It's effective in Iraq just like it would be effective here: great for reducing blast radius, building serpentines leading up to vehicle checkpoints, and -- mor

It's effective in Iraq just like it would be effective here: great for reducing blast radius, building serpentines leading up to vehicle checkpoints, and -- more pertinent to this discussion -- increasing the time it takes to breach a barrier. Just like any security system, from asymmetric encryption to a steel military weapons vault, you can't make something perfectly secure. You can only make it difficult and time-consuming to breach the target. https://www.internationalvault.com/images/standards/class-a-vault-table-10-l.jpg https://www.internationalvault.com/images/standards/class-a-... The concrete barriers in Iraq can be and have been breached. https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2016/0430/Pro-Sadr-protestors-breach-Baghdad-s-fortified-Green-Zone https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2016/0430/Pro-Sa... And that's the crux of the issue: a militarized Green Zone has forces ready and able to respond when a breach attempt is detected, whereas remote New Mexico desert does not. The timescale of an unlawful entry event is a total mismatch for the amount of delay this particular security measure will introduce in an immigration context -- it's like using single-pass DES for strategic intel against an adversary with a botnet.