Should We Take Over Mexico? It's Collapsing

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:

If Mexico dissolves into chaos, we’re in trouble. Millions of hungry people will descend on us. It would be like having an elephant die in your yard — no matter what, you’ve got to deal with it.

For once, I agree with your raving lunatic ass.

I saw that jerkoff Gingrich brought this up a week or so ago, and I started doing research myself on it.

Mexico may the ultimate dream of what the Italian mafia hoped to create- crooked ass judges, cops that moonlight as drug dealers, and stacks of bodies because of the drugs. This is getting horrifically bad.

Funny how we try to give democracy to all these shitbag countries around the world that don’t want it and hate us, while our neighbor to the south slowly crumbles.

Either way, I don’t know whether sending troops would be good for the US, but we may need to eventually. Mexico cannot fall into being a narco-state- that would be absolutely fucking terrible and have nothing but bad news for the US.

It doesn’t matter who’s fault it is at this point- if we have to fix it, we will. [/quote]

I read about this very scenario a while back in a book called “The Next War”, by Casper Wienberger. In it, he covers this very scenario as a viable possibility. And I agree with you guys on your points above. If Mexico fell into such a state, it would have detrimental effects on the US. No doubt about it. On the other hand, nation building is a tough, costly endeavor, with little or no return on investment. Hmmmm…

Maybe we could just…ya know…bail 'em out. Maybe Mexico is too big to fail. ;~)

22

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
This is coming from the same information sources that predicted WMD in Iraq, no doubt?

[/quote]

There was WMD in Iraq…remember how many Kurds Saddam used poison gas on? Nobody predicted anything.

23

[quote]Rockscar wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
This is coming from the same information sources that predicted WMD in Iraq, no doubt?

There was WMD in Iraq…remember how many Kurds Saddam used poison gas on? Nobody predicted anything.

[/quote]

Which is why WMD is a deliberately contrived politicized term, because chemical weapons are, to put it mildly, not a big deal. They do less damage than equivalent HE. But hey, keep patting yourself on the back that we got rid of a tyrant with scary chemical weapons.

24

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
This is coming from the same information sources that predicted WMD in Iraq, no doubt?

There was WMD in Iraq…remember how many Kurds Saddam used poison gas on? Nobody predicted anything.

Which is why WMD is a deliberately contrived politicized term, because chemical weapons are, to put it mildly, not a big deal. They do less damage than equivalent HE. But hey, keep patting yourself on the back that we got rid of a tyrant with scary chemical weapons.[/quote]

LOL! ok then, howz about we float a chemical cloud over your particular neck of the woods, then you can tell us how it’s “not a big deal”. Seriously, I mean, WTF are you on? Not a big deal? Good grief…

25

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
As for Mexico steadily crumbling, what I have seen in the 7+ years that I have been spending time here is quite the reverse. Hell it’s a long way from perfect but there is actually a real air of optimism even with all the doom and gloom reports in the global media about global depression.[/quote]

More gloom and doom from the global media. Vigilante groups in Juarez have threatened to kill one criminal a day if the violence doesn’t stop.

http://www.elpasotimes.com/newupdated/ci_11463340

If it doesn’t happen in your town, and your company is still making money then it doesn’t really exist. And why plan for the worse case scenario? It ALWAYS happens to someone else.

26

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
LOL! ok then, howz about we float a chemical cloud over your particular neck of the woods, then you can tell us how it’s “not a big deal”. Seriously, I mean, WTF are you on? Not a big deal? Good grief…[/quote]

How 'bout the WP Israel is using on the Gaza Strip.

Big deal?

27

[quote]lixy wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
LOL! ok then, howz about we float a chemical cloud over your particular neck of the woods, then you can tell us how it’s “not a big deal”. Seriously, I mean, WTF are you on? Not a big deal? Good grief…

How 'bout the WP Israel is using on the Gaza Strip.

Big deal?[/quote]

The chemical weapons convention does not list WP as a chemical weapon. From what I’ve read, WP has some nasty side effects from heavy exposure; however I believe it is used primarily as a smokescreen/concealment and an illumination tool. I don’t believe it is even used as a “chemical weapon” per Se.

Perhaps someone with more knowledge about WP than myself can add to this.

28

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
EL PASO - Mexico is one of two countries that “bear consideration for a rapid and sudden collapse,” according to a report by the U.S. Joint Forces Command on worldwide security threats.
[/quote]

This was quite the start. Only 2 countries! YEAH!

29

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

The chemical weapons convention does not list WP as a chemical weapon. From what I’ve read, WP has some nasty side effects from heavy exposure; however I believe it is used primarily as a smokescreen/concealment and an illumination tool. I don’t believe it is even used as a “chemical weapon” per Se.

Perhaps someone with more knowledge about WP than myself can add to this.

[/quote]

White phosphorus is definitely a chemical, and it can certainly be used as a weapon. One could claim that it is not a chemical weapon, but only if that person didn’t care about the meanings of words.

Willie Pete has been used as an incendiary antipersonnel weapon since the first world war. The US dropped plenty of WP bombs during the Dresden and Hamburg fire bombings, and white phosphorus grenades and shells were used quite often on enemy infantry in the South Pacific and Vietnam.

More recently, WP played an important role in flushing insurgents out of their holes at Fallujah. The combination of Willie Pete and high explosives is colloquially known as “Shake & Bake”, although a more fitting descriptor would be “Flush & Crush”.

Bigflamer, you’re a fireman, so you’ve undoubtedly seen a few burns in your time. Try this on for size: White phosphorus bursts into flame on contact with oxygen, sticks fast to your skin and will burn you down to the bone in seconds. If you inhale it, you will incinerate your respiratory system. Swallowing white phosphorus dust causes liver, heart, and kidney damage, vomiting, stomach cramps, and drowsiness. Swallowing as little as 15 mg will kill you.

These are similar to the effects of sulfur mustard (“mustard gas”), which was banned by the Geneva convention in 1925 and the CW Convention in 1993 (but still used extensively by Italy, the USSR, Germany, Japan, Egypt, Iraq and Sudan).

The US Army’s policy on White Phosphorus is as follows:

“White phosphorus (WP) rounds burn with intense heat and emit dense white smoke. They may be used as the initial rounds in the smokescreen to rapidly create smoke or against material targets, such as Class V sites or logistic sites. It is against the law of land warfare to employ WP against personnel targets.”

Israel has admitted using WP in the war in Lebanon, but so far denies using in in Gaza.

30

Varqanir, it’s a joke isn’t it. It’s like the whole WMD thing, the general public just loves phrases like that they can bandy about but how do you define mass destruction, is it based on number of people killed, area razed to the ground or what?

The people killed are just as dead.

31

However real the problems Mexico is facing may be, ‘take over’ is a joke. We can’t even run our own country.

32

LOL^

One thing that I can’t decide about today’s powerful governments (US, UK etc) is are they really that incompetent or is it a cover to hide how clever they really are?

33

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
LOL^

One thing that I can’t decide about today’s powerful governments (US, UK etc) is are they really that incompetent or is it a cover to hide how clever they really are?[/quote]

One thing I love about history is that it shows how terribly, laughably incompetent practically ALL powerful governments have always been. The Romans, the Spanish, even the terrible Nazis and Soviets were all just mobs of blundering fools with really good propaganda machines.

Think of how grand they could have appeared had they only had CNN, C-SPAN, Fox News and the BBC?

34

If it becomes a full on failed narco-state, we’re going to have a serious refugee crisis this nation can’t afford.

35

The last place the USA needs to be is in Mexico. The drug dealers and bandits would simply take to the mountains. Anyone see anything good in that situation.

36

[quote]streamline wrote:
The last place the USA needs to be is in Mexico. The drug dealers and bandits would simply take to the mountains. Anyone see anything good in that situation.[/quote]

Why not take over Mexico and capture the drug trade? Americans are stupid enough to poison their bodies? Hell, use that to reduce the deficit.

37

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
streamline wrote:
The last place the USA needs to be is in Mexico. The drug dealers and bandits would simply take to the mountains. Anyone see anything good in that situation.

Why not take over Mexico and capture the drug trade? Americans are stupid enough to poison their bodies? Hell, use that to reduce the deficit.

[/quote]
The Mexican Annex. It has possiblities, control the drugs control the people. America’s in the pharmaceutical business in a very big way. So it has the qualifications that are required, greed!

38

No worries, NAU coming soon…

39

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
streamline wrote:
The last place the USA needs to be is in Mexico. The drug dealers and bandits would simply take to the mountains. Anyone see anything good in that situation.

Why not take over Mexico and capture the drug trade? Americans are stupid enough to poison their bodies? Hell, use that to reduce the deficit.

[/quote]

Or you could just give back Texas, California, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, Baja California and Colorado and we could call it quits…

40

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
streamline wrote:
The last place the USA needs to be is in Mexico. The drug dealers and bandits would simply take to the mountains. Anyone see anything good in that situation.

Why not take over Mexico and capture the drug trade? Americans are stupid enough to poison their bodies? Hell, use that to reduce the deficit.

Or you could just give back Texas, California, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, Baja California and Colorado and we could call it quits…[/quote]

Ours now! Get your own.