View Full Version : Rick Perry suggests US military role in Mexico drug war
Texas Governor Rick Perry - who is seeking the Republican nomination for US president - has said he would consider sending American troops into Mexico to combat drug-related violence.
Mr Perry was speaking during a campaign appearance in New Hampshire.
"It may require our military in Mexico working in concert with them to kill these drug cartels and keep them off our border," he said.
Such a move would go far beyond current US involvement in Mexico's drugs war.
Governor Perry gave no further details of what sort of possible military intervention he would consider.
"I don't know all the different scenarios that would be out there," he said.
"But I think it is very important for us to work with them to keep that country from failing".
Sovereignty,
After the speech, the White House said it would continue its "historic level of cooperation with Mexico" to protect people on both sides of the border.
The Obama administration currently provides substantial material support to Mexican security forces, as well as close intelligence cooperation.
The US has also deployed National Guard troops to boost border security, and uses pilotless drone aircraft to gather intelligence inside Mexico.
Any deployment of US military forces on Mexican territory would almost certainly be unacceptable to the Mexican authorities.
Mexico lost around half its territory to the US after a war in the 1840s, and has since been very protective of its sovereignty.
The Mexican constitution also places strict limits on foreign intervention.
Mexican President Felipe Calderon has been pressing the US to do more to reduce demand for drugs among its citizens and to reduce the flow of weapons from the US to the cartels.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-15140560
Note: 2 October 2011 Last updated at 00:37 GMT
And our administration has been allowing guns to walk over there for the last few years. While not directly arming criminals, they have been complicit in weapons traffiking. Perry is riding the fast and furious debacle for all he can and if his handlers are starting to push this angle, then I truly believe the investigation will be gaining more attention in the next few months. Will be very interesting to say the least.
Skybird
10-02-11, 08:45 AM
Mexico lost around half its territory to the US after a war in the 1840s, and has since been very protective of its sovereignty.
One could argue whether or not a nation so lethally infested and ripped apart by organsied crime indeed is sovereign anymore. To me it looks more like anarchy in the absence of any authority that could claim and defend sovereignity.
I can't say that I have become a fan of Perry over the past weeks since his name continued to pop ub in the media over here. But in fact I have started to consider Mexico to be possibly a failed state, and if it poses a "clear and present danger" to the US - which I think is a view that can be defended due to the drug and crime trafficking - then the US naturally has the right to protect itself by military means, even more so, I think it has the obligation to protect American society and American citizens in the US. whether that would mean mjlitary intervention inside Mexico, or a militarily enforced sealing and isolatiopn of Mexico at the outside borders, is something that must be decided on basis of assessement of the military options and facts that define the current situation.
danny60
10-02-11, 09:12 AM
The US going into a country that doesn't have oil?:k_rofl:
A statement that does not really conform to reality, political moves to win votes for next season,overcome problems yes, but it will not happen, with American military presence, but rather whether there are financial opportunities in the budget, and it's not, but it is obviously in the U.S. interest to stop the drugs, and organized crime, which comes in over the border, Mexico must, in turn, act tougher.
nikimcbee
10-02-11, 10:09 AM
Whatever they do, I wish they (the gubmint) would be a little more heavy handed with those guys. I don't think the US Army could legally do this, but the Nat'l Guard is a different stoy (afaik). Maybe we could hire the North Koreans or the Russians or the East Germans to build\manage a buffer zone.
Jimbuna
10-02-11, 10:13 AM
Whatever they do, I wish they (the gubmint) would be a little more heavy handed with those guys. I don't think the US Army could legally do this, but the Nat'l Guard is a different stoy (afaik). Maybe we could hire the North Koreans or the Russians or the East Germans to build\manage a buffer zone.
I hear the Israelis are pretty good at building barriers/walls :03:
CaptainHaplo
10-02-11, 10:18 AM
Lots of talk to gather support. Not a realisitic option the way its usually talked about. Military forces as a whole are not trained or prepared to do pure law enforcement activities.
As for mexican soveriegnty - we should worry about that only after they decided to start respecting ours. Until then, its a line drawn on the map that has little meaning.
Rockstar
10-02-11, 10:24 AM
Whatever they do, I wish they (the gubmint) would be a little more heavy handed with those guys. I don't think the US Army could legally do this, but the Nat'l Guard is a different stoy (afaik). Maybe we could hire the North Koreans or the Russians or the East Germans to build\manage a buffer zone.
We could invite UN peace keeping forces to the border then all will be well. Lets take a vote and forward it for approval right away.
nikimcbee
10-02-11, 10:25 AM
Lots of talk to gather support. Not a realisitic option the way its usually talked about. Military forces as a whole are not trained or prepared to do pure law enforcement activities.
As for mexican soveriegnty - we should worry about that only after they decided to start respecting ours. Until then, its a line drawn on the map that has little meaning.
I agree, I think this is 100% talk. Pre election hot air:doh: How much do we give them in foreign aid? I think we should start deducting from that.
But, their whole political system is corrupt, so who knows.:dead: Maybe they could pay us to help them (Mex gov't:haha:) clean up the problem. Just an idea.
nikimcbee
10-02-11, 10:25 AM
We could invite UN peace keeping forces to the border then all will be well. Lets take a vote and forward it for approval right away.
Smurfs in the desert?:haha::har:
Shucks, a third of their population lives here illegally anyways. :salute:
kraznyi_oktjabr
10-02-11, 12:20 PM
Shucks, a third of their population lives here illegally anyways. :salute:Looking forward to official name change to the Estados Unidos de América.
Armistead
10-02-11, 01:44 PM
Shut down about 100 leftover cold war bases in Europe that really have no function and place them on the border. The only reason these leftover bases exist now is political and good money makers....not for americans of course.
My guess is in about 20 years we'll have a mexican president demanding we all learn spanish as our first language.
antikristuseke
10-02-11, 02:03 PM
Armistead I'd bet quite a bit of money on you being wrong in your assessment.
Jimbuna
10-02-11, 02:07 PM
Shut down about 100 leftover cold war bases in Europe that really have no function and place them on the border. The only reason these leftover bases exist now is political and good money makers....not for americans of course.
My guess is in about 20 years we'll have a mexican president demanding we all learn spanish as our first language.
The first part....you've just about done that in the UK already and we can't afford to lose the revenue from your Pesos :DL
The second part....were people saying similar about a black president twenty years ago?
I honestly wouldn't know :hmmm:
Sailor Steve
10-02-11, 03:24 PM
were people saying similar about a black president twenty years ago?
In twenty years we're going to have a black president who insists we all learn "black" as our first language? :O:
:rotfl2:
In twenty years we're going to have a black president who insists we all learn "black" as our first language? :O:
:rotfl2:
Dat bee ebonics foooooooool.:yep:
soopaman2
10-02-11, 04:29 PM
The same Rick Perry whos state allows in state tuition rates to children of illegal aliens? That means I would have to pay more than a riverswimmer/fencejumper?
Ahhh, that one. Yeah, and he accuses Romney of flip flopping.
Alcohol prohibition=huge increase in organized crime (Capone, Bugs Moran, Nascar.. Yeah Nascar look it up)
Drug prohibition= Mexican Cartels,
Prohibition went away, the brutal violence of the 20s went away.
I wonder how many pot smokers sit in prison amongst murderers and rapists... One is too many.
Armistead
10-02-11, 06:39 PM
Armistead I'd bet quite a bit of money on you being wrong in your assessment.
You may be right, mexicans aren't coming here like they once did, no jobs, but illegals are still coming and the millions of illegals here are still having babies.
Armistead
10-02-11, 06:42 PM
The same Rick Perry whos state allows in state tuition rates to children of illegal aliens? That means I would have to pay more than a riverswimmer/fencejumper?
Ahhh, that one. Yeah, and he accuses Romney of flip flopping.
Alcohol prohibition=huge increase in organized crime (Capone, Bugs Moran, Nascar.. Yeah Nascar look it up)
Drug prohibition= Mexican Cartels,
Prohibition went away, the brutal violence of the 20s went away.
I wonder how many pot smokers sit in prison amongst murderers and rapists... One is too many.
I agree, spending billions on putting pot smokers behind bars, money could be much better spent. I haven't smoked it in 20 years, but I see no problem with it. They should legalize it and tax it. Course it wouldn't be long before some corporation put all the small pot farmers out of business.
TLAM Strike
10-02-11, 06:58 PM
Why not. Hezbollah is working in Mexico now, lets make this an international war. :yeah:
The US going into a country that doesn't have oil?:k_rofl: Mexico is the world's 6th largest producer of oil. :know:
Castout
10-02-11, 07:41 PM
Just a crazy what if
What if US had been wanting to go into Mexico and basically annex it.
What if the US had been supporting the drug cartel without them knowing, to create the ensuing chaos that would justify sending military forces into Mexico.
I've asked this many times since the drug cartel violence sprung up in the news.
Frankly that'd only make sense if there were any reason the US wanted Mexico. And all things considered, the US does NOT want Mexico, you can trust me on that. Why get rid of one of the biggest sources of cheap abuse-able labour by granting them the same rights as US citizens? Why flood your country with MORE hispanic population that'd immediately demand a more left-leaning order of things?
In general, there's no point for the US to 'annex' any place in the Americas. They have other ways of influencing them, and these ways have certainly proven effective over and over.
Frankly that'd only make sense if there were any reason the US wanted Mexico. And all things considered, the US does NOT want Mexico, you can trust me on that. Why get rid of one of the biggest sources of cheap abuse-able labour by granting them the same rights as US citizens? Why flood your country with MORE hispanic population that'd immediately demand a more left-leaning order of things?
In general, there's no point for the US to 'annex' any place in the Americas. They have other ways of influencing them, and these ways have certainly proven effective over and over. Good point! :yep:
soopaman2
10-03-11, 10:33 AM
I agree, spending billions on putting pot smokers behind bars, money could be much better spent. I haven't smoked it in 20 years, but I see no problem with it. They should legalize it and tax it. Course it wouldn't be long before some corporation put all the small pot farmers out of business.
I sound like a "smoky car" hippy with my post. I can't smoke it because I operate heavy machinery and am tested, but see vastly more social problems with alcohol than with marijuana.
Of course legalizing pot would do little, as cartels only derive 15% (according to what I read) from marijuana, and any pot smoking American knows Canada grows better green anyways. Seedless and not packed into a compressed brick.
Look at the politics behind the movie "reefer madness". It was a propaganda film back in the days to put hemp farmers out of business. Du Pont wanted to kill hemp and succeeded, resulting in our current drug laws. One of Americas earliest examples of why "lobbying" is bad.
Can't lobby in Europe, they call it bribery, which it is.
Just a crazy what if
What if US had been wanting to go into Mexico and basically annex it.
There would be a lot better ways of going about it than what you're suggesting. It'd be far easier and cheaper for us to just close the border.
soopaman2
10-03-11, 11:12 AM
There would be a lot better ways of going about it than what you're suggesting. It'd be far easier and cheaper for us to just close the border.
Agreed.:salute:
If we wanted to we can use the same thinly veiled casus belli to declare Mexico a renegade we did for Iraq part II. Then If the UN objected we would tell them to "go kick rocks" like we did for the same above mentioned war. They won't do anything, The USA feed 75% of money and materiel as well as manpower.
And the above paragraph is not praise. I don't like us using our military like so. It reeks of colonialism, something that Americas hatred for made us a country. (Sorry Britain, we still love you)
Ducimus
10-03-11, 11:27 AM
Mexico lost around half its territory to the US after a war in the 1840s, and has since been very protective of its sovereignty.
They've been doing a bang up job taking that territory back without firing a shot too.
What you posted here, are from the original source ie Articles, and NOT my words, so we should not confuse apples and oranges ...that no bullet was shot, you say, is even better, :yep:
soopaman2
10-03-11, 11:59 AM
They've been doing a bang up job taking that territory back without firing a shot too.
Tinfoil hat time....
Thanks to corporation exploiting under the table wages to increase profits. Thanks to farms taking US government subsidies then hiring illegals at less then half the legal minimum wage. They claim that "Americans won't do the job"
The real unemployment rate is over 20%, the so called statistics don't count people who exceeded their benefits
Go ahead make fun of me, call me names, but first prove me wrong?
We must pander to hate groups like La Raza (who want to "take back") for political votes, and corporate greed.
Republican presidential contender Rick Perry is on the defensive after it emerged a hunting camp used by his family had a racially offensive name.
His campaign said his family had years ago painted over an entrance stone that once displayed the name, ******head, at the rented West Texas camp.
But the Texas governor was heavily criticised by rival Republican nominee Herman Cain, who is African American.
Mr Perry is a leading contender for the Republican nomination for president.
The Perry campaign did not deny that the term was used as a name for the property, but said it was changed soon after Mr Perry's father joined a lease that gave him hunting rights there in 1983.
'Vile, negative word'
"The word written by others long ago is insensitive and offensive. That is why the Perrys took quick action to cover and obscure it," campaign spokesman Ray Sullivan said in a statement.
"The Perrys did not own, name or control the property. They simply rented hunting rights to 1,000 acres of the ranch."
But the Washington Post, which reported the story on Sunday, was told by several people that the name was still visible at points during the 1980s and 90s.
It also reported that as recently as this summer the word was still faintly visible under a coat of white paint.
The land - leased by Mr Perry's father, and later by Mr Perry - was the site of hunting and fishing getaways where the Texas governor entertained lawmakers and supporters. It is not far from Mr Perry's boyhood home in the community of Paint Creek.
At the weekend, Mr Perry again raised eyebrows when he said that if elected president, he would consider sending US troops to Mexico to combat drug-related violence.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15155042
Note: Update Record, 3 October 2011 Last updated at 17:35 GMT
What you posted here, are from the original source ie Articles, and NOT my words, so we should not confuse apples and oranges
People wouldn't make this mistake if you'd put the copied text in a quote box like I have suggested.
Sailor Steve
10-03-11, 02:16 PM
People wouldn't make this mistake if you'd put the copied text in a quote box like I have suggested.
And I, and more than once.
Apparently this is a problem, if you read the article in its entirety is nothing strange, I myself do not experience it as a big problem, but the taste is different, and I respect that.
People wouldn't make this mistake if you'd put the copied text in a quote box like I have suggested. I know,but there are worse things to worry about,and these kind of "mistake".
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.