Mexican Invasion
See other Mexican Invasion Articles
Title: Should We Invade Mexico?
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Jul 5, 2018
Author: Kurt Schlichter
Post Date: 2018-07-05 13:15:00 by tpaine
Keywords: None
Views: 1962
Comments: 21
http://Townhall.com Should We Invade Mexico? Kurt Schlichter 7/5/2018 12:01:00 AM - One fact a lot of Americans forget is that our country is located right up against a socialist failed state that is promising to descend even further into chaos – not California, the other one. And the Mexicans, having reached the bottom of the hole they have dug for themselves, just chose to keep digging by electing a new leftist presidente who wants to surrender to the cartels and who thinks that Mexicans have some sort of hitherto unknown “human right” to sneak into the United States and demographically reconquer it. There’s a Spanish phrase that describes his ideology, and one of the words is toro. Mexico is already a failed state, crippled by a poisoned, stratified culture and a corrupt government that have somehow managed to turn a nation so blessed with resources and hardworking people into such a basket case that millions of its citizens see their best option as putting themselves in the hands of gangsters to cross a burning desert to get cut-rate jobs in el Norte. It is a country dominated by bloody drug/human trafficking cartels that like to circulate videos of their members carving up living people. They hang mutilated corpses from overpasses and hijack busloads of citizens to rape and slaughter for fun. Whole police agencies are owned by the cartels. Political candidates live in fear of murder. The people are scared. And this chaos will inevitably grow and spread north. The gangs are already here, importing the meth and fentanyl that are slaughtering tens of thousands of Americans a year after coming across the border the Democrats refuse to defend. Let’s not even think about the other foreigners, like Islamic terrorists, who might exploit this vulnerability. “Abolish ICE,” the liberals screech, yet what they really mean is “Erase that line on the map.” But that line is all that is keeping the bloodshed in Mexico at bay for now. You can stand on US soil, look south, and see places where the rates of killing dwarf those of the Middle Eastern killing fields you see on TV. The chaos in Mexico will spill over the theoretical border. It is just a matter of time. Normal Americans know it. As my book upcoming book Militant Normals explains, the establishment willfully ignoring their legitimate concerns about border security is a big part of why Normals are getting militant. The Democrats, and the GOP donor class stooges, have a vested interest in ignoring the issue, and they will insure that both the political class and the hack media will continue to play ostrich. Already there are Americans, on American soil, living near the border who cannot venture outside at night on their own property for fear of being murdered because of foreigners invading out territory. This is intolerable for any sovereign country. Yet there is a huge liberal constituency, abetted by GOPe fellow travelers, not merely willing to tolerate the invasion but who actively want to increase the flow. When the 125-million-man criminal conspiracy that is Mexico falls apart completely, as it will, we are going to have to deal with the consequences. Watch the flood of illegals become a tsunami, a real refugee crisis instead of today’s fake one. Watch the criminal gangs and pathologies of the Third World socialist culture they bring along turn our country into Mexico II: Gringo Boogaloo. And importing a huge mass of foreigners, loyal to a foreign country and potentially susceptible to the reconquista de Aztlan rhetoric of leftists, both among them and among our treacherous liberal elite, would create a cauldron for brewing up violent civil upheaval right here at home. So, what do we do? We defend ourselves, obviously. But how? Should we be reactive? Should we continue the fake defense of our border we’re pretending to conduct today? Or should we seriously defend ourselves by building a wall and truly guarding it, and by deporting all illegals we catch inside. But would that even be enough when Mexico collapses? It’s time to ask: Should we be proactive? Should we invade Mexico? Should we send our military across the Rio Grande to secure the unstable territory, annihilate the criminal infestation that suppurates there, and impose something resembling order? One thing is certain. The border charade we tolerate today can’t be an option – it’s an open door to the fallout from the failing state next door. Militarily, there are three obvious courses of action (I had input on this by several people familiar with the issue; none of this reflects any actual operational planning that I or anyone I spoke to is aware of). One is the Buffer Zone option. We move in and secure a zone perhaps 50-100 miles inside the country, aggressively targeting and annihilating criminal gangs – we know where these bastards are – and thereby seal off the threat until Mexico is secure again and then return the territory once we are assured America is safe. This is doable, but it would take a huge chunk of our military forces (we would need to call up most of our reserves). The conventional Mexican forces that fought would last for about un momento before being vaporized, but it would spark at a minimum a low-intensity insurgency by cartel hardliners and, at worst, a large one by Mexican patriots, probably using guns left over from when the Obama cartel was shipping them south. Regardless, it would be expensive. There is the “You break it, you buy it” rule. We would end up administering a long strip of territory full of people living, largely, in what Americans consider abject poverty. They would become our problem. Moreover, there is the giving back part – millions of Mexicans might find they like being nieces and nephews of Tio Sam. The second is Operation Mexican Freedom, a much more ambitious campaign that would recognize what liberals already think – that Mexico and America are one country. Our forces would conquer the nation by driving all the way south, perhaps with an amphibious landing at Veracruz for old times sake and because the Marines would insist, then seal the Mexican-Guatemalan border. We would annex the whole country, making it a colony like Puerto Rico (A dozen new senators from Old Mexico? Nogracias). We would kill every terrorist drug gang member and take or torch everything they own, while simultaneously deporting every illegal from the US-Canada border to the Mexican-Guatemalan border. Of course, that would take up pretty much our entire military and certainly spark some sort of endless guerilla conflict. We would be stuck in another bloody, expensive fight to make a Third World country cease sucking despite itself. It would make the Iraq War seem cheap. But, on the plus side, Bill Kristol and his bombs away pals would probably be excited. Oh, in both cases the Europeans would be outraged, which is a powerful argument for these options. Still, no. Invading Mexico is a bad idea. It would convert the problems of Mexico, created and perpetuated by Mexicans, into our problems. We tried that in the Middle East. It doesn’t work. Making Mexico better for Mexicans is not worth the life of one First Infantry Division grenadier. But the consequences in America are our problem, and we must solve it. That brings us to the third option – Forward Defense. Think Syria in Sinaloa. We secure the border, with a wall of concrete and a wall of troops, perhaps imposing a no-fly/no-sail zone (excepting our surveillance and attack aircraft), and then conduct operations inside Mexico using special operations forces combined with airpower to target and eliminate the cartels. We would also identify friendly local Mexican police and military officials and support their counter-cartel operations outside of our relationship with the central government – they would be the face of the fight. We would channel Hernán Cortés and, in essence, we would allow friendly Mexican allies, with our substantial direct and indirect support, to create our buffer zone for us. This avoids the problem of buying Mexico’s problems and making them ours. It’s somewhat deniable; everyone could save face by denying the Yankees have intervened. But the cartels would not just sit there and take it. They would target Americans and probably do so inside the United States. Yet that’s going to happen anyway eventually. This course of action risks the lowest number of US casualties, but perhaps the highest number of Mexican losses. So no, we should not invade Mexico. There are no good military options, and none are necessary or wise today, but we may eventually have to choose between bad options. Mexico is failing more and more every day. We are not yet at the point of a military solution, but anyone who says that day can never come is lying to himself and to you. We need a wall, but more than that, we need the commitment to American security and sovereignty that a wall would physically represent. The issue is very clear, and we need to be very, very clear about it when we are campaigning in November. Border security. Period. Are we going to prioritize the interests of liberals who want to replace our militant Normal voters with pliable foreigners and establishment stooges who want to please rich donors by importing countless cheap foreign laborers, or are we going to prioritize the economic security and the physical safety of American citizens by securing our border no matter what it takes? Come on, open borders mafia, let’s have that discussion. Bueno suerte with that at the ballot box.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: tpaine (#0)
Ummm....NO.
(BUT....What about the 65 million man criminal conspiracy known as the DEMOCRAT PARTY and "THE RESISTANCE"??) I miss the old-school covert ops when the CIA would just take care of stuff like this.
Yeah no big deal, using the CIA to overthrow democratically elected rulers and/or countries we don't like. A few "highlights": 1954-1958 North Vietnam — CIA officer Edward Lansdale spends four years trying to overthrow the communist government of North Vietnam, using all the usual dirty tricks. The CIA also attempts to legitimize a tyrannical puppet regime in South Vietnam, headed by Ngo Dinh Diem. These efforts fail to win the hearts and minds of the South Vietnamese because the Diem government is opposed to true democracy, land reform and poverty reduction measures. The CIA’s continuing failure results in escalating American intervention, culminating in the Vietnam War. 1963 Dominican Republic — The CIA overthrows the democratically elected Juan Bosch in a military coup. The CIA installs a repressive, right-wing junta. 1964 Brazil — A CIA-backed military coup overthrows the democratically elected government of Joao Goulart. The junta that replaces it will, in the next two decades, become one of the most bloodthirsty in history. General Castelo Branco will create Latin America’s first death squads, or bands of secret police who hunt down “communists” for torture, interrogation and murder. Often these “communists” are no more than Branco’s political opponents. Later it is revealed that the CIA trains the death squads. 1967 Greece — A CIA-backed military coup overthrows the government two days before the elections. The favorite to win was George Papandreous, the liberal candidate. During the next six years, the “reign of the colonels” — backed by the CIA — will usher in the widespread use of torture and murder against political opponents. When a Greek ambassador objects to President Johnson about U.S. plans for Cyprus, Johnson tells him: “Fuck your parliament and your constitution.” 1970 Cambodia — The CIA overthrows Prince Sahounek, who is highly popular among Cambodians for keeping them out of the Vietnam War. He is replaced by CIA puppet Lon Nol, who immediately throws Cambodian troops into battle. This unpopular move strengthens once minor opposition parties like the Khmer Rouge, which achieves power in 1975 and massacres millions of its own people. 1973 Chile — The CIA overthrows and assassinates Salvador Allende, Latin America’s first democratically elected socialist leader. The problems begin when Allende nationalizes American-owned firms in Chile. ITT offers the CIA $1 million for a coup (reportedly refused). The CIA replaces Allende with General Augusto Pinochet, who will torture and murder thousands of his own countrymen in a crackdown on labor leaders and the political left. 1991 The Gulf War — The U.S. liberates Kuwait from Iraq. But Iraq’s dictator, Saddam Hussein, is another creature of the CIA. With U.S. encouragement, Hussein invaded Iran in 1980. During this costly eight-year war, the CIA built up Hussein’s forces with sophisticated arms, intelligence, training and financial backing. This cemented Hussein’s power at home, allowing him to crush the many internal rebellions that erupted from time to time, sometimes with poison gas. It also gave him all the military might he needed to conduct further adventurism — in Kuwait, for example.
It's not worth the effort.
SHOULD we,like it is a viable option? No,of course not. SHOULD we,as in proactive self-defense,of course. BUT......,we should wait for things to get so out of control there that they ask us to invade to restore order.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
That's not so. Commies used their power to knock out the good guys and the only one left are the commies in drag. You forget or look at things from the past with glasses of today. We were fighting commies everywhere including here at home. Look at what the commies have done to America the greatest nation that has even been! Throw away the childish ideas and look at the world as it really is. Until the good lord takes all we will be fighting commies because too many easily lead people can't think properly. By the time these easily lead people wake up its too late to do anything but be slave labor with no possibility of doing a damn thing about it!
LOL. Having observed the sea of Satellite Dishes that sprouted up like toad stools in condo-heaven along the coast of Baja, back circa 1994, when I was still paddling down there. "We" already did.
Their power? This amazing story begins with the war between Russia and Japan in 1904. Jacob Schiff, who was head of the New York investment firm of Kuhn, Loeb, and Company, had raised the capital for large war loans to Japan. It was due to this funding that the Japanese were able to launch a stunning attack against the Russians at Port Arthur and, the following year, to virtually decimate the Russian fleet. In 1905, the Mikado awarded Jacob Schiff a medal, the Second Order of the Treasure of Japan, in recognition of his important role in that campaign. During the two years of hostilities, thousands of Russian soldiers and sailors were taken as prisoners. Schiff paid for the printing of one-and-a-half tons of Marxist propaganda and had it delivered to the prison camps. He also sent scores of Russian speaking revolutionaries, trained in New York, to distribute...." https://archive.org/details/pdfy- -Pori1NL6fKm2SnY I forget -- Where did Comrade Bron-Trotsky get the ice pick stuck in his head?
You left out the most significant highlight - where Herbie Marcuse, with his "analysis" of Soviet economics, helped pull the Cold War out of the Military Industrial complex's Bolshevist/Bovine arse. And then, Herbie became the "Father of the New Left" - and instigated the subversive cultural sexual revolution of the 60's... culminating in the fabulous efemination of the rainbowtard herd. After all. Who wants to BBQ a skinny cow... with horns!?
Yep, and that day will come, imho..
Murder, Kidnap a family member or just harass them to they gave up. Commies are the most evil pos on earth. Conspiracy theory? We backed Russia to fight Germany. Then we realize the commies were not trustworthy and stopped. Let your enemies kill each other and grow weak doing so. Whats wrong with that?
That was AFTER the Zionist-Bolshevik money powers funded Japan in the war against Russia - and then screwed Russia further by propagandizing Russian soldiers, while they were guests of the Japanese.
Jacob Schiff,who was the great-grandfather of the man who married one of Goober Gore's daughters,so you can see the family knows there is still money to be made mixing with politics and destroying countries. Not that Goober would ever notice,of course.He's the stupid SOB that couldn't recognize a bust of George Washington when at Monticello in Jefferson's study. It should also be mentioned that his mother was the daughter of a prominent USCP member,and married his idiot father so she could gain political advantage for the left in it's effort to destroy America.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Any relation to Adam Schiff?
Ask Korah, the Pharaoh's treasurer, and the other fallen "angels" - about that.
Any relation to Adam Schiff? I am not sure,but there pretty much has to be a blood tie there,doesn't it? One of the things you can ALWAYS count on bankers to do is to buy politicians,and to buy royalty in countries were royalty rules. The big money boys never expose themselves to the public by accepting public offices,though. It's always their poor cousins or in-laws they buy political seats for. They learned their lesson about the dangers of public disclosure of THEIR identities back in the Middle Ages.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Wrong. Protecting Russia was the only reason King Franklin and his commie wife agreed to go to war against Germany. FDR was a great admirer of Stalin and Soviet Communism,and so was his cousin-wife. IIRC,it was King Franklin that tagged Stalin with the title of "Uncle Joe". The US was arming,feeding and providing clothing and transportation for the USSR a long time before the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor and gave King Franklin the excuse he needed to get the US officially involved in WW-2. Without US aid it is not likely the Soviets would have lasted until Winter started. They MAY have paid us the money owed to us,but I kinda doubt it. We didn't stop providing for the Soviets until after King Franklin died and WW-2 ended. Given that it seems to be an accepted fact that more than half of his cabinet were Soviet agents,I doubt the flow of case and products would have ended with the war if King Franklin hadn't died.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Presumably. The pattern of behavior is certainly consistent.
Presumably. The pattern of behavior is certainly consistent. So is the fact that both families are wealthy and have their roots in the northeast. MOST migrant families that entered the US in the late 1800's or early 1900's were dirt poor,unlike the Schiff family that fled Russia with enough money to LEND Japan the money it needed to build a freaking fleet of warships to defeat the Russian Navy. They did that and STILL had enough money to run a bank lending money to other people. I can't even begin to understand the concept of that much wealth back at a time when people with good jobs maybe earned 40 or 50 dollars a month.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Old money from the military industrial pattern that can be seen throughout history. Observe Korah -- the Pharaoh's former treasurer. It was he and his "fallen angel" minions, pining for the good ol' days back in Egypt, who concocted the golden calf episode. Num 26:10-11
#2. To: tpaine (#0)
Should we invade Mexico?
#3. To: tpaine (#0)
When the 125-million-man criminal conspiracy that is Mexico falls apart completely, as it will, we are going to have to deal with the consequences.
#4. To: Liberator (#3)
(Edited)
I miss the old-school covert ops when the CIA would just take care of stuff like this.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Trump: My People Should ‘Sit Up in Attention’ Like Kim Jong-un’s Staff.
#5. To: tpaine (#0)
#6. To: tpaine (#0)
#7. To: Deckard (#4)
Yeah no big deal, using the CIA to overthrow democratically elected rulers and/or countries we don't like.
#8. To: tpaine (#0)
(Edited)
#9. To: Justified (#7)
(Edited)
Commies used their power to knock out the good guys
"One of the greatest myths of contemporary history is that the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia was a popular uprising of the downtrodden masses against the hated ruling class of the Tsars. As we shall see, however, the planning, the leadership, and especially the financing came entirely from outside Russia, mostly from financiers in Germany, Britain, and the United States. Furthermore, we shall see that the Rothschild Formula played a major role in shaping these events.
--The Creature from Jeckyll Island
--Chapter 13 "The Masquerade in Moscow"
#10. To: Deckard (#4)
(Edited)
A few "highlights":
#11. To: sneakypete, Y'ALL (#6)
,we should wait for things to get so out of control there that they ask us to invade to restore order. ---- sneakypete
#12. To: VxH (#9)
Commies used their power to knock out the good guys Their power?
#13. To: Justified (#12)
We backed Russia to fight Germany.
#14. To: VxH (#9)
(Edited)
This amazing story begins with the war between Russia and Japan in 1904. Jacob Schiff, who was head of the New York investment firm of Kuhn, Loeb, and Company,
#15. To: sneakypete (#14)
Jacob Schiff,who was the great-grandfather of the man who married one of Goober Gore's daughters,
#16. To: Justified (#12)
Whats wrong with that?
#17. To: VxH (#15)
Jacob Schiff,who was the great-grandfather of the man who married one of Goober Gore's daughters,
#18. To: Justified (#12)
(Edited)
We backed Russia to fight Germany. Then we realize the commies were not trustworthy and stopped.
#19. To: sneakypete (#17)
I am not sure,but there pretty much has to be a blood tie there,doesn't it?
#20. To: VxH (#19)
I am not sure,but there pretty much has to be a blood tie there,doesn't it?
#21. To: sneakypete (#20)
(Edited)
I can't even begin to understand the concept of that much wealth back at a time when people with good jobs maybe earned 40 or 50 dollars a month.
10 The earth opened its mouth and swallowed them along with Korah, whose
followers died when the fire devoured the 250 men. And they served as a
warning sign. 11 The line of Korah, however, did not die out.
NIV
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]