Debate: The Practicality of "The Wall"
Side: Yes, because...

Seriously, expand your thinking, and stop trying so hard at accepting and being a part of the bullcrap propaganda that is based on exploiting your emotions, with little reasonable application of common sense, and the decency of benefit of the doubt to your fellow Americans, especially our military and law enforcement!Okay, first off, you are behaving like a complete ass. My opinions on this are from the actual figures of our overseas operations, not from any propaganda, not from any emotions, not from anything except the military's own reported figures. Stop behaving like an asshole and insulting people you disagree with. I come from a military family, primarily Marines and Air force. I have PLENTY of deference for the men and women of our armed forces. My criticism lies squarely with the command structures that run cost benefit analyses on innocent collateral damage.That's a far fetched idea of our Military!!SO, what you are saying is.... "Our Military, Our Veterans, on battle fields and through air strikes DO NOT carefully execute plans, with careful skill, to limit civilian casualties.I am saying that the command structure of our military does not refuse to blow up innocent life unless it is "unavoidable", because factually speaking they don't. They would be less effective as a military if they did.Was there ever civilian casualties? Yes. It is part of war? Yes. Did our military not care at all to limit those casualties? Or, did they actually try to protect civilians?Yes, they generally tried to limit it. There are, however, instances in which they didn't. They have, on plenty of instances, knowingly harmed the native populace whilst on operations. Be it Agent Orange, drone strikes or what have you.If not, the military should be prosecuted for unthinkable crimes done to humanity!In some cases yes, in some cases no.Oh, and the terrorist, they MUST be the good guys, concerned about the faithful among them, their civilian citizens. Who are you trying to talk to at this point? Of course the terrorists are bad guys. Why are you comparing us to them? Aren't we supposed to be better than them, to the point where any such comparison is just silly?Good (evil) regimes among them, and morally upstanding terrorists caring for the people among them. NO, they would NEVER ever decoy a building, fill it with civilians, and make the murder of innocent people a parade for dramatic effects, (while exploiting us emotionally, since we actually value human lives). Terrorists don't exploit the devastation and distort mediia like that, do they?Of course they do. That does nothing to justify crimes we have committed.When we go to war, we go to protect our civilians. We in America sheild our civilians.We haven't entered into a truly defensive war since WW2, and even that was more of a long-term future defense (preemptive defense?). Beyond that, our wars have been to expand and maintain our sphere of geopolitical influence.When evil regimes and terrorists go to war, they use their civilians as decoys and sheilds!From terrorists, to other countries, every special interest group, every entitlement, every illegal immigrant, the media, our own government, and everyone that wants to trample America and the people of America, to move up while Americans suffer!So do you really live day after day assuming that the entire world hates America and wants us to suffer?The National Debt, the Annual Budget, The Annual Spending, it belongs to all of us.We ALL need to begin to make sense of our priorities in spending, and cut wasteful and nonpriority spending. And also, evaluate cost vs value and pay fair market prices when spending our money.Not by overpaying significantly for bid contracts.Require fiscal responsibility, and priority spending.The wall is a priority!If you want to cut wasteful spending then you need to stop advocating the wall, which is wasteful spending.That's Ridiculous! It's like saying...Your comparison has no logical connection. The wall is not a cost effective means of solving the problem, based on the figures I have already provided for you. It's like saying there's a leak in my roof, so I want to fix the leak instead of replacing the roof.And its also NOT fiscally responsible for our government and our citizens to let that leak go without fixing it!!For even 20 billion or even 30 billion and spend 113 billion annually to manage the leak rather than just repair it!!!!You are repeating a lie. The initial cost, as I have already provided the figures for, is closer to 25 billion, not counting maintenance and cost of manning it. The 113 billion is not included the economic benefits of said illegal immigrants, and the CBO says they equalize. This means that we are spending 25 billion initially with billions more over time for zero economic benefit. It also wouldn't even solve the theoretically 113 billion as over half of those involved arrive legally.So even if the wall is 30 billion, for 1 time to build, if it saves 113 billion per year. How long would it take to pay for itself?It never would.Now, don't everyone think too hard, it might cost you your liberal opinions!I'm not a liberal. Now respond to what I actually stay, because when you try to attack these straw men it just looks ridiculous.