Report: Obama to send 1,200 troops to Mexico border for "intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance"

Discuss

32 Responses to “Report: Obama to send 1,200 troops to Mexico border for "intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance"”

  1. das memsen says:

    There goes the neighborhood.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Yeah, might as well start a 4th war. Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Mexico. Getting a lot done. Really improving the world. NOBEL PEACE PRIZE. Christ.

  3. jenjen says:

    Here’s hoping we don’t have another Esequiel Hernandez case. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esequiel_Hern%C3%A1ndez_Jr

  4. knoxblox says:

    I propose an experiment in which we eliminate the border and recombine the U.S. and Mexico, in which the Department of Justice coverage would reach all the way down to the southern tip of Mexico, but the drug cartels would also have unhindered reach up to the Canadian border.

    How would this play out? Who would win in the battle between zealous U.S. drug task forces and zealous Mexican drug cartels? How would “American” society be affected?

  5. Talia says:

    I understand the drug violence down there extends across the border to a certain degree, so this could reasonably be considered protecting the US as well.

    @Anon – yeah, cuz them Mexican drug lords are peaceful, noble sorts who only want the best for the world. *eyeroll* FFS.

  6. hassenpfeffer says:

    Yeah, sending 1.2k soldiers from an already overburdened military into an effective warzone is much more logical than, say, LEGALIZING the merchandise in question and taxing the ever-lovin’ Jeebus out of it. We’d have China paid back in five years and be able to start buying friends again.

  7. mister-o says:

    Since McCain (and presumably other repubs) are also mad about this (“not enough”) and neither the links nor the comments provide an argument as to in what way this is bad, can someone explain it to me? They’re not full service troops, and it’s a temporary replacement for border agents. Given the more drastic measures that are actually being put into effect (AZ law), why all the opposition to something that looks for all the world like a compromise measure?

    I’m not trying to stir a hornet’s nest, I just don’t understand the issue very well and would appreciate someone calmly cluing me in, preferably with reasoned arguments or evidence, so that I don’t have to wade into the greater echo chamber of the blogosphere.

    • querent says:

      It’s likely a lame-duck, right of center but called liberal, compromise. Like the health care bill. Or asking Israel nicely to stop building settlements without actually doing anything.

      To me, it looks like further militarization of the border, and at its most benign it is treating the symptoms rather than the cause. Kinda like increasing security in a gated community rather than dealing with extreme economic disparity, but on a large scale.

  8. Anonymous says:

    The US is becoming more militarized than since WW2. We have idealized the military to the point where it is beyond reproach, our enemies are defined as whoever we choose to kill and are demonized, and now the military is being used as police. Support this at your own risk because history has shown that eventually it will be used against those it is supposed to serve.

    ironic catpcha: Patriot firework

  9. Anonymous says:

    And North Korea, Pakistan, and now Jamaica.

  10. Anonymous says:

    Bring ALL the troops home. Lay out two rows of concertina wire along the border. Have the troops patrol between the rows.

    Protect our OWN borders – not those of some other countries!

  11. Teller says:

    If this happens, the Arizona law will have achieved its true intent – to a degree.

  12. Nadreck says:

    If the whole Ching Dynasty Empire couldn’t keep the British Empire troops from invading and selling cocaine what makes the US think that it can pull off a military solution. Make no mistake, someday the kids of all these Drug Lords are going to be as well off as Queen Victoria’s kids are now.

    • karl_jones says:

      If the whole Ching Dynasty Empire couldn’t keep the British Empire troops from invading and selling cocaine …

      You’re thinking of opium — the British Empire’s policy of growing poppies in India and trafficking illegal opium into China as a matter of international trade policy.

      See First Opium War, Second Opium War.

      “The trade in such drugs usually results in some form of monopoly which not only centralizes the drug traffic, but also restructures much of the affiliated social and economic terrain in the process. In particular two major effects are the creation of mass markets and the generation of enormous, in fact unprecedented, cash flows. The existence of monopoly results in the concentrated accumulation of vast pools of wealth. The accumulations of wealth created by a succession of historic drug trades have been among the primary foundations of global capitalism and the modern nation-state itself. Indeed, it may be argued that the entire rise of the west, from 1500 to 1900, depended on a series of drug trades.”

      Opium, Empire and the Global Economy by Carl Trocki

  13. Anonymous says:

    I am not American.

    Are ‘National Guardsmen’ and ‘Troops’/’Soldiers’ not mutually exclusive?

    Just curious.

    • querent says:

      they are supposed to be, but the distinction is being blurred.

      “national guardsmen” have been seeing combat duty for a while (it’s named otherwise), and we’re bringing the first troops back for domestic work (in violation of posse comitatus) soon (if it’s not already been done).

    • querent says:

      they are supposed to be, but the distinction is being blurred.

      “national guardsmen” have been seeing combat duty for a while (it’s named otherwise), and we’re bringing the first troops back for domestic work (in violation of posse comitatus) soon (if it’s not already been done).

  14. Anonymous says:

    Militarize the border? Yea Right. I propose we send McCain and his wife. Don’t forget the sunscreen. It’s a violation of the The Posse Comitatus Act. The border today … then your city tomorrow! Except tomorrow, it will be with Canadian and Mexican troops as authorized under the Security and Prosperity Partnership announced by Bush, the President of Mexico and the Prime Minister of Canada on March 23, 2005, at Baylor Baptist University, which established a continental region of global governance.

    Wikipedia relates that The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed on June 18, 1878, after the end of Reconstruction, with the intention (in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807) of substantially limiting the powers of the federal government to use the military for law enforcement.

  15. Roy Trumbull says:

    “¡Pobre México! ¡Tan lejos de Dios y tan cerca de los Estados Unidos!” (Poor Mexico, so far from God and so close to the United States!)
    Porfirio Diaz – Mexican President 1884 – 1911

  16. bkad says:

    The US is becoming more militarized than since WW2. We have idealized the military to the point where it is beyond reproach

    What do you mean, “beyond reproach.”? I have seen little but criticism of the military and US military policy, and that is in both the US and foreign press. This has been true, as far as I can recall, for the last 20 years I’ve been paying attention — with the exception of a three-to-five year period following 9/11.

    You can argue the US is too quick to seek military solutions, sure, but if you think you’re alone I’d argue you’re mistaken.

  17. Dewi Morgan says:

    “Mr president, you’re one of us!”

  18. Anonymous says:

    If this was Bush and not Obama, what would people say?

    Moreover, if it was Bush who pulled a stunt like this during Katrina, what would people say?

    I’m coming to believe that very few people ever objected to Bush’s politics, just his style. Because when Obama embraces the same policies or approach, he gets a pass.

    I *hope* people come realize that the ability to give a pretty speech does not preclude you from being a neocon.

Leave a Reply