Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?
 

 
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
    Loading
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • The End of Mexico?

    Posted by Zenpundit on April 3rd, 2010 (All posts by )

    An ineffective or inappropriate state response will make this tactic go viral:

    ….Last week, at least 30 Mexicans from the town of El Porvenir walked to the border crossing post at Fort Hancock, Texas, and asked for political asylum. Ordinarily, their claim would be denied as groundless, and they would be turned back. Instead, they were taken to El Paso, where they expect to have their cases heard.

    No one doubts that they have a strong claim. Their town on the Mexican side of the border is under siege by one or more drug cartels battling for control of the key border crossing. According to Mike Doyle, the chief deputy sheriff of Hudspeth County, Texas, one of the cartels has ordered all residents of the town of 10,000 to abandon the city within the next month.

    “They came in and put up a sign in the plaza telling everyone to leave or pay with their own blood,” Doyle said. Since then there has been a steady stream of El Porvenir residents seeking safety on the American side of the border, both legally and illegally. Among them are the 30 who are seeking political asylum.

    In recent days the situation in the impoverished, dusty border town has grown worse. According to Jose Franco, the superintendent of schools in Fort Hancock, the cartels have threatened to execute children in school unless parents pay 5000 pesos in protection money.

    And on Wednesday night, according to Doyle, several houses in El Porvenir were set on fire, and there were reports of cars loaded with furniture leaving the town.

    I saw this coming. I’m sure that so has anyone else studying insurgency or military history who stopped to give the matter five minutes of serious thought. There’s nothing magical about geographic proximity to the United States that would prevent this tactic, if applied widely and backed by lethal examples, from working. What has been done in the villages of Bosnia or Dar Fur can be done in towns of northern Mexico.

    Foresight, apparently, does not include governmental officials though:

    Authorities fear that an incident might spark a mass exodus by the residents of El Porvenir that might cause them all to surge across the border at once.

    Doyle says there are no plans yet to set up camps for an influx of refugees. “There is just no way to plan for that,” he said. “We are waiting to see what happens. We will use the standard natural disaster procedures if it happens — the Red Cross and housing at the schools, and if it gets worse, the state and the federal government will have to step in.”

    I would not bet my mortgage that the Feds would step in – at least not until the situation became an unmitigated, if entirely avoidable, humanitarian disaster. Here’s a hint: Very large numbers of people + a desert + no planning – Food – Shelter – Water = Dead children on CNN. Human physiology is the same on the Rio Grande or in Arizona as in Sudan.

    “No way to plan for that”? WTF? There’s no examples of handling influxes of war refugees anywhere in world history? Give me a break. What they really meant is that this kind of contingency planning is politically unacceptable to national security officials because it would offend the Mexican government, a few members of Congress and some activist constituencies in the Democratic Party’s base.

    Political Correctness in national security affairs is the autoimmune disease of our body politic.

    ADDENDUM:

    Mexico drug gangs turn weapons on army – latimes.com ( Hat tip to Morgan)

    In coordinated attacks, gunmen in armored cars and equipped with grenade launchers fought army troops this week and attempted to trap some of them in two military bases by cutting off access and blocking highways, a new tactic by Mexico’s organized criminals.In taking such aggressive action, the traffickers have shown that they are not reluctant to challenge the army head-on and that they possess good intelligence on where the army is, how it moves and when it operates.

    HG’s WorldZenpundit asks! The End of Mexico? or The End of U.S. Sovereignty?

    The bigger question looms, how will this impact the sovereignty of the United States to secure our borders and ensure tranquility?

    ….You will note after you read the link embedded above that this blog concurred and wrote on the same issue twice last year and the year before.

    ….When I read each day that the cancer of lawlessness gains control like a reverse “Oil Spot Strategy” right on our southern border; and then read about this and this from the President of a country where we are spending our most precious resource to secure.


     

    95 Responses to “The End of Mexico?”

    1. James R. Rummel Says:

      You aren’t the only one who has been writing about this, Zen. My main concern has been about the violence spilling over the border into the United States. Even though I am concerned over the ever increasing possibility, few people agree with me on the issue.

      I think a sudden influx of refugees will prove to be more interesting to most.

    2. tehag Says:

      Bienvenidos a los Estados Unidos a America

    3. Mrs. Davis Says:

      I doubt much will be done until El Paso is threatened. And by then it will be too late.

    4. Sgt. Mom Says:

      There already has been an influx of Mexican citizens into the Border – there is a very nice gated community north of San Antonio which has been the favored ‘second home’ for well-to-do Mexicans for years. They have been fleeing the violence for a long time.
      But the residents of a border-town decamping wholesale to the American side – I don’t think that has been seen in decades. Not since the days of Pancho Villa, anyway.
      And you are right – there will be nothing much done about this on a Federal level, because it will just be too damned embarrassing for both the American and Mexican governments. By the time it makes a splash on CNN, then it will be too late for many.

    5. reliapundit Says:

      solution: sell it to china.

    6. Sean Says:

      I’m always befuddled why no one of any serious consideration even mentions the fact that is American’s appetite for drugs, notably cocaine and marijuana, is fueling these terrorist groups in Mexico.

      It’s not like it’s even a vague, tangential relationship. Our money is the one and only cause of this conflagration, the resulting corruption in every country between the Rio Grande and Colombia, and the immigration to the U.S. that results.

      Why is this so hard for people to understand? Why is this impossible for politicians to acknowledge?

    7. JeanE Says:

      The situation in Mexico is a potential disaster, but SOME people have been preparing for this, even if the federal government is not. Here’s an article in the El Paso times from Feb. 2009 about the state government developing emergency plan to deal with the collapse of the Mexican government. I haven’t heard anything else about this over the past year, but hopefully they completed development of the plan and Texas will be in a position to deal with the developing crisis.

      http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_11655113?source

    8. cottus Says:

      The baby boomers, the so – called “worst generation” strikes again. Not only has politics deteriorated to the worst situation since the civil war, but this Mexican violence is rooted in the drug culture born and nurtured by this generation. Every time I see “420 friendly” I get extremely angry and unfriendly. Crimes without victims? Hardly. And legalization? Be careful what you wish for. I have had about enough of tinkering with what was once the greatest nation on earth.

    9. KPD Says:

      The answer to this problem is easy.

      Airdrop pistols and ammo to all residents so they can defend themselves against these guys. With Mexico’s draconian gun laws the general populace is left utterly defenseless.

    10. Narniaman Says:

      Sean:

      “I’m always befuddled why no one of any serious consideration even mentions the fact that is American’s appetite for drugs, notably cocaine and marijuana, is fueling these terrorist groups in Mexico.”

      So. . . . it appears that a rather quick solution would be for Mexico to declare all elicit drugs legal — and then everyone large and small could start selling the stuff — in Mexico — and it would deprive the drug gangs of all their revenue.

      Is that what you are recommending?

      Or are you recommending the immediate death penalty for drug possession in the US — that would probably diminish some of the clamor for the ilicit stuff.

      Surely you’re not recommending that the US legalize Meth and Cocaine and heroin so it could be obtained in a vending machine, are you?

    11. James R. Rummel Says:

      “I’m always befuddled why no one of any serious consideration even mentions the fact that is American’s appetite for drugs, notably cocaine and marijuana, is fueling these terrorist groups in Mexico.”

      I’ve been saying it for years! Closing off the southern US border to illegal crossings would also shut down the major routes for drugs entering the US. Starve the cartels of their cash.

      https://chicagoboyz.net/archives/6627.html

      But I suppose I don’t fit the bill as a person of serious consideration.

    12. Anonymous Says:

      My principle argument for constructing a fence (with a gate) is to maintain an ordered flow for when the southern countries collapse. We’re not there yet but this is exactly what I was talking about.

    13. RKV Says:

      A bit off topic, sorry. “Worst generation?” We’re not the ones who invented and implemented the Ponzi scheme known as Social Security. We didn’t elect the politicians of both parties who spent the money and put worthless pieces of paper in the Bureau of the Public Debt in Parkersburg, WV. We paid their medical bills through socialized medicine for older folks (aka MediCare) too. We’re the tax serfs who have been enslaved for our entire working lives by the so-called “Greatest Generation.” Now the supposed cure for this moral failure is enslave our own children with Hellth Care. God help us.

    14. mockmook Says:

      Sorry, last I checked there is a functioning government in Mexico. This is their problem.

      If the reports are accurate, then a Mexican army should be showing up to root out these “insurgents”.

    15. tm Says:

      We can’t keep drugs out of prisons. Why would anyone think we can keep them out of our country?

    16. morgan Says:

      The Mexican army has been there ever since Calderon took office. They don’t seem to be having much success.

    17. walrus Says:

      For those who believe that ending drug laws would end all of this, you should read the article a little closer. The cartels are turning more and more to kidnapping, extortion, murder as sources of income. For those parents who were told their children would be murdered unless they paid 5,000 pesos, that has nothing to do with drug trade and legalizing marijuana or coke would have no effect on that. That’s extortion, and in this climate of fear, extortion is easy money, maybe easier than running drugs. So we do have some blame with our appetite for drugs, but if their drug income source was shut off I don’t think the cartels would then begin to look for jobs in factories. These are evil people and unless they are put in jail or killed they will continue to prey on the poor people of Mexico.

    18. What I Think Says:

      One word: Prohibition.

      We all know its cause (social control, institutionalized looting) and we are all aware of its effects.

      So, let’s grow up already.

    19. Matty_J Says:

      There is planning for this, and has been for years. However, the action matrix from this plan is being delayed due to political considerations. We’ve been gaming this and planning at least since the White Falcon group days, and know what to do and how to do it. Politicians refused to do the deployments and actions indicated which would stop this.

    20. Leigh T Says:

      Im an American who lives in central Mexico. You wont see the entire country collapse as it centers on Mexico City and what is happening on the border isnt and wont happen there. That the government has lost much of its control over the north and parts of the west is certain, the question is how much control they have lost and if they can get it back.

      There are two conflicting historical trends vis-a-vis the northern states… Mexico center sure doesnt want to lose any more territory but on the other hand, the North has always been kind of written off as uncivilized since Aztec times.

      Whether there is a “collapse” of the Mexican federal government or whether its that they lose control over the border states doesnt really matter to the US, the result will be the same.

    21. NukemHill Says:

      What they really meant is that this kind of contingency planning is politically unacceptable to national security officials because it would offend the Mexican government, a few members of Congress and some activist constituencies in the Democratic Party’s base.

      I disagree. Maybe it’s the conspiracy theorist in me, but this strikes me as the perfect impetus for the Amnesty crowd. If the situation really breaks down, and a mass exodus from Mexico to the U.S. occurs, with a justifiable majority asking for political asylum, then there’s really no way the anti-amnesty faction can cry foul and block the amnesty shills from implementing a sweeping “reform”. Said reform consisting of throwing our hands up and arguing “We have to help these poor people! We can’t just send them all back! It would be inhumane!!!!”

      Instant amnesty for tens of millions of immigrants–legal or otherwise.

      Political Correctness has nothing to do with it. It’s a cynical political calculation of epic proportions.

    22. Whitehall Says:

      While a strong physical fence would be very helpful, one fearful US response is the Blackjack Pershing Solution.

      That would be an expeditionary raid by US troops to directly attack the cartels’ forces.

      This has its problems. Is the US Army that much more resistant to corruption than the Mexican forces? It would take strong, patriotic leadership at the top, one with a clear plan, to prevent that.

      The Mexican government has to be internally divided for events to get this far. Would the Mexican army and federales side with the invaders or with the indigenous drug dealers, the ones with the cash and the reprisals against their families?

      Cutting off the cash flow would involve legalization and low street prices. That will, of course, move the price/demand curve toward higher consumption, especially amongst the major Democratic voting blocks. Cigarettes are legal but so highly taxed that it still pays to smuggle. I can see where California’s initiative to legalize pot would be helpful but pot is not the main money maker for Mexicans, I don’t think.

      Seems to me that the proper course is two major initiatives. First, stronger and serious border controls. I still have a bumper sticker I’ve yet to apply to the car – “Where’s the Fence?” Second, find and support the Mexican elements who can get control of the cartels. That may involve outbidding the drug guys but we can still print US currency BETTER and FASTER than they can. There has to be some elements within the Mexican Army where a general would accept a large direct payment from the US to retake and hold these border towns.

    23. CP Says:

      Here’s a thought… upon felony conviction for illegal drug possession, sale, or use, deport that person (yes, even American citizens) to Mexico. Then the druggies infesting our culture won’t have to go so far to get their fix,and the cartels can sell on their own soil.

      This country would be far better off if we rid of ourselves of self-indulgent, irresponsible people who are so incredibly stupid that they think poisoning their bodies with toxic substances makes them “cool” or ‘enlightened.”

    24. wolfwalker Says:

      “No way to plan for that”? WTF? There’s no examples of handling influxes of war refugees anywhere in world history?

      The statement is so stupid on its face that I’m sure it was taken out of context. Most likely he meant there’s no way for a town or county government to plan for such an event.

      And while there are many incidents of large-scale refugee movements, there are few if any examples of such movements being successfully handled, without herding thousands of people into squalid mass camps with limited food and even more limited facilities.

    25. INVA$ION USA!! Says:

      Please see http://www.BorderInvasionPics.com

      It’s all there.

    26. Michael Kennedy Says:

      Surely you’re not recommending that the US legalize Meth and Cocaine and heroin so it could be obtained in a vending machine, are you?

      There is a reasonable case for legalization of heroin with registration and dispensing through pharmacies. There is a good case for legalization of marijuana although it is ironic that the federal nanny state is trying to outlaw tobacco at the same time. Heroin makes people passive and content (and constipated) so they are not a community safety problem. Actually, many people can function quite normally with morphine levels to control severe pain. Heroin causes more euphoria so it is unlikely that users would be employable at any but menial jobs.

      Marijuana should be subject to laws similar to alcohol in terms of motor vehicles, age restriction, etc.

      Cocaine makes people hyperactive and paranoid, a bad combination. It also has pretty severe cardiac consequences with arrhythmias and sudden death, even with modest levels of chronic use. Methamphetamine has similar problems with hyperactivity and severe affect on judgement.

      Legalization is caught up with morals and politics so nothing useful will be accomplished. When the Harrison Narcotic Act went into effect and opium was removed from many of the “tonics” sold throughout the country, thousands of farm wives were said to have gone into withdrawal. The Sears, Roebuck catalogue carried an item that included cocaine and a syringe for $1.50. during the 1890s. Something like 2/3 of opium users before the Harrison Act were women who took such tonics for menstrual cramps and the like.

      A drug to block cocaine receptors may be coming soon. That could solve a lot of the cocaine problem. It might make local anesthetics ineffective and heroin blockers exist now with methadone and narcan.

      Maybe we could redeploy some Special Forces to Mexico to hunt down the cartels if Mexico would allow it. They probably won’t until the government collapses. It has largely lost control of the border states.

    27. Teddy's SEARCH+RESCUE Says:

      The numbers are staggering – http://www.ImmigrationCounters.com

    28. Cannoneer No. 4 Says:

      FEDGov won’t step in until it’s too late. The States of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona & California and the Counties along the border are going to have to deal with this as best they can, with the resources available.

      Sheriff’s Posses, State Guards/Defense Forces, and Emergency Management Agencies will have to step up. The assistance of “militias” may very well be too desperately needed to turn down, and these Irregulars will have to be monitored, mentored, and liased with to keep them solving more problems than they cause.

    29. MANHATTAN DECLARATION Says:

      See more about the ongoing INVASION @ http://www.AmericanPatrol.com

    30. Cheney W. Halliburton Says:

      I would not bet my mortgage that the Feds would step in – at least not until the situation became an unmitigated, if entirely avoidable, humanitarian disaster… …that can be blamed on someone else, preferably a Republican.

      FTFY.

    31. HANOI JOHN KERRY Says:

      The latest ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION news – http://www.OneOldVet.com

    32. K Says:

      Wow. Perfect timing.

      Once the population of a target western country starts to get wise to the influx of illegal immigrants, the next step for the government is to declare wholesale lots of them as political asylum seekers and bring them in that way. That’s the way it has worked in Europe and Australia.

      And the really fun part is that they’ll be here legally, get government subsidies and then be affirmative actioned directly into the mainstream – as leftist voters.

    33. jcm Says:

      In Venezuela began in the same way. Farc made a business of racketeer Now, they are asking for “vacuna ” payments for not kidnap you nor to stole your car not only in the frontier but deep into the country. And it began before Chavez became their accomplish

    34. Anthony Says:

      Mexicans in the north of Mexico are more mixed (less Indian) than in Central and Southern Mexico. (Look up the list of folks hunting with Dick Cheney when he shot that guy, for example.)

      That means some of those dead kids in the desert are going to be white. Won’t *that* make a splash on CNN?

    35. Jay Manifold Says:

      Well, this is certainly flushing some paranoids out of the woodwork. I’m particularly enjoying the “contributions” of our $PAMMER above about the INVASION!!1! — the contrast between hysteria about (eg) “anchor babies” on one website and the “defense of the sanctity of life, traditional marriage, and religious liberty” in the Manhattan Declaration is quite amusing.

    36. comatus Says:

      Messrs. Brynner, McQueen, Bronson, Vaughn, Coburn, Buchholz and Elmer Bernstein: please call your office. Your services are in demand.

    37. Cannoneer No. 4 Says:

      Y’all could be doing more than wringing your hands.

      HomeGuard

      Virtual Border Watch

      There are ways that interested Americans from across the country can help.

    38. Arty Says:

      Some day a strong rain will come and wash all the scum off the streets.

    39. Doc merlin Says:

      I have to agree with rfd. The distributed solution is usually the best one.

    40. MAJ Mike Says:

      Same thing happened during the 1910 Revolution. Massive numbers of Mexican citizens fled the bloodshed of the revolution for peace in the U.S. Most U.S. citizens of Mexican heritage can trace that heritage no further than 1910.

      So, here we go again. Big questions will be how well will these new refugees assimilate into American culture, and how many “refugees” will be gang members seeking to extend their influence farther into El Norte. Maybe they’re not truly questions at all. Both situations are playing out right now in the U.S., and not too much to our advantage.

    41. Anonymous Says:

      Don’t worry, dead children on CNN means that Barack and Rahm will have yet another crisis to exploit.

    42. Lindsey Abelard Says:

      Perhaps its time to end Prohibition II. Prohibition II has not been any more successful than Prohibition I and has indeed fueled the same criminal violence that Prohibition I did during the 20’s and early 30’s.

    43. buddy larsen Says:

      Nice aim, cannoneer. Windage on target, elevation just beyond no-man’s land.

    44. Anonymous Says:

      Nukemhill (11:10am), how about letting the United Nations handle it? They have no problem letting generation after generation of Palestinians live in refugee camps, so why couldn’t they provide the same humanitarian treatment here for Mexicans?

      (And for the clueless: Yes, this is actually a Modest Proposal.)

    45. SteveM Says:

      There is also nothing magical about presence on US soil which will transform Mexicans into something other than what they are. Mexico is a shambles because it is full of Mexicans. The fantasy that people are interchangable units is well on its way to destroying America and the West in general.

    46. Steve H Says:

      > the contrast between hysteria about (eg) “anchor babies” on one website and the
      > “defense of the sanctity of life, traditional marriage, and religious liberty”
      > in the Manhattan Declaration is quite amusing.

      Maybe they “contrast” because they are the views of different people who, like, have different opinions and stuff (have you noticed that about people?)

    47. SteveM Says:

      If the situation really breaks down, and a mass exodus from Mexico to the U.S. occurs, with a justifiable majority asking for political asylum, then there’s really no way the anti-amnesty faction can cry foul and block the amnesty shills from implementing a sweeping “reform”. Said reform consisting of throwing our hands up and arguing “We have to help these poor people! We can’t just send them all back! It would be inhumane!!!!”

      Yes, these words by John Adams sem apt.

      “Be not intimidated… nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your liberties by any pretense of politeness, delicacy, or decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for hypocrisy, chicanery and cowardice.”

    48. Henry Butler Says:

      This story is at least a week old…haven’t heard any reaction to this from the President of Mexico, have you? Has any mainstream media reporter asked Madam Clinton if they have queried the Mexican government on what they intend to do? For that matter, has any reporter asked the White House what their plans are? Are we just living in an Alice in Wonderland vacuum due to the total incompetence of the media and the government?

    49. SteveM Says:

      the contrast between hysteria about (eg) “anchor babies” on one website and the “defense of the sanctity of life, traditional marriage, and religious liberty” in the Manhattan Declaration is quite amusing.

      I’m not sure why you think so, considering that the concept of “anchor babies” has zero intersection with those of “the sanctity of life, traditional marriage, and religious liberty”.

      But ignorant sneering is always the hallmark of the liberal.

    50. SteveM Says:

      Just looking over the rather draconian comment policy on this blog, and it occured to me – of all the blogs on the net, the ones with the least committment to free and open debate are … the libertarain ones. Hit-and-Run at Reason is the only exception I can think of. Many libertarians on the net don’t allow comments, period.

      Why is it that people who claim to be free-speech absolutists and urge it on others are not in practice especially interested in it themselves?

    51. jgreene Says:

      Since we have narco-terrorists operating just across and within the border of the United States this should have a MILITARY response coordinated with the Mexican Military.

      We have to ELIMINATE, KILL WITH NO MERCY, the “narcos” especially the LEADERS.

      We MUST build a REAL FENCE along the border restricting access to the USA NOW, not sometime in the future. It’s time to begin paying close attention to those CRETINS in the Narco Community who are killing innocent men, women and children in the USA and in Mexico.

    52. JR Says:

      What is happening in Mexico is a humanitarian tragedy, largely attributable to the US-led and enforced (via the Clinton List, extradition, drug certification, etc.) War on Drugs. The US is responsible for the crisis culminating in Mexico. Denying this is like saying without Al Capone, there would have been no alcohol-related violence in Chicago. That, furthermore, prohibition of alcohol was not to blame for the deaths, and that the solution is more police to crack down on criminals. ‘Win the war at any cost!’

      The victims will be largely innocent people, and the response is the responsibility of the US, Mexico and the larger international community. I do believe that humanitarian intervention is appropriate and merited given the situation. While up until now there have always been a list of political demands necessary for the declaration of an ‘internal armed conflict’, ignoring the situation or providing a police-only/intelligence response since this single requisite is lacking is tantamount to condemning thousands to pointless suffering, and possibly death.

    53. seguin Says:

      Filibuster.

    54. Lee Says:

      I have three words for Mexico:

      The Second Amendment.

      The reason why these drug dealers have been able to terrorize the country is because the Mexican people are actively denied the right to keep and bear arms. This in spite of the fact that the Mexican constitution actually acknowledges this right.

      The Mexican civil war that we are now seeing will end when the Mexican people possess the political power that comes from the barrel of a gun. Until then their story will be one of a corrupt central kleptocracy struggling with other criminal organizations for control of the country.

      Real democracy is not possible unless each individual possesses real power.

      Do the world a favor, donate firearms to the citizens of Mexico.

    55. Anonymous Says:

      Let the town be taken completely over by the cartel, then with Mexican permission send in some F-14s. Should just take a few minutes to clean out the problem.

    56. Hucklebuck Says:

      Fence. Fence. Fence.

    57. Don Says:

      Have Mexico declare that all civilians leave just as the gangs want, wait one week and then 3-4 fuel/air bombs on each of the cities.

    58. Kirk Parker Says:

      Anon @ 3:08pm: Are you saying let the Iranians take care of them? (No one else has the F-14 in service, though I suspect Iran’s capability is fairly nominal at this time.)

    59. Paul A'Barge Says:

      The influx of hoards of Mexicans into the USA leading to endangered children is Barack Obama’s wet dream.

      Remember the words of Rahm … “a crisis is a terrible thing to waste”. Big problems call for big government solutions.

      Bosnia? Haiti? Iraq? now Mexico. Say hello to the US Military and Obama-nation.

    60. Poole Says:

      Anonymous:

      The only country in the world that now flies the F-14 Tomcat is … Iran.

      The United States Navy retired its last Tomcat to the boneyard about three years ago.

    61. M. Report Says:

      I am all in favor of power subsiding
      from the Federal Govt. to the States,
      but this is extreme. On the other hand,
      once the States take on the power, they
      will not be giving it back, and the
      Feds will not be able to take it back;
      Good job…we wil take over now…not.

    62. Jay Manifold Says:

      I expect pseudonymous drive-by commenters to be lazy and stupid, so I did the work they won’t, or perhaps can’t. See http://www.city-data.com/city/Texas.html for …

      Internal migration 2000-2006: +451,910
      International migration 2000-2006: +801,576
      Housing units change from 2000-2005: +827,829
      Land area: 261,797 square miles

      Spending two whole minutes with a calculator demonstrates that that’s at least one new housing unit for every 1½ people moving into the state. And new arrivals per unit area works out to 1 for each 130 acres. Pretty crowded living conditions … if you’re Daniel Boone.

      In general, Texas appears able to easily accomodate in-migration of over 200,000 per year, 4,000 per week, 600 per day. I also note that the state’s biennial budget for FY 2010-2011 is balanced.

    63. zenpundit Says:

      Hmm…that’s a lot of comments.

      Matty_J wrote:

      “There is planning for this, and has been for years. However, the action matrix from this plan is being delayed due to political considerations. We’ve been gaming this and planning at least since the White Falcon group days, and know what to do and how to do it. Politicians refused to do the deployments and actions indicated which would stop this.”

      I am not a domestic policy guy, even on security issues but from what I do know from studying the external aspects of national security that sounds highly plausible. From what I have heard from a few contacts, Mexico issues are hyper-politicized right now, even more than they normally are.

      Hi James Rummel,

      Did not mean to imply that I was alone in my concern, just amazed at the capacity of our high officials in DC to continue saying “Nothing to see here, move along….”

      As to the suggestion of US intervention in Mexico, direct intervention with open military forces, I’m not in favor of that except in extremis to push narco-militias away from our own border. Aid, COIN training, intel sharing and perhaps covert -ops is more workable. The Mexican state has to become more competent and mnore legitimate by reducing it’s commitment of resources to enriching the oligarchy and investing in its own people and economy. More statesmanship and less corruption, in other words.

    64. Vinny B. Says:

      The real problem is not with Mexico, it is with the United States, who is at fault for all Mexico’s problems and should be forced to pay billions in reperations. Americans buy the drugs and supply the cartels with guns. And George W. Bush is curiously way to too involved in the problem to avoid mentioning. He was the Governor of Texas, then President, yet the violence and drugs continued to grow. Hmmm. doesn’t take a genius to put two and two together. I am sure Smith & Wesson and other gun manufacturers gave Bush a lot of money to look the other way while drug cartels just walk into gun stores in El Paso and buy hundreds of guns which are used in the war.

      Stop blaming the Mexicans simply because they are Mexican, and start looking at the real cause of itall, America and George W. Bush.

    65. Paul A'Barge Says:

      Jay Manifold: In general, Texas appears able to easily accomodate in-migration…”

      Do you live in Texas, Amigo?

      Well I do. And frankly I would much prefer that the so-called in-migration be IYBY (In Your Back Yard).

    66. James R. Rummel Says:

      “Americans buy the drugs and supply the cartels with guns.”

      No denying that the drugs are mainly bought by Americans, but you need to prove that they are getting the guns from here.

      Time after time, the claim that the cartels are getting their arms from common sources in the US has been debunked. The only people who continue to make such claims are the “Blame America First” crowd, along with those who favor fun control laws.

      Or their dupes, of course.

    67. jdm Says:

      I’ll admit that I don’t know a whole heckuva lot about this, but there seems to be two competing perspectives – two, because so many of the others are unrealistic, silly, or just goofy to the point of being sarcasm (right, Vinny B?).

      Anyway, there’s this
      The Mexican state has to become more competent and mnore legitimate by reducing it’s commitment of resources to enriching the oligarchy and investing in its own people and economy.

      which is true, but there’s also apparently this
      You wont see the entire country collapse as it centers on Mexico City and what is happening on the border isnt and wont happen there. That the government has lost much of its control over the north and parts of the west is certain, the question is how much control they have lost and if they can get it back.

      The latter is quite troubling and unfortunately seems to fit the evidence. The Mexican state wants to govern but is unable to or won’t. I’d have to think there’s so much money in them drugs that it may be attractive to government officials.

      Perhaps it’s like tourism. It was my understanding that as long as (American) tourists “stay in the resort”, they won’t be bothered. And they aren’t. Resort owners pay protection money, perhaps.

      Surely drugs are worth enough money that the cartels have/had been given a free hand as long as certain government officials got a taste. But maybe this got out of hand and the cartels don’t respect the government anymore.

      I don’t know. A recent issue of City Journal had an article titled The Mexicanization of American Law Enforcement. It looks like it’s arrived here as well.

    68. Zimriel Says:

      Time to google “Camp Of The Saints”.

    69. SteveM Says:

      I am sure Smith & Wesson and other gun manufacturers gave Bush a lot of money to look the other way while drug cartels just walk into gun stores in El Paso and buy hundreds of guns which are used in the war.

      I’d really like to think that this is inspired parody. Considering some of the people you see online, it may be in earnest.

    70. Thomass Says:

      My prediction, the US government will use this for another push to disarm Americans….

      See some of the comments from drones here. They’ve already been fed the narrative to back it…

    71. Anonymous Says:

      Sean Says:
      April 4th, 2010 at 10:09 am

      I’m always befuddled why no one of any serious consideration even mentions the fact that is American’s appetite for drugs, notably cocaine and marijuana, is fueling these terrorist groups in Mexico.

      America had an appetite for drugs before 1914 and 1937. Look up “cocainized Negros”.

      What changed? Prohibition.

    72. M. Simon Says:

      Anonymous Says:
      April 4th, 2010 at 8:27 pm

      Was me.

      M. Simon

    73. schizuki Says:

      “Is the US Army that much more resistant to corruption than the Mexican forces?”

      Ummm… yes. Exponentially so.

    74. Robert Schwartz Says:

      BO fiddles while Mexico burns.

    75. SteveM Says:

      I’m always befuddled why no one of any serious consideration even mentions the fact that is American’s appetite for drugs, notably cocaine and marijuana, is fueling these terrorist groups in Mexico.

      I’m befuddled that American’s appetite for drugs somehow fails to fuel terrorist groups in Canada. What’s with that? What could possibly cause the “Americas appitite=>terrorist groups” chain reaction to break down? It’s baffling.

    76. SteveM Says:

      I expect pseudonymous drive-by commenters to be lazy and stupid

      I’m not gonna just sit here while you insult Zenpundit like that! Put ’em up!

    77. M. Simon Says:

      “Is the US Army that much more resistant to corruption than the Mexican forces?”

      Ummm… yes. Exponentially so.

      They will be offered exponentially more money.

      Doesn’t any one understand supply and demand?

    78. M. Simon Says:

      I’m befuddled that American’s appetite for drugs somehow fails to fuel terrorist groups in Canada.

      It does. Outlaw biker gangs are terrorizing Canada. Do a search.

    79. Jay Manifold Says:

      Paul A’Barge: I lived in Texas from 1989-98 and own property there now to which I plan to retire.

      If the in-migration were occurring where I live now, it would be an indication of overwhelming success, just as it is in Texas. The Texan economy and institutional functionality is better than almost any other state in the US and far better than Mexico’s. Well over a thousand fellow Americans move to Texas every week. They know what they’re doing.

    80. Kirk Parker Says:

      M. Simon,

      “Exponentially more money” is a losing game.

    81. Alex Says:

      “One word: Prohibition.
      We all know its cause (social control, institutionalized looting) and we are all aware of its effects.
      So, let’s grow up already.”

      I agree; let’s grow up, already…

      There are literally tons of all kinds of confiscated illegal narcotics in the hands of US authorities.

      Poison every swinging ounce of it with cyanide, and put it all back on the street, and continue to do so until the trash that consumes it A) is dead on their living room floor, or, B) suddenly loses interest in buying the stuff.

    82. Tim McD Says:

      Where is Blackjack Pershing when you really need him?

    83. SteveM Says:

      If the in-migration were occurring where I live now, it would be an indication of overwhelming success, just as it is in Texas.

      Texas is California circa 1992. Check out the in-migration there. The same demographic trends that brought down the latter must bring down the former in the next decade.

    84. SteveM Says:

      Outlaw biker gangs are terrorizing Canada. Do a search.

      I’m still looking up “cocainized Nergos”! I’ll have to get to “Canada: Failed State Due To US Drug Laws” a little later.

    85. THIS... IS CNN Says:

      Free Health Care for the WORLD!

      1 Hospital, 2 ILLEGAL ALIENS more than $3,000,000 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gAYUfrFOLw

    86. Sarattus Says:

      The failure to take Mexico’s degeneration seriously (as opposed to, say, Tiger Woods coverage) by federal officials and big time media is shameful. This has been going on for years. The murders and machine gun battles have been terrorizing border residents and brought commerce to a virtual standstill. It is insane to sit around and allow narco armies to take control or our border cities – and that is exactly what is happening. I found an interesting web site which updates events in Reynosa, a hot bed of violence snd terror, http://www.reynosalightning.com

    87. Steph Houghton Says:

      “This country would be far better off if we rid of ourselves of self-indulgent, irresponsible people who are so incredibly stupid that they think poisoning their bodies with toxic substances makes them “cool” or ‘enlightened.’”

      yes and if we ended the war on drugs and gave people welfare in yearly lump sums we would be rid of them. But people like you would rather fight the moronic war on drugs.

      Alex poisening booze did not work durring prohebition. Why do you think it will work now.

      Learn some fucking history and econ or don’t comment for god sake.

    88. Amos Says:

      While I favor the legalization argument, it’s simplistic. Columbia has improved quite a lot since the 80s and cocaine has not got any less illegal. So there is some virtue to killing drug producers + cartels. Columbia also got a more useful, free market government which focused on decent jobs. The core of the drug trade is evil. But the margins may be merely opportunistic.

      If Mexico wasn’t such a collectivist hole of corruption and vice, it would be more effective at providing good jobs on the one hand and crushing the cartels on the other.

      Thankfully, they can buy some time with Hope and Change and the ideological open-borders crowd, by pushing their surplus armies of disaffected north. A free market approach to borders and jobs will not last forever when you import massive amounts of people happy enough with collectivism to do nothing about it in their own countries.

      That you would be kind to your neighbor says nothing about whether your neighbor would do justice to you. Thus we have prisons and fences.

    89. Carol Says:

      I am always perplexed by the drug numbers. This is a country of 350 million people. If even 12% use illegal drugs everyday that’s only 42 million, about the number that don’t have health insurance. I know lots of people. I know lots of people who probably drink more alcohol than is good for them. Everybody I knew in college in the seventies smoked dope. But nobody I know does that anymore. And none of the kids in my family and their friends do it.
      So where are all these drugs going? Who’s using them? Who makes up this huge marketplace for drugs?

    90. Jay Manifold Says:

      Texas is California circa 1992. Check out the in-migration there. The same demographic trends that brought down the latter must bring down the former in the next decade.

      SteveM: Thanks for the falsifiable prediction; it will actually be useful eventually. I contend that Texas is not California; it’s the difference between “scarcity mentality” (CA) and “abundance mentality” (TX). Frankly, there are hordes of illegals in Texas right now. They are neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for institutional collapse (see Illinois, which has 3x the per capita deficit of California but a small fraction of the illegal alien population). Whether incoming Americans will turn TX into a blue-state hellhole remains to be seen, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

    91. tehag Says:

      If Sonny Bono can extend the copyright law to 100+ years, then the length of residential time to become to US citizen can be extended to 50 years. Welcome all the refugees: only their children will be citizens.

    92. ng Says:

      One more: http://www.alipac.us/article3640.html

    93. ng Says:

      Forgot to mention one of the hits in El Paso. http://newsblaze.com/story/20090607060640mcut.nb/topstory.html
      The cartel lieutenant lived behind the Chief of Police.

    94. ng Says:

      Truth be known, the cartels are already here. http://deadlinelive.info/2009/08/13/juarez-cartel-infiltrates-border-patrol-and-fort-bliss-army-base-informant-assassinated-by-u-s-soldier/

      http://narcosphere.narconews.com/node/1424

      http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1888111,00.html The Mayor and various other government officials live in El Paso, Texas.

      http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_13142923?source=most_viewed

      http://www.internationalpen.org.uk/go/news/mexico-two-journalists-killed-in-chihuahua-and-michoac-n

      http://dianawashingtonvaldez.blogspot.com/2008/07/journalist-author-of-killing-fields.html

      http://www.thefreelibrary.com/SALINAS+TESTIFIES+IN+KILLING+:+EX-MEXICAN+PRESIDENT+DENIES…-a084033757

    95. Anonymous Says:

      Its time the US reinstitute manifest destiny. We could use this to secure the border(s, help an impoverished people, protect the sovereignty of the USA, help control the drug trade, and so forth. The problem in Mexico is out of control and doing nothing, or what e have done in the recent past has solved no problem for the mexican people, or for the United States. In this regard there is no choice.

      Get support from the Mexican rulers and Start the invasion now.