Printable View
10,000 percent yes. I'll even give you odds. What do you want, 20 to 1? 100 to 1? I honestly do not care what the number is.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
You might have missed it, but US special forces (Navy Seals) spent THREE FUCKING WEEKS trying to breach wall prototypes with conventional tools/gear (everything short of rocket launchers), and they could not get over, under, around, or through the wall. Navy fucking Seals
Walls work.
But what country are they produced in? Shouldnt something be done about it?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
Point is, people buy the cheapest drugs they can usually. Making coke more expensive by burning a few hectares of rainforest and killilng Escobar didn't stop people using drugs. And building a Wall isn't going to stop it either. And you know it.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
Never heard of a rope and grappling hook I guess. You owe Oskar $20bQuote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
Do some research on this. As I just mentioned...special forces spent three weeks trying this. In that entire time, among dozens of the most highly trained human specimens on earth, only one guy was able to get a grappling hook to stick on the top. Once...in three weeks of trying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
you so funny.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a8237631.html
Apparently the impenetrable Wall isn't quite ready for mass production yet.
Quote:
A Customs and Border Protection report on the tests had identified "strengths and flaws of each design but does not pick an overall winner or rank them, though it does point to see-through steel barriers topped by concrete as the best overall design," the AP reported.
Oh so it wasn't special forces, it was just regular military. My bad I guess. Nice fact check bro!! HIGH FIVE!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
But we're clear now....for three weeks "highly trained testers" did everything within reason to try and breach that wall. And they could not do so.
I'm willing to bet $20B that Oskar can't either.
All that quote seems to be saying is that it's really easy to build an effective wall, and no design is particularly superior.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
The quote says each design has weaknesses (i.e., none are impregnable, presumably even by people without special skills/equipment). The best design was the steel slats, but get a cutting torch and a tank of acetylene and Oskar is $20b richer.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
It doesn't say whether the "best" design is also $20k per foot either. So it doesn't really seem settled.
Seriously, are you mentally challenged in some wall related way? The steel slat wall they're building. You can saw through that by hand. To get over you'd use a rope with a hook. Bring a blanket if there's barbed wire. If you just want to get fentanyl through, you'd probably put that in car tires and drive through, but in case you want to prove a point, you'd just throw it.
This is a bit ambiguous. What kind of "help?" It could have just been another guy helping him throw it.Quote:
“Only once did a tester manage to land a hook on top of the wall without help,” the AP reported, according to one source.
Oh yeah I forgot about that lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
You know, for a guy who thinks that congress should rule omnipotently over all three branches of government, you seem unusually willing to dispense with democracy. Funny, but for some reason I doubt the sincerity of your fiscal concerns. I think you're opinion just morphs to whatever fits the narrative of ORANGE MAN BADQuote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Anyone citing cost has completely missed the point. A) It's a permanent solution, and nothing else is. and B) That's what America wants. America didn't vote for Trump because he promised fiscally responsible border policy. They voted for him because he promised to BUILD A FUCKING WALL.
It's the American people's job to decide what their money gets spent on, and they want a fucking wall.
Is he building a wall though?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
it's a permanent solution only if you couple it with an international band on hacksaws.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
To be clear, he also promised it would be paid for by Mexico. So there's that little detail.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
Do you? Maybe you should hold a Wallerendum.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
No, but that's the democrat's fault ldo. Don't you remember when the Rs controlled the House and Senate for two years and he couldn't get approval for his Wall monies? That was all the Ds fault.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Right...like it's just that easy. You could chip at it with a teaspoon and eventually break through if you were persistent enough. Didn't you see Shawshank?? The idea that you could cut through and make any meaningful breach of the border quickly enough to not get caught is just preposterous.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
The wall prototypes can't be climbed over. They can't be breached quickly enough to avoid detection. they have sensors that can identify underground tunnelling. If those sensors go 20 ft deep....I guess you could dig a tunnel 30feet deep. But then you've really got a deterrent there.
Would you take your kids for miles through an underground tunnel, 30ft down, dug discreetly by criminals?? How bad would shit have to be in guatemala before you tried that?
yeahQuote:
Originally Posted by oskar
I'm pretty sure he's just replacing existing fence.
Read your own links man. They tried that. For three weeks. Can't get through the wall.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
With a wall!Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
https://image.cnbcfm.com/api/v1/imag...88rtx6jhvu.jpg
This is a wall?
Are you going to drag a ladder all the way from Guatamela to get over a wall?
I'm not sure what your point is. They have to all sit on the top until the last person gets up. Then all climb down the other side. Good luck not getting spotted by a drone or motion sensor, or camera in that time.
A family with kids couldn't get over that wall. Someone transporting a cadre of sex slave prostitutes will have a hell of a time getting over that wall. Anyone traveling alone/discreetly (like a heroin smuggler) can't get over that wall.
Works for me.
How thick do you think these steel beams are? A cutting torch goes through steel pretty quick. A hacksaw, maybe an hour. So is your patrol going to cover every inch of the wall every hour?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
No, but two heroin smugglers could.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
I mean, we can see a fishing boat entering US waters from a radar station 500 miles away. We don't wait until a boat gets to our shore to handle it's arrival. We see it coming first.
You're telling me we won't see some mexicans marching through the desert with a 20 foot ladder???
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA have you ever tried to use a hacksaw to cut anything???Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
If you think you can slice one of those beams in an hour...you're nuts. And by the way, you have to cut it twice to make a hole in the wall.
And oh by the way, they're steel posts filled with concrete filled with rebar. I don't think your hacksaw blade will hold up.
I'll bet it's close to that. At least multiple times a day, at irregular intervals.Quote:
So is your patrol going to cover every inch of the wall every hour?
Right, because if you're not trying to attract attention.....carry a 20 foot ladder through the desert towards an international border.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
I know, right. Get ready for the human extinction event that even Arnold Schwarzeneger can't stop.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
Manbearpig warned you, but did you listen? Nooooo.
I mean... I tend to agree with that sentiment, but who decides what's credible in the case of allegations of criminal behavior? A court of law, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
I think the word hearsay is perfectly appropriate.
I agree. I'm not sure how much actual pressure it brought to bear. Probably a bad argument on my part.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
You'd use cutting wire. Every demolition company has a wire cutting machine - they aren't high tech or prohibitively expensive, but these beams are thin enough that you could do it by hand in a couple of hours. You'd just need the wire and leave the machine at home.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
If you already have surveillance, why do you need a wall? That was the democrats proposal. Use modern technology. Trump said: NOTHING BUT A BIG BEAUTIFUL WALL.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
One of these and a parachute and you win the bet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rPU_t7TGqo
Try secondsQuote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3Eq52unObc
A couple of hours x 2. You'd have the cut the top and bottom of the pole in order get a body through. That plus you'd have to get to to the wall undetected in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Or...we can just let them run across the sand when we're not looking.
Which do you think will be more effective??
The walls ARE surveillance. They have the sensors that go off when one of the bars is cut. They have the sensors that go off when someone tries to dig a tunnel.Quote:
If you already have surveillance, why do you need a wall? That was the democrats proposal. Use modern technology. Trump said: NOTHING BUT A BIG BEAUTIFUL WALL.
And we've already talked about this....the wall is permanent....so even if you remove all the surveillance, your average immigrant and/or drug/smuggler is still gonna have a bitch of a time getting over an 18 foot steel wall.
Where do you think the picture was taken? If you just google border wall, a lot of pictures will have people sitting on it. I didn't go look for that picture, it was the first result.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
That's not so you can't cut through them that's so you can't knock them over.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
Rebar is also steel fyi. And concrete is easier to cut than steel.
wow....border patrol will never see that coming.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
ANd if you think you're gonna operate that wire by hand you're crazy. For $10 you can buy a modified chainsaw blade with handles so you can work it through logs by hand. See how that goes compared to a regular chainsaw.
And how many of those people are apprehended as a result of the delay caused by the 18 foot steel obstacle in their way.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
That pic still shows those people in Mexico.
All your ideas why a wall would work have nothing to do with the wall. If they see them coming, you didn't need a wall. If they don't see them coming, a wall won't stop them.
But the whole discussion is irrelevant because Trump is not building a single foot of fence that wasn't fenced already.
Haha. Or you could use the thermite they used to bring down the Twin Towers.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
It really doesn't matter if some dispatcher in a CBP station 40 miles away sees some people running through the desert or reads that a sensor was tripped. By the time he gets there, the immigrants are gone.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
But then again, if those immigrants are delayed by a multi-hour cutting project, or even by 15-45 minutes it might take to get a half dozen people over a ladder, then their apprehension becomes a million times easier.
As to "how can they possibly get down" I don't understand how you can possibly be this ignorant about your body and how it can overcome terrain, but here's some video from your favorite news source:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpnFyLxr1qQ
Yeah cause no immigrant ever had access to a source of electricity, like a small gas generator.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
You genuinely believed that US military could not do that in three weeks?
No. Christine Blasey Ford made a credible allegation. Kavanaugh never touched her. Both of those statements can be true.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey
If you want to speed run: detonating cord. Just the notion that it somehow would be inconceivable to bring a ladder when he's looking at the picture of mexicans climbing THE WALL with a ladder is making me feel dizzy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Looks to me like you could get fentanyl through that wall. How's that going to stop the drugs trade?Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
What are you saying? That they didn't spend three weeks trying? Or that they didn't put a sincere effort into trying?Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Look, I'm sure the US military has 500 ways to breach those prototypes piece of cake. But the experiment was to see if they could do it using conventional tools and methods. When a Honduran caravan gets its hands on a fighter jet or a nuclear submarine, we might have a problem. But until then, steel and stone seem to work just fine.
How is a ladder not a "conventional tool or method"
The prototypes tested were 12 feet taller than the walls in your pic. I think that ladder is at its limitQuote:
Originally Posted by oskar
12 WHOLE FEETSIES? OH MY LORD! I DID NOT SEE THAT ONE COMING.
THAT CHANGES EVERYTHING
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico...States_barrier
26 feet at its highest
26 foot ladder:
https://www.homedepot.com/b/Building...vZasewZ1z19wc9
It changes alot. A 20 foot ladder weights about 25-30lbs. A 40 foot ladder weighs almost 90 lbs.
Also, the prototypes being tested, at least the ones that I saw, had rounded/polished tops. So even if you got to the top of the wall, you had no way to perch yourself on top long enough and securely enough to pull the ladder over.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
LOL, the words Hillary and progressive in the same sentence!
Last week, Nancy Pelosi too claimed with a straight face she was a progressive.
Words have no meaning anymore
I'm not playing that game. "liberal" is another word that doesn't mean what it's supposed to mean.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer
When I say progressives, you should just know that I mean anyone who says that they are a progressive. And when I say conservative, I mean everyone claiming allegiance to that camp as well, whether their actions mirror those values or not.
What I find tremendously funny Oskar, is that you sincerely believe that a for-profit construction company.... successful enough, and well run enough to be on the government's approved vendor list......would submit a prototype that is susceptible to something as simple as a really tall ladder.
They thought of that. Thanks for your expertise bud.
Can you explain to me what you see in this image:
https://image.cnbcfm.com/api/v1/imag...88rtx6jhvu.jpg
I see a tiny group of immigrants having a bitch of a time making five feet of longitudinal progress.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
I also see a wall that's too short and needs about $25B in renovations.
What exactly is your point?
How high is the Trump wall?
30 feet not counting several feet underground.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
12 feet taller than the barrier in that picture.
But they haven't built any of it yet, right? Besides the prototypes.
I mean... doesn't change a whole lot: https://www.amazon.com/Extension-Lad...11&s=hi&sr=1-3
You can't seriously believe that. Impossible to lift 90lb? - the one I linked is 75lbQuote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
Oh shit. At first I thought it said 'fentanyl', not fireball.
Never mind then.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAdC2K8-E4U
Right. Still not seeing your point?Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
I think voters should hold Trump accountable for failing on that campaign promise. It's going to be a challenge for him in 2020. But if Dems are just going to run around shrieking about the hoax that is climate change or a fake narrative about white-supremacy, they make it easy for him.
The wall isn't built because the Republicans, led by Paul Ryan, were able to convince Trump to focus on tax reform and kick the can down the road on the wall. Now the dems control the house and are being obstructionist douchebags. That's fine....voters should hold them accountable for that too.
By the way though, he did get the tax thing done, along with two supreme court judges and prison reform.
If you don't know about it already, look for "pumpkin chunkin' videos. It's one of the greatest competitions ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Im dedQuote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
Believe what? That carrying 90lbs through the desert is a fuckton harder than carrying 30lbs? Yeah, I believe that.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Or are you shocked that I believe there is such a thing as a wall structure that deters ladders as a viable form of breach?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFx11UzAyn0
This thing is sick as fuck!
Fuck the bus ride! We can probably just use that to launch a mexican from Tijuana to OaklandQuote:
Originally Posted by oskar
I'm now officially for open borders, provided that every immigrant arrive via trebuchet.
So you think it's smart to spend 16+ billion - not including maintenance, to slightly inconvenience some Hondurans and possibly even make them carry a 60lb heavier ladder? Not that I believe it's 30ft before any of it has been built.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
That wasn't the point. This is a record holding trebuchet built for the purpose of chunkin' pumpkins, and it's cool to look at. You're not pulling your weight around here and I'm drifting off.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
I didn't catch that the first time. Why would you measure underground? XDQuote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
Because shovels are a thing. They're easier to carry than ladders.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Well, ask me about something else then. I'm still waiting for you to answer my question from the other day. Can you explain how Trump got elected without invoking racism, sexism, or russia?Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
You already told us. A bunch of disaffected people wanted to stick it to the ruling class by electing a man who would make them suffer by lowering their taxes.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
Those are undeniably factors. Racists love him - look at Daily Stormer, Richard Spencer... The access hollywood tapes actually raised his popularity and russians hacked the DNS for him and ran a social media campaign. I'm sure there were other reasons too. Like I've said many times... trying to not be inflammatory is really hard here... uhm... He appeals to simple folks by being, uhm... a simple man.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
....and by busing immigrants into their citiesQuote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
....and by de-railing their dreams of having a functionally activist supreme court for the next 20 years.
....and by embarrassing the news media for the sham that it is, resulting in a humongous wave of layoffs in the journalism industry.
....and by seemingly effortlessly booming the economy beyond anything ever dreamed about by his predecessor
....and by not giving a flying fuck about climate change.
#MAGA
What if you found out that you and Richard Spencer liked the same flavor of ice cream? Would you die?Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Trump won well over 300 electoral votes. Richard Spencer couldn't fill a single-A baseball stadium. LOL. Big factor in his success right here huh.
Seems like the best explanation of the Mueller Report here:
tldr; MR found Trump "not innocent"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f71Rasj_0JY
Yes, let's invent whole new legal terms because "ORANGE MAN BAD"Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
No, you should watch that. You already showed earlier that you misunderstood the thing the guy explains in detail, because you believed what Barr said about the OLC opinion as seen by Mueller. What Barr said is directly contradicted by the Mueller report.
Ugh, I'm five seconds in and I already hate everything this guy says.
"Unless you're as smart as I am, you don't understand"
Yeah I really trust a guy who starts his argument with "Hey legal eagles!!"
A credible allegation that wasn't of rape, yeah. No criminal activity to unravel there.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
I'm kinda glad you mentioned it, because I deleted the section I was going to write about it, due to it not being about a criminal accusation.
Three minutes now and this guy hasn't told me anything I don't already know.
Yeah yeah yeah....can't indict a sitting president. blah blah blah.... can be charged after he's out of office yak yak yak.....I'm talking to you like a third grader
Play all the legal gymnastics you want. At the end of the day, the most relentless investigation ever conducted could not find any evidence of even a single criminal action.
For fucks sake guys....WHO CARES ABOUT THIS CRAP?? Trump is not on trial. This isn't a courtroom where he's either found guilty or not guilty. Mueller could have said "X is an incident where Trump committed a crime against the interests of this country. Or here is where he provably obstructed the course of justice to protect himself from investigation". then congress would know, and the media would know, and the voters would know. Then justice could proceed from there.
But he didn't do that. He spent two years commanding a small army and couldn't even put a scratch on the guy. If anything Trump gained support after the MR.
I literally can't believe you still want to push the russia angle. I mean...when does it end? What would it take for you to say "Ok...Trump didn't do it"
I'll break it down for you.
Mueller starts report by saying he is operating under policy against indicting sitting POTUS. As such, he cannot make claims that Trump is guilty of x, y, or z because that would not allow Trump the right to immediately defend himself in court (due process). Thus he can only either find Trump innocent (i.e., clear him), but never guilty. So for the rest of the report he's going go provide the evidence he found and give it to Congress to decide what to do.
He discusses evidence for conspiracy with Russia and reports it as inadequate (i.e., Trump is innocent of collusion).
He then goes over 12 items re: obstruction, lays out the evidence in each item, which varies in strength from zero to strong for each item (summarized in the graph at 9:00), and says 'there you go, that's my report'.
In no case does he 'clear' Trump of obstruction like Barr claimed. On the contrary, he makes it clear that there is strong evidence for at least a few of the obstruction items (including attempts by Trump to fire and/or curtail Mueller lol) and leaves it at that. Nowhere in that report will you see anything that says 'innocent of obstruction'.
Fixed your post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Is that going in the White House rebuttal of the Mueller Report? 'Cause it seems funny to prepare a rebuttal for a report that totally exonerates someone.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
I've watched a few trials, and I've never seen someone cleared of all charges filing a rebuttal.
fypQuote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
I swear to fucking god....I've never been to law school but if you gave me 30 million dollars and a team of prosecutors and FBI agents....I could get you charged with treason.
Do you realize how unbelievably innocent Trump has to be to not only come out unscathed, but ahead???
That obstruction chart was funny. "Some guy colored this in...look how much red he chose to use. TRUMP IS GUILTY GGRRRAAAHGGGGH"
The best part of this whole thing is that Trump obstructed justice over a crime he was being cleared of. If he'd just kept his mouth shut and let the thing run its course he would have walked away clean.
Then why wasn't he? Maybe it's because they're being paid to get to the truth, not to fabricate evidence for a kangaroo court.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
He is, to use his own words, 'fucked'.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
Of course the colouring is subjective.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
The point is all 12 of those instances were discussed in the report, and in no case (afaik) did Mueller say 'he's innocent'.
Sorry, I just want to savour this moment a bit longer with a meme.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Attachment 1109
Trump is more likely to get re-elected than he was before the Mueller report's release.
And you think it's a loss for Trump?
And you think he's retarded and you're not?
at least jesus loves you man.
Says you and Fox.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
He's going to be under congress' investigation between now and Election Day. If he isn't impeached by then, and if the D's have a brain (the latter of which is a big 'if' admittedly), they're going to put up some squeaky clean candidate and spend the next 18 months talking about how POTUS obstructed justice, oversaw the family separation policy, fucked up trade, and didn't do anything about health care.
And he's going to come back with 'hrhbbhbhb i am not a crook!' and 'i'll build the wall this time for sure' and 'immigrants are trying to rape your babies' and 'the stock market was good when i started' and we'll have to see how that goes.
Speaking of the stock market, he doesn't brag about it much anymore. I wonder why.
Attachment 1110
Who? I doubt someone is going to unexpectedly jump out of the woodwork and run for president at this point. You know who the option are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Who is this squeaky clean person?
Kamala Harris? Is she even polling on whole numbers?
Joe Biden? Touches kids
Beto? He is probably already toast. Saying his presence = charity might be unfixable. But just in case..drunk driver.
Swalwell? Gun confiscation...not a winning platform
Warren? Trump bullied her into getting that DNA test. Another epic troll. She won't hold up in a head to head campaign against him. She's too weak to be president.
Bernie? Social justice sell out. Also a closet capitalist. And also too weak to be president. Might croak before the convention
Who am I missing?
Booker? He's the guy who went to boarding school, went to yale, became a rhode scholar, rand a major US city and became a senator. But claims victimhood status because of his skin color.
Gillibrand? Also went to boarding school, ivy league college, and enjoys a comfortable living as a US senator. And also like booker, claims victimhood status. Because she's a woman or something.
Oh, and Mayor Pete. A fake-christian who has yet to articulate any actual policy positions.
Who can beat Trump?
Anyone really. He's not exactly a juggernaut of popularity.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpoonald
Although I would be hedging my bets if Warren or Biden ran. Even anyone else, there's no predicting what people are going to do.