Not infeasible no, I agree.

But, if you want to know what draconian policy really is, you can look at NZ. That place is no joke. It's state-managed isolation or a quarantine facility for at least 14 days and until you test negative.

There are a bunch of reports of people breaking out of these facilities after having been there for more than a month. Just zero chance this would work in America.

Thats overstating it a little. or even a lot.

Nobody has been in those places for more than a month, its 2 weeks.

The 'escapees' so far have been an alcoholic (went to the nearest bottle store) and a couple of people with mental issues.

The REASON those people escaped is because the places aren't prisons, or even close. They were hotels, high quality hotels in some places...with no police presence at all...

There was a bunch of fuss made by the public because it was eventually realised that people were being allowed out without testing to attend funerals under a compassionate exemption.

Your description makes it sound like something very different to the reality.

Its toughening up a little now, because everyone in NZ wanted them to toughen up, but for a long while the reality was that all you had to do to leave was decide that you wanted to leave.

Most people didn't, of course, because most people aren't dicks.

Island.

Yes, exactly.

But Australia is also an island, in the relevant sense for this discussion, and didn't succeed in eradication.

Hawaii also had considerable success, albeit recently undermined. Much to my chagrin, since I live here.

My conclusion is that eradicating this virus is very difficult, even with all the advantages.

But again, not impossible.

Adding an Australian perspective here. Our politicians did not share the same approach as New Zealand (which started with a level 4 lockdown and stayed there for 6-8 weeks). The approach here has certainly been more unified than the US, but states are encouraged to pursue their own approaches, with some states (WA, SA, Queensland) having much more success than others (NSW, Victoria). The plan here was never to pursue eradication, but to flatten the curve and keep infection rates manageable. I wish we'd considered eradication more seriously. As a country we have the resources to support the country through that 6 week period, and the national government would have done a decent enough job in ensuring the population had sufficient support through that period.

Australia's is an interesting case because the recent spike coincides (~2 week lag) with the lifting of most of the restrictions. It's also only really spiking in one state (although NSW may be slipstreaming Victoria).

This is evidence that the lockdown rules were having a significant effect on suppression, and eradication may have been within reach had the easing been delayed another month or two.

Sorry is the implication that the US is in the state it’s in because infected people are continuously walking across the border and infecting more people?

If no, then being an island isn’t really relevant here.

No, it’s because 100 different people (according to genetic studies) started separate chains of infections in New York City due to international travel, immediately overwhelming any efforts to do contact tracing.

I invite you to spend some time with Hawaii's COVID statistics before coming to the conclusion that being an island, or not, is irrelevant to US outcomes.

https://www.hawaiidata.org/covid19

Vietnam. Long border with China, two million people cross every year, population of 95 million, zero covid deaths because they got serious early and everyone more masks.

There is absolutely no chance that they had 0 covid related deaths anywhere in the country of 95 million. None. Not to say that they didn’t act well and where prepared though.

Perhaps not, but Western reporters have confirmed that they're not noticeable problems at all.