Somehow we don't seem to face this problem when it comes to building roads.

Even when we build them right through populated downtown areas!

https://www.vox.com/2015/5/14/8605917/highways-interstate-ci...

A road is usable if you build it piecemeal, that's not true of a railway.

In this case, as in many others, political problems are just legal problems at scale.

Can't the US govt buy back any land they want for infrastructure? I mean forcibly buy back.

Yes, it's called eminent domain. But if the government attempts to do so you can file a lawsuit and argue that they don't have a right to purchase your property from you. These lawsuits are expensive and take a lot of time/effort, which makes building a railway impractical by this method. To "solve" this politically would require a constitutional amendment, which is obviously not going to happen for this issue.

But, as a previous poster said, these problems always seem solveable when building a freeway.

I think it's a question of public support, political will, and stamina.

People think of freeways as vital, so it's ok if I-69 through southern Indiana takes over 30 years from initial studies to completion.

If a train route took 30 years to build, it would be lambasted as a boondoggle and abandoned.

You can also try negotiating peacefully first: https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/virginia-a...

Governments usually do try negotiating peacefully first. It’s better for everyone involved than the alternative.

Eminent domain means property rights issues for public infrastructure are also political issues.

They become legal issues when those cases go to court (which is what frequently occurs)

i don't understand why the government doesn't do stealth land acquisition more, with shell companies like denver airport