•  redfellow   ( @red@sopuli.xyz ) 
    link
    fedilink
    2
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    Here’s something for you to think about when making these silly drive over the fence remarks:

    The border area consists mostly of hard to traverse terrain with only half a dozen roads or so on Russias side iirc. It’s easy for us to see vehicles approaching, because the places where the could are far and few between.

    The issue is just random people walking over. We have plenty of road networks to intercept on this side, as long as we know where border guards are needed.

    Final note: there are only 9 border crossing stations altogether in a border spanning 1,343km.

    •  Sonori   ( @sonori@beehaw.org ) 
      link
      fedilink
      1
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      Neglecting the silliness of assuming that we were talking about where the road crosses the border, or alternatively showing a map where the Russian road parallels the border for sections and where not a single part of the border is more than 10km from the Russian road while meaning it to show that no vehicle could even drive near to the border much reach it, surely what you said about the guards always knowing when someone is coming from kilometers away and being ready to meet them makes the case for a fence over the whole length worse, as it is evidently is and has not been needed for that purpose?

      I guess it is nice though that the issue is just Norway considering spending a lot of money to help solve the issue of lost Russian tourists instead of trying to solve any security concerns.

      •  redfellow   ( @red@sopuli.xyz ) 
        link
        fedilink
        2
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        The point of mentioning the road crossing points were that those places are reinforced, and yeah, it’s silliness to attempt it there, leaving no possible places to take a truck over the border due difficulty terrain - we’re talking about migrants here, not soldiers.

        They aren’t using vehicles, the russians provided migrants bicycles to get to the crossing points when they had the “flood our border with immigrants” operation active some months ago.

        That leaves us with one large issue to cover: people traversing the foresty areas by foot, attempting to slip in undetected. That’s where the fence comes in - they can obviously get over it if they bring a ladder, but as they struggle to even have proper shoes, a ladder becomes a luxury item they cannot afford. In any case, the fence is a slowing measure. The fence also contains alarm systems and surveillance, so that our border patrol can then pinpoint where they are needed ASAP.

        The border patrol people themselves wanted this, and it’s been working well.

        •  Sonori   ( @sonori@beehaw.org ) 
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          6 hours ago

          I thought you just said the issue the government needed to solve was random people wandering across the border without realizing it. People crossing or being trafficked across Russia in an attempt to exercise their right as a human being under article 14 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights, an agreement specifically drafted with the goal of facilitating large movements of persecuted people in the wake of nations turning away people fleeing the Holocaust, well those people are either trying to find and be collected by the border agents or being trafficked and falsely terrified they’ll be sent back to horrific abuse if their discovered by the border patrol instead of welcomed in, so why would a fence change anything about the number of them trying to get out of a dangerous foreign nation?

          I mean it’s not like Norway would be trying to discourage them from holding it to the obligations the nation signed and agreed to that require it to thoughtfully and thoughly analyze each of their claims in court, now would it? I mean if they don’t have even proper shoes, Norway is of course going to spare no expense in welcoming as many of them as show up as quickly as possible, and as such undercutting human trafficking by showing how easy and risk free the alternative is, right?

          It apparently has all this extra money to spend on a changing a border system that is currently working very well in your own words.

          Also, you realize we are talking about a press release about the Norwegian government considering future fencing of more of the Russian-Norwegian border, and not the system as it exists currently, right?

          And that this boarder fencing functionality requires a nice, level, drivable trail to be cleared through the wilderness either side of it to be built and maintained, right?

          • And why exactly are these people not trying to get that asylum in Russia since they’re already traveling through the whole North-South length of it or in any countries in-between their country of origin and Russia? For people in acute need of asylum it does seem suspect that they’re making a long and costly trip through whole of Europe and large parts of Middle East and North Africa, though several countries where they could apply for that asylum, only to seek asylum in Norway-Russia border.

            It doesn’t help that Russia and Belarus have used migrants as a tool of their influence operations and been allowing traffickers to operate and even helping them out.