That's your perspective as an American who was probably content with the catch and release policy. The Mexican perspective is somewhat different. El Universal ran an editorial this week calling it a major commitment and lamenting the high cost of appeasing the monster in the White House.BrooksBearLives said:Sam Lowry said:The typical result of real negotiation is that neither side gets everything they want. And by Mexico's own account, it's simply not true that everything was decided months ago. The Remain in Mexico policy has been newly expanded, and the deployment of troops to the border has been newly prioritized.BrooksBearLives said:Sam Lowry said:It's far from a token effort, which is why it's become so controversial in Mexico. 6,000 troops is equivalent to the entire police force of several of the larger provinces.BrooksBearLives said:Sam Lowry said:How weird. It's almost as if someone came along and suddenly got them to shift their priorities from internal security issues to emergency border control.BrooksBearLives said:That's a fair statement.redfish961 said:I'm not sure how the Mexican military works, but I do know many well trained U.S servicemen join the National Guard or the Reserves after their active duty ends.BrooksBearLives said:contrario said:BBL?contrario said:I would get your point if Mexico didn't have an army at all, but it's not like they were starting from ground zero. Even the Washington Post is saying Mexico is sending its "new national guard" to the southern border this week. Are you ready to concede that you were wrong about Mexico not having a national guard, or are you going to argue against the reporting of the Washington Post as well?BrooksBearLives said:Sam Lowry said:They're arresting women and children traveling on foot. I don't think 30 months of Navy SEAL training is a prerequisite.BrooksBearLives said:
So, our President agreed to a deal where Mexico is sending "troops" from a National Guard that didn't exist before last Christmas, and you're claiming this as a win?
You deserve to be fooled.
No one said it would take 30 months. But surely you realize it will take more than 6, right? It took over a year of planning for Nike to roll out our new uniform campaign.
You think creating an entire national guard infrastructure will go faster?
I mean, sure. Mexico is known for its efficient government and all...
I'm really not making this up. As it is, these troops don't really exist. They're scrambling to get them there. The "National guard" is about as real as the Space Force.
This is a joke.
The National Guard that Trump is bragging about us 6,000 troops that haven deployed yet and won't for months.
May be apples to oranges, but the U.S. would have no issue filling 6,000 spots and it wouldn't take anywhere close to 6 months.
The infrastructure may not be ready, but the already trained service members would be using the same system so it's nowhere near like starting from scratch.
But the entire point of this Mexican National Guard -which was the brainchild of Obrador- was that this would be a new security force that would be half police/half military force, specifically created to be free of corruption and able to handle internal security issues. Specifically, things like the gas theft (it's been fascinating to read/hear about the PemEx gas theft issues he's been dealing with) and insane murder rates/cartels.
The specific point of the National Guard was to be new. Not saying there won't be trained soldiers/overlap. But it is supposed to be new. I've literally been reading about this stuff for months. That's why I made the points I made.
It's a token effort, though. And one they agreed to MONTHS AGO.
The big thing Trump wanted, was the safe 3rd Party country provision and Mexico told him to **** off.
Trump failed and he's claiming he won.
We can continue to argue that point. But what is beyond argument is that it WASNT the big thing Trump wanted. And it was agreed to months ago, prior to the Tariff threats.
You're describing free breadsticks.