> I remember reading articles (15+ years ago) about how dangerous and impassable the Darien Gap was. Clearly that's not the case, or at least not anymore, consi

> I remember reading articles (15+ years ago) about how dangerous and impassable the Darien Gap was. Clearly that's not the case, or at least not anymore, considering the number of migrants (including children) walking through every month. This comment really belongs at the unfortunate juncture of privileged assumptions and geographical/geopolitical naivety. The volume of people making the crossing doesn’t signal that it has somehow become less treacherous. All this shows is that the reward for crossing outweighs the risk of dying along the way - both of which are preferable to not attempting the cross (which is pretty bleak when you think about it). > Perhaps they should develop some infrastructure, like roads or tunnels. This is a very “thanks I’m cured” sort of statement that appears to be informed by nothing except your own lived experience in a place where terrain is mild and the political landscape is such that this is even possible. If you have not seen this sort of terrain for yourself, it’s hard to imagine it. Miles and miles of stinking swampland, ankle to waste deep in mud, bounded only by limestone cliffs with a shear drop to salty oceans below and plenty of rain to keep it muddy. Malaria is a literal plague and the mosquitos that carry it are not in short supply. Getting construction equipment there is difficult at best absolutely impossible otherwise. Tunnels would require multi-decade, multi-trillion dollar investments, boring through bedrock. Making coast-adjacent roads is difficult due to the isolation of the place and two closest cities you could link are on facing opposite oceans.