Morman Bloodbath in Mexico

[The Annoyed Man]

Cartel members should be considered enemy combatants and droned accordingly.

I don't have a problem with drone strikes. Neither do I have a problem with simply terminating cartel members with extreme prejudice as they either attempt to cross the border, or stage for any such attempt while still in Mexico. Sink their boats. Mortar their installations on the Mexican side of the border. Blow up their tunnels with the people still inside. Arm the BP with AT4s, Carl Gustavs, and Mark 19s. If we kill them on our side of the border, hang their carcasses on the border fence, just like you do with coyotes. But the only US boots on the ground presence inside of Mexico should be limited to small counter-terrorism teams (DEVGRU, Delta) whose sole mission is to acquire target intelligence and grid coordinates and then return to our side of the border.

The problem with boots on the ground intervention is that the cartels are too large and too well armed for operations limited to SOCOM to wipe them out. Wiping them out would require a full scale military intervention, and THAT would require a military occupation of ALL of Mexico. Otherwise, all that happens is you push the cartels south, away from our border, but not OUT of Mexico.

We are still disentangling ourselves from Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Syria. We should commit to a war on a 4th front? I don't think so.....and that is aside from the legal and diplomatic issues. Any incursion into Mexico without the express approval of and cooperation with the gov't of Mexico, would rightfully be seen as a hostile invasion by the rest of the world. Mexico is a LARGE land mass, with a LARGE population.

Screen Shot 2019-11-05 at 3.26.05 PM.png

There is that; and as in Viet Nam, they all look alike. Who does one zap first? It's a Mexican problem. Build the wall!

The problem is, to get the wall built, you’d have to start killing or jailing democrat politicians first to get them out of the way. It’s been almost 3 years since Trump got elected on a promise to build the wall. The wall SHOULD have been completed by now. But it's not EVER going to be completed, because it’s not in the DNC's interest to shut off the flow of new democrats into the country—and roughly half of the nation's current voters are on the DNC's plantation to ensure that it never changes.

That’s just the facts as they are right now, and there’s no use denying it. What we SHOULD do, and what we CAN do are not the same thing. So what's left? What CAN be done lawfully and constitutionally by the gov’t we HAVE? The answer is: not a blasted thing.

1. Congress is not going to declare war on Mexico over the murder of 9 citizens. Terrorists killed 3,000 Americans on 9/11. Did Congress declare war on the nation that harbored those terrorists and quite literally refused to turn them over to us per Bush's demand? No. Congress declared no war. Did Congress declare war on Iraq, under the pretexts outlined by the Bush administration according to the intelligence available at the time? No, they did not ... and Saddam Hussein plainly needed to be eliminated by somebody, but that should have been the job of the Iraqi people themselves. Congress can’t find its own butt with both hands in broad daylight. They can’t and WON'T build a simple wall. They are the absolute pinnacle of incompetence — the ultimate illustration of the Peter Principle. They’re NOT going to declare any wars....nor should they in this particular case.

2. Trump, whatever his virtues may be, can’t declare a war on his own, and he can’t fund a private war with the democrats in control of the congressional purse strings. They’re too busy giving the nation's wealth away to illegal immigrants and cartel members who sneak across the border; too busy figuring out how to steal the wealth from the rest of us to pay for their folly; too busy trying to impeach Trump; and too busy trying to figure out how to disarm the rest of us so we can’t say "no" to their insanity.

3. In the eyes of the DNC and lefties everywhere, Mormons—like all religious people who claim to believe in Jesus—are dirt people who need to be marginalized and preferably stamped out "for the greater good". 9 fewer Mormons is not a caucus belli for the left.

So if you’re going to count on the wall being built, it’s not going to happen ... because it’s raciss ...and reasons .... Whatever. It’s not going to happen as long as Texas remains in the Union—and that’s a dead horse, so.....

Things will only get worse.

[The Annoyed Man]

Let's be clear- this is NOT "just a Mexican problem." The cartels are in everything from CBD vaping(money laundering) to human trafficking (both ways), and there is strong evidence of cooperative activity with China.

Tom Clancey's, Clear and Present Danger is/was a good read, for a variety of reasons. It could realistically be argued that the various "Migrants' Rights" advocacy groups present a clear and present danger by enabling the movement of terrorists (cartel/gang members), harm to citizens (illicit substances of highly lethal impact, expansion of the slave trade), e.g., they have no right to free speech.

Hand in hand with the "imminent threat" standard (Webster- no formal declaration of war, does not legally require "consensus" from other nations), it is not at all unreasonable to suggest that "exterminate with extreme prejudice" is a more than reasonable mechanism for dealing with the problem, using everything from facial recognition software to drones to the local SO's precision rifle shooters.

I read the book. I have NO problem with targeted drone strikes, JDAMs, limited spec-ops intelligence gathering, and termination with extreme prejudice at the border. None. People in Colorado argued that legalizing weed would push the cartels out of the picture. That not only didn’t happen....they got STRONGER.

OTH, all the laws on the books, plus the $trillion(s) spent on drug enforcement at the federal, state, and local levels since 1973 when the DEA was formed under the Nixon administration, have ALL failed to curb the trafficking in or the use of drugs. In fact, it grew.....EXPONENTIALLY. How many people today are either in prison or have a felony drug conviction on their record? And what is the recidivism rate? I’m not saying we should do nothing, but CLEARLY, what we are doing isn’t working at all.

So the most pragmatic solution is to simply terminate cartel members with extreme prejudice, wherever they are found. But there’s a problem with that "wherever". On OUR side of the border, we still have at least the illusion of the rule of law (at least outside of DC anyway). That means that the Constitution is still in force....and that means that, no matter how vile a person he is, the cartel member who gets caught on our side of the border gets a trial, a defense lawyer, and everything. And in the likely event that he’s sent to prison, he'll find a lot of his homies already there. It’ll be like old home week. 3 hots and a cot, and for once, nobody's shooting at him. He makes new connections in prison, and strengthens old ones, and when he gets out, he’s moved up the cartel's org chart. So termination with extreme prejudice is the only pragmatic solution, but it’s illegal.....in this country.

Another possible solution would be to deport captured cartel members via a C130 and dump them out the back at 20,000 ft somewhere over Sinaloa. When the plane arrives empty in Mexico City, tell the Federales that they escaped along the way. Frankly, I don’t care HOW we kill them; we just can’t kill them on our side of the border without suspending the Constitution....and that’s a road none of us should want to travel down, because the NEXT president might use that excuse to terminate anyone they don’t like on our side of the border—including anyone of us.

[Papa_Tiger]

...We just can’t kill them on our side of the border without suspending the Constitution....and that’s a road none of us should want to travel down, because the NEXT president might use that excuse to terminate anyone they don’t like on our side of the border—including anyone of us.

I have a healthy fear when people advocate doing away with some part of the Constitution that is standing in their way of reaching their end goals whether I agree with the goals or not. Down that road lies tyranny none of us want to live under whether it is "our" side or "theirs"...

The whole "Us vs. Them" mentality and extreme polarization is another thing that I have a healthy fear of.

[Soccerdad1995]

it occurs to me that they were possibly living in Mexico because 1. it's cheaper and 2. poligamy is illegal here, don't know about there, but if it is, it probably isn't enforced.
What I do know is what happened was horrid and the people who did it deserve a paricularly hot spot further south

Unless they were some breakaway sect, I doubt it, The LDS Church renounced polygamy 130 years ago. Mormons that I've met are very dedicated to evangelism and they very often move to other countries to spread the(ir) "Word".

I'm not sure which part you doubt?

At the risk of going off on a tangent, I've offered wondered how its even possible to break the Polygamy law. You can't get a marriage license if your currently married to someone else. So how do you legally marry the second person to start with?

The only thing I can think of is maybe it's illegal for a married person to have a religious ceremony where they take marriage vows of some sort (with someone else) without getting an actual marriage license? But that can't be how the law works since gay couples were having ceremonies long before gay marriage was legalized, and I never heard of any of them being arrested.

And it's obviously not illegal (in most states at least) to have an affair, or even to agree with your spouse that you'll bring in a 3rd person to live with you who also has a sexual relationship with one of you. That may be immoral to most folks way of thinking, but it's not illegal.

[Flightmare]

it occurs to me that they were possibly living in Mexico because 1. it's cheaper and 2. poligamy is illegal here, don't know about there, but if it is, it probably isn't enforced.
What I do know is what happened was horrid and the people who did it deserve a paricularly hot spot further south

Unless they were some breakaway sect, I doubt it, The LDS Church renounced polygamy 130 years ago. Mormons that I've met are very dedicated to evangelism and they very often move to other countries to spread the(ir) "Word".

I'm not sure which part you doubt?

At the risk of going off on a tangent, I've offered wondered how its even possible to break the Polygamy law. You can't get a marriage license if your currently married to someone else. So how do you legally marry the second person to start with?

The only thing I can think of is maybe it's illegal for a married person to have a religious ceremony where they take marriage vows of some sort (with someone else) without getting an actual marriage license? But that can't be how the law works since gay couples were having ceremonies long before gay marriage was legalized, and I never heard of any of them being arrested.

And it's obviously not illegal (in most states at least) to have an affair, or even to agree with your spouse that you'll bring in a 3rd person to live with you who also has a sexual relationship with one of you. That may be immoral to most folks way of thinking, but it's not illegal.

Aren't marriage records are kept at the state level? If so, I suppose it's possible for a person to marry someone in one state, and marry someone else in a different state.

[oljames3]

Harold Coyle wrote a novel in the early ninties, Trial by Fire, that involves US forces in Mexico. Good read, as all of Coyle's works.
https://www.amazon.com/TRIAL-FIRE-Harol ... 583&sr=8-3

[bbhack]

I heard or read that my g-father was a Mexican POW. This was the time of Pancho Villa and Pershing. This was a short event, and we know what happened. That's a different subject.

I do believe that killing at a distance is a whole new art. Snipers may be obsolete. No, snipers are obsolete.

[The Annoyed Man]

As is typical, democracy is followed by a period of anarchy, then tyranny, before some semblance of democracy/republicanism returns, for the simple reason that large segments of any given society, in periods of extended peace and freedom, desire that EVERYTHING be legal/permissible and decline to ascribe to an archetype of self-discipline/self-denial for the support and maintenance of the society at large.

Socially, we can no longer afford to provide 3 hots & a cot to violent offenders, and await some nebulous determination of accountability that only supports the system processing the offender and does nothing for the society at large.

I believe in redemption, I believe in grace. Regardless of our best intentions and greatest desires, we are at a point where this is no longer a simple difference of perspective, but of good vs. evil. If one does not believe in such concepts, I know this sounds extreme.

I absolutely believe in good and evil, and in the power of redemption. But we either have a Constitution, or we don’t. If you want to declare martial law in order to suspend its protections, that could give you the authority to summarily execute cartel members caught within our borders. It would also infringe on the liberties of law-abiding citizens. And the longer it lasted, the more permanent it would become. Do you trust your gov’t enough to quickly restore the Constitution as soon as the crisis was over? Is being able to summarily execute cartel members worth that price if gov’t turns out to be untrustworthy? Has the gov’t been trustworthy at all for the past 20 years, if not longer? What about this gov’t?

The only rational way to handle this thing, IF we're going to handle it, is through limited spec ops incursions into Mexico, drone strikes, and CBP officers armed with the ability to rain hate and discontent onto cartel members if they stray anywhere near the border. But of course, that would rely on being sure they were cartel, and not some random farm workers.

[surprise_i'm_armed]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpIyaIHsJbc

The above link is the Vice documentatry entitled "The Mexican Mormon War". Credits: This documentary was released 9/26/2012, was made by Vice, and is sourced here from Youtube. It is 41 minutes long.

The primary Mormon families with dual citizenship are the LeBaron's and the Romney's. IIRC, the reason these Mormon families moved from Utah to Mexico was to continue polygamy. LDS (Latter Day Saints) had to outlaw polygamy at the behest of the US federal government, as a requirement to let Utah enter the Union.

I believe Mitt Romney's father was born in Mexico, but moved to Detroit, and was the governor of Michigan. Later Mitt became the governor of Massachusetts. Mitt Romney's LDS mission year was spent in France, where he was a passenger in a car that crashed, causing him to have life-threatening injuries.

The LDS town is an oasis of green in a desert area, attesting to the well-developed work ethic of their community. Although firearms are generally outlawed for Mexican citizens, the Mormons are strapped. They have to be, since the next nearest town is full of cartel sicarios.

Although these American/Mexican Mormon families have been there for years, they speak American English and do not really seem Mexican at all.

SIA

[mrvmax]

I heard or read that my GF was a Mexican POW. This was the time of Pancho Villa and Pershing. This was a short event, and we know what happened. That's a different subject.

I do believe that killing at a distance is a whole new art. Snipers may be obsolete. No, snipers are obsolete.

Your girlfriend was a Mexican POW?

[bbhack]

I heard or read that my GF was a Mexican POW. This was the time of Pancho Villa and Pershing. This was a short event, and we know what happened. That's a different subject.

I do believe that killing at a distance is a whole new art. Snipers may be obsolete. No, snipers are obsolete.

Your girlfriend was a Mexican POW?

That did read funny. Should have been g-father. I'll fix it.

[flechero]

Frankly, I don’t care HOW we kill them; we just can’t kill them on our side of the border without suspending the Constitution....and that’s a road none of us should want to travel down, because the NEXT president might use that excuse to terminate anyone they don’t like on our side of the border—including anyone of us.

Why can't we declare the cartels terrorist organizations and kill them in their own homes?

We routinely operate in other nations to bomb, kill, disrupt terror organizations. It may not completely eliminate the problem but it sure would slow them down.