Readers React: Trump wants a wall to hold back the hordes, just like a medieval royal

Border wall prototypes stand in San Diego near the U.S.-Mexico border on Dec. 12, 2018.
Border wall prototypes stand in San Diego near the U.S.-Mexico border on Dec. 12, 2018.
(Moises Castillo / AP)

To the editor: Nobody is going to dispute the need for reasonable border security. But the notion of a thick wall as an effective “people barrier” seems to have died a long time ago, when siege machines challenged medieval castle walls and cannons breached the most severe ramparts. (“Trump and congressional leaders dig in over government shutdown,” Jan. 2)

What would a stick of dynamite do to President Trump’s medieval border solution? Is the Rio Grande an appropriate accompanying moat? As for drug trafficking, I envision drones lifting the goodies over the wall, driven by old-fashioned U.S. demand.

Trump comes from a world of concrete edifices. Add to this his career in television, where visuals and catchy slogans rule the medium, and you can bet that the president will fight for this legacy image. But this is hardly a sensible approach to border security and immigration reform. It’s simply a very pricey ego-driven, highly ineffective, symbol.

Isn’t it about time for both parties to deal with genuine immigration reform? Finally? We really haven’t seen any substantial immigration reform since the Reagan era. It’s time for us to grow up and get real.

Peter Dekom, Los Angeles



To the editor: Using “border security” as the reason to build a wall on the southern border is a dog whistle. The issue is illegal immigration by “brown” people.

If the issue was truly about national security, there would be increased funding for the Coast Guard and a call for a wall at our northern border.

As for the 800,000 federal employees working without pay, the president is holding his ground on a wall that another country was supposed to have funded. What happens, say, if Transportation Security Agency workers decide to walk off the job at airports after not getting paid for a month?

Wendy Winter, Altadena


To the editor: To my knowledge, our Constitution has no provision forcing employees to work for no pay, and yet our present government does exactly that.

Is it not the right time for those unpaid federal employees to simply not work until they are paid? Is it not now the time for these employees to show their patriotic spirit and do what would be done in free democracies and withhold their services until our misguided leaders come to their senses and end the shutdown?

And no, I am not a federal employee.

Theodore Polychronis, Glendale

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook