Police Action, or Unprovoked Violation of Sovereignty?

1,763 Views | 14 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by KaiBear
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Invading Mexico isn't just an awkward hypothetical any more. It's the hot new flavor of regime change mania.
Quote:

What's Behind the New Calls to Invade Mexico
The right can claim it's about defeating cartels or defending democracy, but it's really about resource extraction.
Jeet Heer

Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene isn't exactly famous for her restraint, but on March 15 she posted a tweet that was berserk even by her standards. The tweet showed a photograph of an onion-shaped ball of duct tape, which Greene claimed was an "explosive found by Border Patrol Agents." This homemade bomb, Greene argued, justified a military response.

"Our US military needs to take action against the Mexican cartels," she declared. One problem: According to Border Patrol chief Raul Ortiz, the ball wasn't an improvised explosive device. When you unwrapped the duct tape, what you got was a pile of sand.

Greene is hardly likely to let an embarrassing mistake like that stop her from beating the drums of war. Nor is she alone. Emboldened by their success in putting the Biden administration on the defensive about the alleged immigration crisis, Republicans have upped the ante. Going beyond Trumpian calls to "build the wall" to stop border crossings, the new rallying cry on the right is a call to unleash the American military against drug cartels south of the border--even if that means violating Mexican sovereignty.

On January 12, Representative Dan Crenshaw introduced a bill to "authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for trafficking fentanyl or a fentanyl-related substance into the United States or carrying out other related activities that cause regional destabilization in the Western Hemisphere." On March 2, former US attorney general Bill Barr lent his support to Crenshaw's bill in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.

On March 7, GOP Senators Lindsey Graham and John Kennedy held a press conference putting forward the same idea. "If there were an ISIS or Al Qaeda cell in Mexico that lobbed a rocket into Texas," Graham proclaimed, "we would wipe them off the planet. They [the Mexican drug cartels] are doing that times thousands, and our response is inadequate."

These calls for military action make no sense. It's true that drug cartels are a destabilizing force on both sides of the US-Mexico border. But an American military attack done in defiance of the Mexican government would only contribute to further destabilization. It's no more likely to be successful than the American invasion of Iraq or Afghanistan--and could easily produce a failed state. Ultimately, the fentanyl crisis is a demand problem driven by American consumers.

Yet the shrill war cries of the hard right have been echoed in more modulated tones by centrist publications like The New York Times and The Atlantic, which questioned the legitimacy of President Andrs Manuel Lpez Obrador's government. These more mainstream voices, which also include Democratic Senator Bob Menendez, focused not on drug cartels but on an electoral reform bill that AMLO is pushing. According to David Frum, writing in The Atlantic, "liberal democracy in Mexico is under assault." Given Frum's famous contribution as George W. Bush's speechwriter to the use of pro-democracy rhetoric to justify invading other countries, his intervention is suspect. At the very least, Frum's thinking suggests the worrying possibility of an alliance between ber-reactionaries like Greene and the more polished establishment voices of the foreign policy elite in a shared project of regime change in Mexico.

It is AMLO's political success, rather than his troubles controlling the drug cartels, that is surely the main cause of the new calls for attacking Mexico. AMLO's populism provokes precisely because many Americans think Mexico is too valuable to be left to the Mexicans. In addition to the traditional Yankee indifference to Mexican sovereignty, the desire to exploit Mexico's resources is also in play. Brandon Darby, a right-wing activist who has worked with Steve Bannon, offered a clue in a 2019 podcast episode: "The reality of Mexico is this: They're very resource-rich." Darby added that if the United States targeted the cartels, it could create a situation in which Mexico will "fall in line in other places so that businesses are more able to invest in Mexico and invest in resource exploitation."

If the United States does invade Mexico in the coming years, it will doubtless do so on the pretext of defending democracy and trying to defeat the drug cartels. But behind this rhetoric lies the desire of a weakened superpower to reassert its hegemony and retain control of resource extraction.

https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/invade-mexico-amlo-cartels/
RD2WINAGNBEAR86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I am much more concerned about Mexico invading the U.S. these days than the other way around. Besides, Nose Candy Joe does not want his human/ drug trafficking enterprises to be disrupted.
"Stand with anyone when he is right; Stand with him while he is right and part with him when he goes wrong." - Abraham Lincoln
Proud 1992 Alum
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That author lost me when he wrote "alleged immigration crisis." Probably doesn't live in a border state. The U.S. should demand more from the pathetic Mexican government.
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Nuke the Cartels: Yes or No?
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's an act of war similar to what Russian is doing in Ukraine.
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldbear83 said:

Nuke the Cartels: Yes or No?


I'm sure nuclear fallout is intelligent enough to stay south of the Rio Grande.
EatMoreSalmon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mitch Blood Green said:

Oldbear83 said:

Nuke the Cartels: Yes or No?


I'm sure nuclear fallout is intelligent enough to stay south of the Rio Grande.
Just like Covid.

Nuclear option and mass immigration are both a bad idea. Both have fallout.
OsoCoreyell
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If we can't get the government to protect the border, why do we think we can get it to invade beyond the border? Stupid.
BearN
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Today I learned that a number of people on the left support Mexican Drug Cartels killing millions of Americans more than they support a free market economy, and that they would rather attack someone trying to stop Child Sex Trafficking than agree with a "MAGA Republican" on anything.
OsoCoreyell
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearN said:

Today I learned that a number of people on the left support Mexican Drug Cartels killing millions of Americans more than they support a free market economy, and that they would rather attack someone trying to stop Child Sex Trafficking than agree with a "MAGA Republican" on anything.
Yes. Here is the hierarchy of badness (#1 being the highest):

1) Existential Threats
2) Anything the people in the rival tribe wants
3) Things that are actually, objectively bad
Wrecks Quan Dough
How long do you want to ignore this user?


Not the first time we have carried out a punitive expedition south of El Paso way. That is Black Jack Pershing and, behind him, George Patton.
JXL
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"Centrist publications like the New York Times and the Atlantic."

My kids asked why I was laughing so loud.

Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JXL said:

"Centrist publications like the New York Times and the Atlantic."

My kids asked why I was laughing so loud.


What's your idea of a centrist publication?
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

JXL said:

"Centrist publications like the New York Times and the Atlantic."

My kids asked why I was laughing so loud.


What's your idea of a centrist publication?
Wall Street Journal or the Washington Examiner.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
KaiBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldbear83 said:

Sam Lowry said:

JXL said:

"Centrist publications like the New York Times and the Atlantic."

My kids asked why I was laughing so loud.


What's your idea of a centrist publication?
Wall Street Journal or the Washington Examiner.



Agree with the WSJ.

I should get a subscription.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.