Would You Support Military Action Against Mexican Cartels?

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

What is the degree of your general support for the idea:

A. No, never. Its a violation of Mexican sovereignty

B. No, we have too many military commitments already

C. Yes, if the kill US citizens in Mexican territory

D. Yes, if they kill US citizens in US territory

E. Yes, to prop-up the failing Mexican state before it actually collapses

F. Yes, but only after an actual collapse forces our hand


If you answered Yes to any of the above: What is the depth of force you are willing to commit assuming the graduation scale includes all preceding levels:

A. Small-units/Special Operations

B. Larger maneuver units

C. Artillery strikes

D. Rotary-wing aircraft (helicopters)

E. Fixed-wing aircraft (jets)


If you answered Yes in the first question: What sort of action would you support?

A. Punitive raids

B. Disruption/interdiction

C. maneuver in force until Mexican forces gain the upper hand

D. regime change

E. Long-term occupation


ALTERNATE OPTION: Gimme 12 Texans a keg of beer

[cavegal]

Yes, yes, and hell yes. All of the above on the last 2.

[IassaFTots]

I have more than 12 Texans.......they brew their own beer, but some sandwiches and a couple rounds would do. 

[Airwolf]

If iwas in charge and Congress was backing me up , Mexico would have first hand experiance with what used to be called an "Arc Light " Mission.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Apparently the severed head of the lead investigator for the Falcon Lake incident has been delivered to the Mexican army as an outright taunt.

No word yet about whether the beheading was related to the Falcon Lake episode but whether he was killed for this investigation or another one speaks the boldness of the action and makes one wonder whether the Mexicans are able to assert their own governmental power.

[dutch508]

Apparently the severed head of the lead investigator for the Falcon Lake incident has been delivered to the Mexican army as an outright taunt.

No word yet about whether the beheading was related to the Falcon Lake episode but whether he was killed for this investigation or another one speaks the boldness of the action and makes one wonder whether the Mexicans are able to assert their own governmental power.

Pancho Villa part duex?

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Pancho Villa part duex?

George Patton, IIRC, claimed 5 kills with his pistol during that episode.

Personally, we should pound them into submission and force Spain and/or France to take them back under (relatively) adult supervision.

[Thor]

There's already some talk of the Texas Militia gathering  some folks to do some ops down there.

[ToddWB]

I'd support arming law abiding Mexicans so they could protect themselves, some 72 yo woman in Juarez blasted a couple of them to Hell, she didn't give a damnm if they'd made a law against private ownership of firearms, she's damn glad she used her (dammmn whippersnappers!)

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

There's already some talk of the Texas Militia gathering  some folks to do some ops down there.

Private citizens committing acts of international armed conflict and then returning to the US  where they will presumabley be shielded by US law enforcement and military is a bad idea. It would degrade US sovereignty and the presidency's plenary Article II powers (notice I said "presidency" and not "president's"). Granted, with Obama in charge there isn't much sovereignty to protect but the precedent of private citizens waging private wars but seeking US government protection is a bad idea.

Kill the little ****ers on US soil all day long if you want but if the militias go over they should stay over or come home and be arrested.

On the PR side it's a horrible idea as it plays to the stereotype of the drunk redneck racist being overly-armed and trigger-happy. Obama won't close the border or fight narco-terrorists, he'll use it as an excuse to skirt the Heller and MacDonald decisions.

[Thor]

Private citizens committing acts of international armed conflict and then returning to the US  where they will presumabley be shielded by US law enforcement and military is a bad idea. It would degrade US sovereignty and the presidency's plenary Article II powers (notice I said "presidency" and not "president's"). Granted, with Obama in charge there isn't much sovereignty to protect but the precedent of private citizens waging private wars but seeking US government protection is a bad idea.

Kill the little ****ers on US soil all day long if you want but if the militias go over they should stay over or come home and be arrested.

On the PR side it's a horrible idea as it plays to the stereotype of the drunk redneck racist being overly-armed and trigger-happy. Obama won't close the border or fight narco-terrorists, he'll use it as an excuse to skirt the Heller and MacDonald decisions.

When I said, "down there", I meant on US soil, on or near the border. They're not talking about invading Mexico.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

When I said, "down there", I meant on US soil, on or near the border. They're not talking about invading Mexico.

Then I hope they make damn sure of their targets because if they hurt a legal immigrant we'll lose every politician that might have stood up to Obama.

[LC EFA]

I know I don't have a dog in this hunt so to speak - but wouldn't the best plan be to use military assets to properly enforce the border ?. Prevention rather than cure.

[IassaFTots]

I know I don't have a dog in this hunt so to speak - but wouldn't the best plan be to use military assets to properly enforce the border ?. Prevention rather than cure.

Ya think?      That would be nice.  Doesn't seem to be much of an option these days though.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Actually I wouldn't have a problem unleashing an Einsatzkommando on their asses.

[ToddWB]

Actually I wouldn't have a problem unleashing an Einsatzkommando on their asses.

Hey...I'm on the Border, 3 hours to the murder capital of the world. I'll rent you a spot for gun embankments, but.....

[TVDOC]

I'm gonna go with large unit armored incursion (with close air support) to establish a buffer zone 100 miles deep into Mexico.......advise their government that they can have it back when they prove that they can maintain order there, accompanied by a promise that if they don't perform, the next incursion won't stop until the southern suburbs of Mexico City are secured.

Fun to speculate about, but such a plan would require a US government with a set of balls........which we well know doesn't exist.

Two problems solved......illegal immigration, and narcoterrorism..........

doc

[TheSarge]

Private citizens committing acts of international armed conflict and then returning to the US  where they will presumabley be shielded by US law enforcement and military is a bad idea. It would degrade US sovereignty and the presidency's plenary Article II powers (notice I said "presidency" and not "president's"). Granted, with Obama in charge there isn't much sovereignty to protect but the precedent of private citizens waging private wars but seeking US government protection is a bad idea.

Kill the little ****ers on US soil all day long if you want but if the militias go over they should stay over or come home and be arrested.

On the PR side it's a horrible idea as it plays to the stereotype of the drunk redneck racist being overly-armed and trigger-happy. Obama won't close the border or fight narco-terrorists, he'll use it as an excuse to skirt the Heller and MacDonald decisions.

They've already comitted acts of war.  There are countless incidents where the Border Patrol has come under fire by Mexican Army units....units that have crossed the border into the U.S. to provide cover for the drug runners.

Last time I checked...on country crossing a sovergn boder and committing violent acts constitutes war.

[TheSarge]

Fun to speculate about, but such a plan would require a US government with a set of balls........which we well know doesn't exist.

How about a Governor with an entire Mechanized Infantry Division in his state?

They are his troops.  What's going on cross border is civil unrest/civil emergency.

We've already got a Brigade Combat Team headquartered in Weslaco.

[TVDOC]

How about a Governor with an entire Mechanized Infantry Division in his state?

They are his troops.  What's going on cross border is civil unrest/civil emergency.

We've already got a Brigade Combat Team headquartered in Weslaco.

Hey....it works for me!!

doc

[Thor]

As far as the Texas Militia, I haven't read of any ROEs, yet. One would HOPE that they wouldn't get crazy and just start shooting at people. I would also hope that IF they did get into the shooting thing, it would be, "fire on only IF fired upon".....

But, you are right, this could go very badly with the wrong people involved. I've already read a comment by one of them that didn't give me the warm fuzzies.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

They've already comitted acts of war.  There are countless incidents where the Border Patrol has come under fire by Mexican Army units....units that have crossed the border into the U.S. to provide cover for the drug runners.

Last time I checked...on country crossing a sovergn boder and committing violent acts constitutes war.

OK.

But Thor and I were discussing the TX militia and I mistakenly interpreted his "go down there" as an insinuation that they would be crossing the border.

Personally, I'd be OK with repelling Mexican army units by force. In the interests of fairness, however, I must wonder aloud/in writing if the Mexican government has sanctioned these incursions and the use of force. I suspect the Mexican government barely contrls the bathrooms in their own government buildings these days an I would not be surprised to hear these are renegade units.

[Eupher]

I'd definitely support military action against the cartels - with overwhelming force. Armor, artillery, light weapons infantry, ground support aircraft, whatever it takes to send the unmistakable message that we will defend our borders.

Beforehand, however, I'd send a message to the U.N. to butt the **** out of our little adventure. Resolutions, demands, requests, political pressure, all of that emanating from the U.N. is meaningless. We're going to do what we have to do.

[IassaFTots]

I'd definitely support military action against the cartels - with overwhelming force. Armor, artillery, light weapons infantry, ground support aircraft, whatever it takes to send the unmistakable message that we will defend our borders.

Beforehand, however, I'd send a message to the U.N. to butt the **** out of our little adventure. Resolutions, demands, requests, political pressure, all of that emanating from the U.N. is meaningless. We're going to do what we have to do.

Indeed.  I don't understand why more people don't understand how heinous this is.  It is an invasion.  No doubt. This isn't a trifling issue.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Indeed.  I don't understand why more people don't understand how heinous this is.  It is an invasion.  No doubt. This isn't a trifling issue.

The only way you will get dems to turn their backs on 12 to 20 million undocumented voters is if the GOP can exploit the Catholic up-bringing of the illegals to swing issues like abortion and gay marriage.

If we could do that the dems would pillage every Home Depot within 500 miles of the US-Mexican border to put up a fence.