The photograph of the Trump administration border wall that accompanied the Jan. 10 Politics & the Nation article “Trump officials to announce completion of 100 miles of new border fencing” showed a wall crossing a stretch of desert with no cover for miles. It is impossible to see any economic rationale.

The wall could be easily breached with a good power saw, or an average climber, or a cheap fishing rod and 60 feet of rope fire ladder. The only purpose is the delay against the intruders; say, five minutes on top of the existing warning from spotting them at a distance. Is the Trump administration seriously suggesting that a few more minutes’ warning in a few cases is worth this expenditure?

The $25-million-per-mile average cost of the wall would buy a massive amount of additional drone and surveillance capacity.

Has the administration run comparative numbers on alternative modern technologies, or has it just hidden the findings to force the Trump-mandated medieval solution (so far, without the archers and boiling oil)?

Ridley Nelson, Great Falls