems like a terrible method of achieving that goal, by almost any metric.

I know you want to keep the premise as is, for the sake of the discussion - I can't say I know enough about USA politics, or policy to truly understand what the the claimed issue is, or how a wall will resolve it-

Lets just assume that the problem is Boogeymen literally walking across the 'border' - my first suggestion would be something like the TARS (that I believe is already partially in use?)

Wikipedia (What? I'm not a friggen' expert) suggests they have a 400km range - so you need one of these every 800km - so four of these will cover the whole border.

Set up a monitoring centre, link it into to local law enforcement (or a specialised task force, or the national guard for all I care) to react/investigate as need be.

I'd probably want someone who knows more about them to explain to me why that's not a good idea, and even then I would not necessarily can it altogether, just come up with something to address the shortfalls.


Edit: Plan B - Privatise the issuing of border-crossing permits, making every unauthorised crossing a loss of profit for a private company, and let them be motivated to fix the problem for you....

So you don't support discrimination based on ethnicity or national origin and you do believe in the sanctity of the human person, oppose cruel and unusual punishment including death? In other words, you believe in the force and the inherent value of all life within it...even immigrants attempting to cross the southern boarder of the united states?


Jedi Believe

In the Force, and in the inherent worth of ALL LIFE within it.
In the SANCTITY OF THE HUMAN PERSON. WE OPPOSE the use of torture and CRUEL or UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT, INCLUDING the DEATH penalty.
In a society governed by laws GROUNDED IN REASON and COMPASSION, NOT in FEAR or PREJUDICE
In a society that DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF sexual orientation or circumstances of birth such as gender, ethnicity and NATIONAL ORIGIN.
In the ETHIC OF RECIPROCITY , and how moral concepts are not absolute but vary by culture, religion and over time.
In the positive influence of spiritual growth and awareness on society.
In the importance of freedom of conscience and SELF-DETERMINATION within religious,POLITICAL AND OTHER STRUCTURES.
In the separation of religion and government and the FREEDOMs OF speech, ASSOCIATION and expression.

www.templeofthejediorder.org/doctrine-of-the-order#JediBelieve

Right JamesSand. I've lived in Texas all my life. We share a border 3,145km (1,254 miles) long. Trump's "big beautiful wall" is a stupid idea. It's an evil idea. That's why all my posts show evidence against it with references. That's why I asked Malicious why he thought it was a good idea? And even if it was to keep people from illegally crossing it's not the best way and it's highly destructive to humans and other living things and the environment.

Why would a Jedi contemplate the best way to discriminate against and cause the deaths of anyone anywhere without even raising the question, as well as attempt to have such questioning be removed from the discussion, about whether or not specific actions/technology were in line with the doctrine of the order of which they are a member?

Right JamesSand. I've lived in Texas all my life. We share a border 3,145km (1,254 miles) long. Trump's "big beautiful wall" is a stupid idea. It's an evil idea. That's why all my posts show evidence against it with references. That's why I asked Malicious why he thought it was a good idea? And even if it was to keep people from illegally crossing it's not the best way and it's highly destructive to humans and other living things and the environment.

Oh aye, I reckon I have a reasonable handle on your personal view, and I'm not a stranger to arguing a matter that I either have an alternate, or no position at all on.

KG on the other hand is mere moments from calling us all hitler....

Why would a Jedi contemplate the best way to discriminate against and cause the deaths of anyone anywhere without even raising the question, as well as attempt to have such questioning be removed from the discussion, about whether or not specific actions/technology were in line with the doctrine of the order of which they are a member?

Because, as per most discussions or debates or symposiums or what have you, the question was put "is a physical wall, from sea to shining sea, the best way to achieve X"

That's the question. It is offered in those terms.

If you want to debate the ethics of that position, well and good and I applaud such a debate - but it's not the question that is put forth in these circumstances.

(Edit: Oh good, you did want to debate the ethics of that position. Yay, a new thread)

A bit like how no one really asks a vegan how to cook steak - steak may or may not be evil, but that's not the question, the question is - assuming we have a steak, and we are going to eat it - then what is the best method.

So now you're equating the continued building of a technology which has already caused discriminatory human death along the lines of a moral code which runs counter to that of the Jedi Doctrine with... eating steak?

Do you really think everyone in this forum/temple is incapable of thinking through this little word problem? Your intent is plain as day.

Your not a Jedi even if you're a member of a church which recognizes you as one.