Define "Invasion"...
 

Hypothetical question #1

If a criminal contingent of "Nation A" routinely crosses the border into "Nation B's" sovereign territory for the purpose of smuggling illegal firearms, drugs, engaging in human trafficking and other illegal actions... is that considered an invasion?

[]YES []NO



Hypothetical question #2

If a criminal contingent of "Nation A" routinely crosses the border into "Nation B's" sovereign territory for the purpost of smuggling illegal firearms, drugs, engaging in human trafficking and other illegal actions... and these criminals are under the direct protection and armed escort of uniformed, armed soldiers and military units from "Nation A"... is that considered an invasion?

[]YES []NO








US Border patrol warns it's officers to be alert to units of the Mexican Military operating illegally within the United States.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIL_xy0akqo

No.

No.

While there are different contexts in which the term invasion also is used (medicine, for example), the most commonly meant reference is to the military dimension of the term.

Also, invasion troops usually are of considerable strength, and they take land in order to hold it for longer than just some hours or days. Poland, normandy, Falklands, Iraq, that were invasions. Commandos crossing the border in hiding to hunt down smugglers and then returning home, may or may not be hostile to the nation they enter, but I do not see that action as qualifying for a description of being an invasion.

So if say... rogue elements of the Mexican Military engaged in openly hostile operations, and in numerous cases fired their weapons on and in some cases even killed Federal Agents of the United States there would be nothing wrong with this?

Though it might not meet the black and white, cut and dry Webster's dictionary version of the term "Invasion" in the traditionalist sense... it is a hostile act by a foreign military force - is it not the Mexican government's job to maintain control and discipline of their military?

I suppose the next question in this series of questions would be

Should the United States Federal Government react, in some capacity other than "form letters", to this illegal activity which is being conducted by the Mexican Military on US soil (be they rogue elements or officially sanctioned)?

If i were president...

1. I would have already mobilized a division, minimum, tasked with the interdiction of any border crossing activity which is to be met with lethal force wherever necessary.

2. I would impose sanctions on Mexico, mostly barring all travel to Mexico, even going so far as to make it illegal for any US Air Carrier or any US Citizen to travel to Mexico. I would also repeal the North American Free Trade Agreement. These steps would be taken in order to bring the Mexican government to the table to discuss a border security agreement.

then i would see where it went from there

#1 No its a crime
#2 No its a crime

@ newsclip, an everyday occurance on borders worldwide

Ok I'll bite on this one

so you mean to tell me, every day, elements of the German Military cross 30-50 miles into Poland without any authorization to do so?

I think we would hear about that.:hmmm:


and if it is a crime as you say.... is it a crime against the county? the state? the nation? humanity?

who's jurisdiction? FBI? US Army? the Pima County Sheriff's Department? Mexican Fedral Police?

what should the response be?



you must admit it is a unique situation which requires some outside the box thinking

This I did not say and I do not even judge the action you describe. You originally asked whether or not a small illegal force crossing a border for acts of smuggling or crime qualifies for being described as an "invasion". In the case you refer to, it would also be interesting to know if the Mexican do it with knowledge and approaval of their government, or not. In case of the latter, you are dealing with a rebelion in their military, or large scale corruption. actually, at around 3:50 of that video they indicate that the military units involved in these border incidents are in the pockets of Mexicin drug cartels. I strongly doubt that the Mexican government - as long as it is not on the payment list of the cartels, too - ordered and authorised the military to crowss the border to shoot at american agents.

The video is from autumn 2008.

So again, GR, it is nasty, and yes, you should close that border and certainly you have the right to engage those Mexican smugglers and units with weapon'S force. But it is not a milizary invasion in the normal meaning of the word. It is organised crime and corruption. If Mexico cannot get a hold of these events, then this would rate Mexico as a failed state because obviously then anarchy and corruption and organised crime have more influence in that nation than the state and it's institutions have.

If the ammount of ignorrance by the Us goivernment is true, likle the report claims, then this would be a scandal that should lead to politician's heads rolling. "Water rights conflicts"...?

Is there evidence existing that shows those Mexican soldiers wearing official Mexican uniforms when entering the US?

my exact point




well said:salute:

Not really, criminal enterprises by elements of the military or law enforcement are nothing new, cross border ones are just more lucrative

Is that what was written? No.
However, Poland Germany, thats an open border isn't it. So what on earth would the military be trafficing?

But that would raise another issue, if you close the border and declare that the Mexican government doesn't control its country you would be stuck with illegals already in the country and would face applications for refugee status from any new ones.

I would say Yes and Yes
It's crime definately not a military operation, but it's stil an invasion, but not the start wars kind

Invade

–verb (used with object)

1. to enter forcefully as an enemy; go into with hostile intent: Germany invaded Poland in 1939.

2. to enter like an enemy: Locusts invaded the fields.

3. to enter as if to take possession: to invade a neighbor's home.

4. to enter and affect injuriously or destructively, as disease: viruses that invade the bloodstream.

5. to intrude upon: to invade the privacy of a family.

6. to encroach or infringe upon: to invade the rights of citizens.

7. to permeate: The smell of baking invades the house.

8. to penetrate; spread into or over: The population boom has caused city dwellers to invade the suburbs.



Definitions 6 and 8 could be taken in the lesser ways you suggest, but in national terms 'invade' implies an attempt by one government to conquer another.

I was under the impression that the smuggling of arms is mostly into Mexico, not from Mexico. Perhaps it's a two way street to launder the source of illegally obtained firearms.

Well, it's worked for Cuba. No problems there.

Thats the problem with law it usually sees black or white(some say its blind lol)
While criminals or terrorist can walk the thin line every one is arguing if it its legal to take action against them.
Not saying that law should not be respected but sometimes total liberty can be exploited too easily.

Isn't it funny that hispanics illegally entering america from a screwed up country are cause celebre if its one country and evil invaders who speak spanish if they are from another country.
To take one of Chapelles lines and alter it a bit..... If Gonzalez had been from Mexico instead of Cuba they would have dragged his sorry ass off the innertube and kicked him straight back to where he came from.

Bring back Black Jack Pershing.

His success or failure in his task is not the issue.
The issue is that the US Government has in the past used the US Army to protect US Citizens on and near the mexican border.
Defending HOME borders is the primary role of armies.

USA has military bases around the world, but not so much as an outpost to guard her own border?
Something stinks in USA.