- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Wouldn't it make sense for invaders at the southern border to be shot on sight?
Posted on 5/11/23 at 1:25 am to Thundercles
Posted on 5/11/23 at 1:25 am to Thundercles
If people are verified as being armed, they could justifiably be shot. Otherwise you need to employ nonlethal measures.
No, you cannot automate this. This requires a mobilization of at least 250k military personnel to cover the entire border, plus others in the interior.
It's a national emergency.
No, you cannot automate this. This requires a mobilization of at least 250k military personnel to cover the entire border, plus others in the interior.
It's a national emergency.
1
Posted on 5/11/23 at 1:18 pm to POTUS2024
quote:
This requires a mobilization of at least 250k military personnel to cover the entire border, plus others in the interior.
bullshite, but even so, how many troops do we have in Europe protecting the socialists there from their primary trade partner? The border sounds like a perfect place for them.
1760 yards to the mile, so erect 5-6 towers per mile, giving a 2 man crew a 150 yard shot in either direction. That's 10,200 towers, even if you changed personnel 6 times per day giving each crew 4 hour shifts, that's only 122,400 men.
But like I said, the invasion would come to a screeching halt before you got 100 towers built with the military actually defending our borders and shooting to kill.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News