Team Trump Debates 'How Much Should We Invade Mexico?'

[mahatmakanejeeves]

Source: Rolling Stone

'That Is The Question'
Team Trump Debates 'How Much Should We Invade Mexico?'
In Trump's government-in-waiting, the only question is how massive the U.S. assault on Mexican drug cartels should be

By Asawin Suebsaeng, Andrew Perez
November 27, 2024

Within Donald Trump's government-in-waiting, there is a fresh debate over whether and how thoroughly the president-elect should follow through on his campaign promise to attack or even invade Mexico, as part of the "war" he's pledged to wage against powerful drug cartels. ... "How much should we invade Mexico?" says a senior Trump transition member. "That is the question." ... It is a question that would have seemed batty for the GOP elite to consider before, even during Trump's first term. But in the four years since, many within the mainstream Republican centers of power have come around to support Trump's idea to bomb or attack Mexico.

Trump's Cabinet picks, including his choices for secretary of defense and secretary of state, have publicly supported the idea of potentially unleashing the U.S. military in Mexico. So has the man Trump has tapped to be his national security adviser. So has the man Trump selected as his "border czar" to lead his immigration crackdowns. So have various Trump allies in Congress and in the media.

Trump, who has routinely (and falsely) promoted himself as the candidate who would stop "endless wars," now wants to lead a new conflict just south of our nation's border. But at this moment, it is, in the words of one Trump adviser, "unclear how far he'll go on this one." This source adds: "If things don't change, the president still believes it's necessary to take some kind of military action against these killers."

Another source close to Trump describes to Rolling Stone what they call a “soft invasion” of Mexico, in which American special forces — not a large theater deployment — would be sent covertly to assassinate cartel leaders. Indeed, this is a preliminary plan that Trump himself warmed to in private conversations this year.

{snip}

Read more: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-mexico-drug-cartels-military-invade-1235183177/

---

Hat tip, commenter ASFT at Joe.My.God.

AL Haters Seek To Ban Pride Group From Xmas Parade
November 27, 2024

https://www.joemygod.com/2024/11/al-haters-seek-to-ban-pride-group-from-xmas-parade/

https://www.joemygod.com/2024/11/al-haters-seek-to-ban-pride-group-from-xmas-parade/#comment-6600837078

[Scrivener7]

1. And so it begins. And none of this is necessary.

Nothing they propose would do anything to benefit US citizens.

[Irish_Dem]

11. It benefits Trump in some way.

Money or power.

[boonecreek]

12. Good grief!

Let's commit an act of war against an ally. I swear these people are barking mad.

[Scrivener7]

15. Definitely, but it won't happen. It's all a troll.

[wnylib]

17. Dictators need an enemy and a war against that enemy

to unite the people behind them in a "just cause."

If he wants to go that route, who is his Adderall supplier? Who supplies Jr. with his coke? Maybe we should raise awareness of coke and Adderall abuse and urge a war against suppliers? Cut 45 and his spawn off from their drugs of choice.

Yes, Fentanyl is a serious problem in the US. It was routinely supplied by US doctors and manufacturers for profit, creating a market of addicted customers. Drug cartels moved into the market.

While pursuing cartels in Mexico, don't take your eyes off of manufacturers and distributors in the US. Perhaps that's what Republicans want us to do. Ignore the home business.

[rampartd]

18. we will never know

trump will declare victory and mika will fawn over his strength and decisiveness.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

2. Cue more MAGA regret. "No wars" was one of his biggest promises & brags about his first term. . . . nt

[hlthe2b]

3. A few of those Drug Lords/Cartel heads might love the excuse to escalate and that might just include

some murderous activity that could leave the Trumpists "reeling."

I suppose their arrogance won't allow for such considerations, but...

[Irish_Dem]

13. Trump wants some of the cartel profit?

He wants in on the sex and drug trade.

[bronxiteforever]

4. So Mexico should cut a defense deal with China then?

Or Russia? Or both? This incoming administration thinks an attack against Mexico will have no consequences. Idiots.

[Scrivener7]

7. They're already leaning towards China.

[bronxiteforever]

8. Agree and just like you said earlier

“Nothing they propose would do anything to benefit US citizens.”

[Irish_Dem]

14. It's a win for China.

Mexico further aligns with China for defense, and China can install Chinese military bases
on the US border.

[Mike 03]

5. The author of this piece doesn't seem to remember, Trump DID

contemplate firing missiles into Mexico during his first term:

This is not a one-off answer to a stray question. Trump suggested firing missiles at Mexico during his presidency, asked advisers for a “battle plan” against the cartels last year, and recently proposed sending special operators to assassinate drug kingpins. The idea of war in Mexico is popular among the Republican elite; a Trump-aligned think tank even drew up a broad-strokes plan for how such a war might work.

https://www.vox.com/policy/363146/trump-policy-war-mexico-trade-deportation-border

This RS piece is good, I just wish we had better memories, and that the stupid things he did had been better reported when they happened.

It is a question that would have seemed batty for the GOP elite to consider before, even during Trump's first term

[Dan]

6. War is a two way street.

[Irish_Dem]

9. He wants Mexico to pay him not to invade?

Trump is raking in the dough.

[Deminpenn]

10. Serioulsy doubt any of these Trumpers actually know how to kill people,

but the Mexican drug lords and cartels do.

[Baitball Blogger]

16. Here's a thought: Stop selling guns to the cartel, you fucking idiots.

Seriously. It's an easy solution. No one has to get hurt. Control the number of guns going over the border.

[mathematic]

19. Well, Mexico is crazy if they think they can weaponize migrants like Texas did to NY

There's a lot of commentary on DU that is, frankly, behind the times.

Europe knows that Turkey weaponized migrants last decade.
NATO knows that Russia weaponizes migrants now.
Everybody here knows that Texas weaponized migrants against New York over the last few years and yet will cheer when Mexico threatens to do it to America.

If there's no space for Democrats to oppose Mexico's policy of facilitating mass migration for political purposes then prepare for Democrats to lose elections forever. Border crossing are drastically down at the American border this year because Mexico finally took some action on it. Where was this 3 years ago? And now they promise to reverse those actions if trump puts on tariffs. What am I supposed to conclude from this? That Mexico has been acting as our friends this whole time? Or that they've actually been able to do something but chose not to? Nah, I'm done losing elections because Mexico doesn't want any heat for being a narco state playing footsies with the worlds worst regimes.

We've spent the last week laughing at farmers and other conservatives complaining about how trump's policies will hurt them. Congratulations mexico, you destabilized america. Hope it was worth it.

[rampartd]

20. "penetration, howsomever slight ...."

borrowing language from his master, trump will call it a "special military operation" never an "invasion."

[NotHardly]

21. It's called INVASION e.g. a declaration of war with fewer steps.

So incredibly illegal on so many levels ... International Law and US law.

[ananda]

22. So, we supply the cartels with guns ...

as an excuse to invade them?

These Trump people are so insane
it defies words.

[LT Barclay]

30. Maybe the CIA is in on this game. That is their usual MO, just ask Saddam Hussein

[LeftInTX]

23. Is this the Onion? Sky high tariffs and now an invasion?

I think he's BSing. He'll claim that just his threats were enough to prevent the "Battle of Tijuana" before it even begins

[C0RI0LANUS]

24. Without war or talking about war, the Republicans have nothing.

Examples: The Global War on Terror, the War on Drugs, fighting the so-called War on Christmas, the liberal war on American values, etc.

The only presidential administration in the history of the US that did not fire a single shot at anyone or anything was Democratic President Jimmy Carter's (a WWII USN hero and nuclear engineer).



Link:

https://www.military.com/history/how-jimmy-carter-saved-canadian-nuclear-reactor-after-meltdown.html

[EX500rider]

25. "only presidential administration in the history of the US that did not fire a single shot"

Well they tried but Operation Eagle Claw did not go well.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Eagle_Claw

[C0RI0LANUS]

29. True, the Carter Admin. attempted a rescue mission out of frustration.

Result: The photo you provided.

The Eagle Claw commando team may have been issued with non-lethal rounds as well (rubber bullets) for all we know. So, under Jimmy Carter, no one was killed by the US military in four years.

"We never dropped a bomb. We never fired a bullet. We never went to war" - Jimmy Carter.

BTW: When you read October Surprise by Gary Sick, you will see in 1980 the GOP sabotaged Pres. Carter's negotiations to release the hostages to make the Dems look weak. The plan worked and Ronald Reagan won in Nov 1980.

[LT Barclay]

31. My dad who was a computer programmer and not given to political statements

believed that someone sabotaged that mission to make Carter look bad.

[C0RI0LANUS]

32. Your father was right, LT Barclay. GOP strategy: Make the Democrats look weak on national security.

JFK was forced to take a harder line on communism (Cuba, Vietnam) or else the GOP would have appeared stronger than him on national security. Result: Bay of Pigs fiasco, embargo on Cuba, and escalation of US involvement in Vietnam. LBJ would go on to face RW hardliner Barry Goldwater in 1964.

Richard Nixon's team sabotaged LBJ's peace discussions with the South Vietnamese President in 1968. The GOP requested Saigon to stop peace negotiations with Hanoi in Paris as Nixon will give them a better deal if he wins in 1968. Saigon complied and LBJ heard the wiretaps. Hubert Humphrey went on to lose the election. See link below.

In 1980, Ronald Reagan's team backchanneled to Tehran and promised the Iranians a better deal if they NOT release the hostages for Carter. That's why Carter couldn't understand why negotiations with the IRGC kept failing and hence the attempted rescue mission that failed. Carter lost the election as planned and the Iranians released the 52 American hostages on Inauguration Day, Jan 1981. This is from Gary Sick's book, "October Surprise."

Many analysts suspect that the GOP does not want to restore relations with Iran is because those secrets would publicly emerge. Another powder-keg for the GOP are details from the Iran-Contra Affair. So Iran ends up a permanent Bete Noir for the US (and the Israelis).


Americans landing in West Germany after the IRGC released them (Jan 1981 / ABC News)

Source:

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21768668

[LT Barclay]

33. An article in either The Atlantic or The Nation also said that Nixon's negotiations with Vietnam promised war

reparations $$ in exchange for POWs, while knowing congress would never approve. So Nixon gets elected, no $$ to Vietnam and 1200 POWs left to sit in camps in Vietnam. The details are shocking. Apparently McCain was on the POW/MIA commission for a while and probably knew of this. Although the author acknowledged controversy about his conclusions and includes links to other reports.
https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/why-has-john-mccain-blocked-info-mias/

[C0RI0LANUS]

34. Thank you for this article. Nixon screwed a lot of people; John McCain and LBJ never spoke up about it.

BTW: The USIC has a special agency to find our missing Soldiers in SE Asia or confirm their status with DNA and other National Technical Means (NTM). I wanted to pursue an assignment at the POW/MIA Cell, but other duties prevented that.



Link:

https://www.dia.mil/News-Features/Articles/Article-View/Article/2352642/dia-honors-prisoners-of-war-and-those-missing-in-action/

PS: That our POWs were used as political pawns is kind of infuriating to me.

[SomewhereInTheMiddle]

41. I had a friend that spent seven years in Vietnam doing that - searching for MIA/POW and bringing back remains. N/t

[C0RI0LANUS]

42. That must have been both rewarding and grueling for him.

The US Army has a forensics lab in Hawaii where the remains are analyzed. Your friend must have been there several times transporting the remains of our Soldiers from Vietnam.

I'm sure he shared some interesting stories with you.

Here's the link to the lab:

https://www.civilbeat.org/2018/09/we-dont-give-up-identifying-americas-long-lost-soldiers/

[EX500rider]

37. I doubt sand storms and defective helicopters & runways collisions were part of any plan.

The fact is they over planned it with way to many moving parts and not enough inter-service operability practice between units.

various reasons for the mission failure have been argued, with most analysts agreeing that an excessively complex plan, poor operational planning, flawed command structure, lack of adequate pilot training and poor weather conditions were contributing factors

[EX500rider]

36. "The Eagle Claw commando team may have been issued with non-lethal rounds"

The chances Delta Force, the CIA Special Activities Division, the 10th Special Forces Group and elements from 1st and 2nd Ranger Battalion were going to fight their way into & out of Tehran with rubber bullets is zero IMO.

[C0RI0LANUS]

38. True. And the failed Eagle Claw mission led to future innovations in USSOF.

And I can imagine Jimmy Carter saying "limit the casualties, OK fellas?"

Below is the DOD precis on Eagle Claw with maps and images.

Link:

https://media.defense.gov/2012/Aug/23/2001330106/-1/-1/0/Eagleclaw.pdf

Footnote: Sky Marshals were once issued non-lethal rounds capable of stopping an assailant without damaging the cabin of the aircraft. The USG does not disclose their arsenal, but years ago a retired FAA Air Marshal sort of kind of hinted that to me one evening. Things have probably changed since last century.

[EX500rider]

39. I believe the sky Marshals were issued frangible rounds which are lethal but don't over penetrate

[C0RI0LANUS]

40. You're probably right about the frangible rounds, EX500rider.

Me, I'm like Columbo, I dislike guns.

We learn way more from a live EPW than a stiff with a toe tag (pocket litter, tattoos, and cell phone exploitation can be fruitful at times, but it's not the same thing).

Too bad the USSS CAT whacked the kid in Butler, PA in July 2024. The FBI couldn't interrogate his corpse so they had to re-construct his frame of mind and sift thru all the social media on his computer.

[bucolic_frolic]

26. Is this a hostile takeover of the cartels?

Change of ownership.

[delisen]

27. Trump fears the cartels and would appease them.

Mexico will treat any incursion as an act of war.

[Montauk6]

28. "WE'RE GONNA INVADE MEXICO, AND BELIZE IS GONNA PAY FOR IT!!"

smh...

[NickB79]

35. The cartels would respond with terrorism across the US

Especially assassinations of elected officials and their families. Gonna be a lot of Republicans finding the heads of their wives and children on their doorsteps.

They'd blend into the local populations and a lot of civilians would die in the military strikes, just like the Taliban and Hamas have done.