Military on the Mexico border -- what am I missing?

Great Debates
1

At the risk of being accused of either whooshing or trolling, I have to ask this question, because it’s bothering me. And I assure you, I am neither whooshing nor trolling.

With the increase in violence along the U.S.-Mexico border, some have mentioned dispatching U.S. troops (Army, I assume) to the area. This has brought civil libertarians straight out of their chairs braying that we do NOT deploy U.S. troops in the U.S.

And I’m thinking, we don’t? But isn’t that what the Department of **Defense ** does, is **defend **our borders and coasts from foreign enemies? And if Mexican drug cartel bandidos start fighting their war on our side of the border, are they not foreign enemies?

I was especially appalled by this nugget from AP via MSNBC:

Okay, so let me get this straight: Terrorists fly airplanes into buildings in New York and Washington D.C., and instead of considering terrorism a crime, the U.S. immediately reaches for a military solution and invades foreign countries. But drug traffickers start coming into the United States and shooting up innocent Americans as part of a **drug war **(to use the favorite government phrase) and we use the military as a **last **resort? Is our military only good for invading other countries? Is the U.S. Amy useless for defending our own land?

What the hell am I missing here? Isn’t “homeland security” part of the military’s job?

2

I’m not sure what you think the problem is along our southern border. Do you think Mexico is going to invade the United States? That’s the kind of thing our armed forces are designed to defend against but I think it’s an unlikely prospect.

Drug smuggling is certainly a problem. But calling it a war doesn’t make it a military problem just like calling it a plague wouldn’t mean we should be deploying doctors and nurses along the border. Drug smuggling and its related gang violence is a crime problem and should be handled by law enforcement. Soldiers and marines aren’t trained to enforce laws, conduct investigations, make arrests, and take people into custody - and that’s what’s needed.

3

When did drug traffickers cross the border and massacre civilians?
Of course it should be a last resort. We can’t have the military taking over the roles of law enforcement.

4

Even the actual police, whether Federal or local, can’t solve this problem, just as they can’t solve the problem of smuggling human beings. In my opinion, based on what I have read, and seen in Baja, the basic problem in Mexico is that a small oligarchy reaps most of the fruits of their economic output, and the masses get next to nothing. Police officers, like most others, get paid others and are more susceptible to corruption than their American or Canadian counterparts would be.

For the same reason I think trying to keep people out of the U.S. by actual physical barriers is just plain dumb, not to mention futile.

5

If things really go to hell down there we could easily be looking at refugee camps on both sides of the border seeking refuge from narcoterrorism or the accompanying economic upheaval. If you think the state police and local cops can handle this mess if it happens, I think you’re mistaken.

6

This is directed at the above posters who obviously have no idea what’s going on.

Violence from the Mexican drug war certainly has and is overflowing into the U.S. Latest estimates put the number of Cartel combatants as being larger than the entire Mexican army. Most of the border towns in Mexico are pretty much 3rd world warfare zones at this point. Phoenix isn’t even all that close to the border and is the kidnapping capital of the country now. Guns from here are flowing into Mexico to support the war, and drugs are flowing like water back over here to buy them.

Law enforcement simply cannot handle this at all. If they could, Mexico would be dealing with it. Instead, their army with assault weaponry is being consistently defeated by drug cartel members who are even more heavily armed and numerous.

Nothing extreme has happened yet, but the potential for it is at an extremely worrying level, a level that calls for a much higher level of defensive measures than is currently present. Mexico has gone from a relatively friendly and stable country to one of the countries most likely to collapse in the near future. I don’t mean to sound like some fearmongering “worst case scenario” type person, and I certainly am not, but you have to be stupid to be approaching it with a “live and let live” type attitude, especially if you don’t live in a border state. We’re dealing with people here that make most terrorists look like amateurs, and to call border security a joke would be extremely generous.

If you want cites, go to google news and start looking around.

7

Thank you. I hope you don’t consider me one of the posters who doesn’t know what’ going on – I-25 through Colorado is an artery of the drug trade and, frankly, it scares the hell out of me. Our state patrol, sheriff’s deputies and local police are just good enough at finding and taking down drug shipments that they’ve become a fairly routine irritant. If Phoenix is the kidnapping center that you say it is, Denver can’t be far behind.

I’m not suggesting that the military be used to fight the drug war – that’s been a lost cause since the beginning. But when Mexican nationals send battalions of irregulars into the United States to enforce territorial claims then, yes, they are invading and the Defense Department needs to defend us.

8

The current Economist has five articles about the war on drugs. Of course, they suggest stopping the war. I can’t believe it has gotten to the point that the cartels are better armed than a nation’s military. Hell, half of the problem is that members of the military defect to the cartels!

It’s absolutely terrible.

9

I remember having a conversation with my wife a few months ago and saying to her we need forces on the border. At the very least to help stem illegal immigration. I have no problem with immigrants (i am one from the UK), but i had to pay thousands of dollars and waste years going thru all the paperwork and criminal background checks, it only makes sense to secure the border not only to help prevent drugs/criminals getting over the border but to ensure we have protection for the American homeland.

I find it absurd that we have so many checks etc etc on airports but any terrorist could fly/sail to Mexico and walk or drive into the states without checks. With the amount of drugs entering the country a day(no cite but to meet demand it must be alot) it surely would not be hard to get a bomb, or anyone into America.

I can understand the argument of American military personal operating in the states but is there not a barrier region between the countries? 100 meters or so inbetween American land and Mexican land. I can not imagine Mexico having a issue with a “joint” operation in that land to secure both borders. No one allowed to cross at all except at the official entry points, and if the military is stationed inbetween the checkpoints, then the border guards can focus on checking the cars etc for illegal goods. into and out of the country.

It does not seem unreasonable to me. And the fact that American servicemen and woman are defending us from harm at the border, it far different from jackboots walking down the main drag in downtown anywhere USA.

I hear the news sometimes mention Mexico becoming a narcostate and people flooding over the border to escape it, and here in Texas, it concerns me who might be flooding over the border without any knowledge of who or what they could be or why they are fleeing.

We seem very willing to have nuclear weapons pointed at potential threats around the world, but not have any forces ready to defend or secure our most worrisome border? thats just not common sense.

Now i am not under any illusion that the Mexican drug cartels are planning a invasion of the states, as they would not stand a chance when the military got seriously involved, but i would imagine most of the drug cartels are not the smartest guys in the world, the bosses maybe, but the average “soldier”…? Either way, the risk is there, and there should be a defense.

Because

If you follow the logic of American forces not being allowed to operate in the USA, then what is to stop the cartels from occupying a US town or city?.. its not like we could send in the army.

How many police officers and SWAT teams would be lost before we surrendered the entire country because the constitution does not allow us to defend the country with our military machine.

10

Who are you arguing against? I think everyone knows it’s a bad situation. But your proposal makes no sense. What do you want American armed forces to do? Invade Mexico? Launch airstrikes? Shoot everyone in Arizona that has a Mexican accent?

If there’s rioting in Mexico it’s a problem for Mexican authorities to deal with. I would be strongly opposed to the United States sending troops into Mexico to restore order.

Kidnappings, drug sales, illegal firearm sales, smuggling, illegal border crossing are all criminal problems like I said before. There’s a strong argument to be made that we need a lot more police along the border but there’s no call for soldiers.

11

I started a thread about this very subject a few weeks ago, and I invite you all to read it because I posted some information in that thread that I think would shed some light on the scope of exactly what is taking place on our southern border.

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=506186&highlight=states+mexico

I’ll post more later, but for now it’s time for bed. I hope that you all will parse that thread because it’s a threat that I think many in this country are unaware of.

12

The problem is that it’s a police issue. Drug cartels aren’t foreign enemies invading the US, even though their criminal activates may occur on the US side of the border, and the US military is forbidden from being involved in law enforcement by the Posse Comitatus Act. When Pancho Villa actually invaded the US, the military was called up and sent into Mexico because he had conducted a military action against the US. Simply saying criminal foreign nationals are committing their crimes inside the US doesn’t cut it.

These drug cartels are in the end selling their product to US citizens. Deploying the military would involve them in law enforcement; there isn’t an invasion of foreigners but rather the transfer of drugs into the US to be consumed (illegally) by US citizens.

In the end, there are very good reasons to forbid the military from being involved in domestic affairs barring open rebellion. If the military is involved in domestic law enforcement, it’s involved in political action. One need only look at the history of most 3rd world countries over the past 60 or so years to see the problem with the military having political power.

13

If you have family in the area of Juarez, get them out now.

14

“US Customs and Border Protection secures the homeland by preventing the illegal entry of people and goods while facilitating legitimate travel and trade.” As a part of the Department of Homeland Security, CBP includes the U.S. Border Patrol, as well as air & marine, field operations, and intelligence coordination divisions. The FBI, DEA, and and other agencies also have their roles in securing our borders against this kind of thing.

15

It’s actually pretty common. Kidnappings in Phoenix have skyrocketed, though it’s usually people who are involved in the drug trade. It crosses the border all the time but it’s contained.

One thing I guess people who haven’t been following this don’t understand is that the reason Mexico has deployed troops is because its law enforcement is compromised. Where they aren’t directly involved with the cartels they are terrified of the cartels. The cartels together have as many soldiers as the Mexican army just about. The US on the other hand is a whole different ball game. Our law enforcement is far more organized, has a lot more assets at its disposal, has much better information management and isn’t compromised by the cartels.

16

I’d also like to point out that the US already DOES have a sizable military presence on the border near Juarez.

Ft. Bliss and intelligence service EPIC

17

If things are that bad, could Obama close the land border? (Leaving the sea and air borders open.) Order that anyone trying to cross be shot on sight?

18

The saying is Plata o Plomo: Silver or Lead. Choose our money or choose our bullets. The corruption exists everywhere in Mexico though, from law enforcement to political leaders to the military itself. As others in this thread have pointed out, some of the cells operating for the cartels are actually defectors from the Mexican military who have access to intelligence and arms on that side (though the majority of weaponry used in slayings come from over here). The most notorious of those would be Los Zetas, the enforcers of the Gulf Cartel. Those guys have been recruiting kids here in the States as hitmen for a long time.

Also, I wouldn’t be so naive to think that that kind of corruption doesn’t exist on this side of the border; our border agents are routinely bribed into letting shipments cross (political leaders too). Everyone seems to have a price, and I don’t think that will change with the funds that these guys have. I’m sure that they’ve already corrupted local law enforcement to some degree, it’s just a matter of time before they get to our military (assuming they are ever deployed along the border).

19

Terrorism is a crime and terrorists can be convicted of it. (N.B. This justice has nothing to do with the appalling mess that is Guantanamo Bay.)
The US formed an international alliance to hunt down Bin Laden in Afghanistan.
However Bush’s invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. The only reason given was (non-existent) WMDs. :smack:

Have you got a cite for drug traffickers killing Americans in the US? DOn’t they want to make money from US citizens, not kill them?

The ‘war on drugs’ is not a war, has no end goal and is just politicians spending taxpayers money to say to the voters “of course we are doing something”. :rolleyes:

US citizens wish to spend billions of dollars on recreational drugs; the US Government declares most of them illegal, but allows tobacco (which kills 50,000 people a year in the UK alone) and alcohol, because there’s profitable taxes on these two drugs.
Nothing to do with danger, all about getting money to be re-elected.

20

Mexico is already invading the United States.