Sara A. Carter, Washington Times, March 3, 2009
The U.S. Defense Department thinks Mexico’s two most deadly drug cartels together have fielded more than 100,000 foot soldiers—an army that rivals Mexico’s armed forces and threatens to turn the country into a narco-state.
{snip}
The disclosure underlines the enormity of the challenge Mexico and the United States face as they struggle to contain what is increasingly looking like a civil war or an insurgency along the U.S.-Mexico border. In the past year, about 7,000 people have died—more than 1,000 in January alone. The conflict has become increasingly brutal, with victims beheaded and bodies dissolved in vats of acid.
The death toll dwarfs that in Afghanistan, where about 200 fatalities, including 29 U.S. troops, were reported in the first two months of 2009. About 400 people, including 31 U.S. military personnel, died in Iraq during the same period.
The biggest and most violent combatants are the Sinaloa cartel, known by U.S. and Mexican federal law enforcement officials as the “Federation” or “Golden Triangle,” and its main rival, “Los Zetas” or the Gulf Cartel, whose territory runs along the Laredo,Texas, borderlands.
The two cartels appear to be negotiating a truce or merger to defeat rivals and better withstand government pressure. U.S. officials say the consequences of such a pact would be grave.
{snip}
As a result, Mexico is behind only Pakistan and Iran as a top U.S. national security concern, ranking above Afghanistan and Iraq, the defense official added.
{snip}
Independent analysts warn that narco-terrorists have infiltrated the Mexican government, creating a shadow regime that further complicates efforts to contain and destroy the cartels.
“My greatest fear is that the tentacles of the shadow government grow stronger, that the cartels have penetrated the government and that they will be able to act with impunity and that this ever stronger shadow government will effectively evolve into a narco-state,” said Ted Galen Carpenter, vice president for defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute in Washington.
{snip}
Original article
(Posted on March 10, 2009)
Comments
This might become a military situation for us despite the unwillingness of our rulers to defend our borders. It would be well beyond the ability of the National Guard to control thousands of armed Mexican thugs, even if the Guard weren’t more than half Hispanic in some parts of the Southwest. Our Regular troops now have lots of experience in urban and desert warfare, but would they be constrained by the ACLU when fighting invaders on American ground? Would the Rules of Engagement forbid violating Mexican soil? Would captives be subject to the Geneva Convention, or Federal rules of evidence? POWs or criminals? This has the makings of a very dirty war, where soldiers seek and destroy the enemy, and the courts and Congress sit back and accuse them of atrocities.
“The two cartels appear to be negotiating a truce or merger to defeat rivals and better withstand government pressure. U.S. officials say the consequences of such a pact would be grave.”
“Would be grave?”
Isn’t it a little late to consider a situation that has been building the last ten years at an accelerated rate, all of a sudden, as being “grave?” I mean, the only difference between five years ago and now is that the extent of corruption is out in the open. The situation has always been grave.
The unfortunate reason for the entire affair can be laid at the feet of multiculturalism just as the sub-prime crash rightly was. Radical Clinton officials insisted on giving loans to people who couldn’t afford them, and literally tens of millions of people defaulted in such great numbers so quickly it caused a global crash.
Likewise, the radical leftists in the Clinton administration, and Bush, REFUSED to put troops on the border to prevent drug runners and gang members, terrorists and illegal aliens from waltzing across the border anytime they wanted to. And now, like the economy, it’s out of control.
If we had not bowed to a multicultural agenda in both cases, there wouldn’t have been an economic crash and there wouldn’t be the establishment of drug cartels within our own borders, and more than likely the inability to freely move drugs into the US would have meant the drug gangs could never have gained in any significant strength, which would have made the problems less intensive within Mexico itself.
So, once again, it is multiculturalism that is basis for our woes. You know, the ideology that gave us diversity, which is our strength?
Some strength, eh? A collapsing economy and drug killers established in major cities all over the US.
If a brilliant military strategist were given an assignment to destroy the US without attacking it militarily, he couldn’t have done a better job of destruction than what our so called leaders and multicultural heroes have done to us.
But, just hang on tight, because it’s going to get a hell of a lot worse than it is right now. I can guarantee it.
Clearly, a foreign threat of this size requires a militia size response along the border. If BHO is going to create jobs, maybe he ought to hire able-bodied retired folks to patrol the border and surveil for Mexican infiltrators. Read about how the Swiss do it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Switzerland
The U.S. Defense Department thinks Mexico’s two most deadly drug cartels together have fielded more than 100,000 foot soldiers—an army that rivals Mexico’s armed forces
This many well paid, motivated and unrestrained soldiers could rival the U.S. Military, never mind Mexico’s military. With so many of our own military of hispanic origin if not nationals, they would find fighting against their own families or relatives something they would not do.
I know that many who read this will disapprove, but this is why the US should decriminalize drugs. Make them legal and that takes away the power from the cartels. Remember you history and what happened in the 30’s with Prohibition.
But try to say something wrong on Mexicans and the “Liberals” will label you a “racist”.
When I hear someone coming up with this “justification” of proliferation of Mexican drug cartels: “they simply meet the demand created by the American drug users,” I always think: “You SOB!”
One more example of how hostile the “Liberalism” is to our society.
Here is a prediction of what will happen if Mexico
Up to 50 Million Mexican Refugees of the Mexican Civil
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=142777
It may sound outlandish, but what can’t we put past
Just as in PROHIBITION - DRUGS won’t disappear BUT they can be regulated to a high degree. Regulated and TAXED. This would eliminate the Drug Dealers and the crime that goes with them. Why don’t we admit it Our Own Government has already shown in many ways (Oliver North) that it has no problem dealing drugs (To Americans) when it wants to, already?
I just want to add a response to Eric Holder’s alleging that banning AK-47 “assault weapons,” in this country, will mean that Mexico will not be able to arm the drug trafficker’s 100,000 man army, because the AK-47 is the drug gang’s choice of weapons. That’s nonsense, and everybody should know why.
First of all, an AK-47 is a fully automatic rifle, which is already banned in this country, so Mexico does not purchase them here. There are AK-47’s manufactured here, but they are a semi-automic type, and, although they could be converted to fully automatic, it would be an unecessary task, because the cartels can buy the Kalishnikov AK-47, fully automatic, from more than two dozen countries around the world.
Hugo Chavez just bought 175,000 of them from Russia. Although Russia wouldn’t offer them to drug dealers there’s plenty of other arms dealers who would, and I imagine Chavez’s interest is to have enough on hand to sell them to FARC and other insurgency groups in the area, plus to the cartels in exchange for by-passing Venezuela on drug distribution and/or just to undetmine the US by arming groups hostile to them.
Also, I think it’s important to mention the following to prove what a liar this pitiful attorney general is. His concern is with automatic rifles not available in the US, just so he can start by banning certain rifles in order to give the radical leftists a toe hold of sorts for further restrictive bans and laws, because he knows he can’t create dictatorial control over an armed public.
But isn’t it odd that he never mentioned that the drug gangs had other weapons besides the AK-47 that cannot be bought in this country either, because they’re illegal? For example, the border patrol has confiscation photos of 60mm mortars, (These are out-dated in the US military but they are small and can be easily hand carried, like in an excursion across the border) land mines, RPG’s (Rocket propelled grenades that can penetrate armor.), night vision goggles, sniperscopes with night vision, deadly claymore anti-personnel mines, light anti-tank weapons, M-79 grenade launchers, white phospherous grenades with the capacity to burn clear through a human being upon contact with hundreds of red hot projectiles and can’t be extinguished, and regular hand grenades. I suspect they could even get 155 millimeter howtzers and armored personnel carriers on the black market as well.
But, keep in mind, with a 100,000 man army, already armed to the teeth, how big a deal would it be to take over Mexican armories and drive off in tanks, APC’s pulling howtzers, 50 caliber machine guns and anti-aircraft weaponry? In fact every piece of military equiment the Mexican government has is available to the cartels anytime they decide to lay seige to an army post/armory and take it over. Have no doubt they have highly qualified pilots on their payroll also.
For this sub-standard attorney general to lie so blatantly just in order to ban guns in this country, because he knows bullying governmental ideologies can’t succeed when the populace is armed is an absolute disgrace, but, more importantly, it shows the shallowness of his mental abilities.
While he can fool the effeminates and the ignorant, he’s not even remotely aware that hackles were raised by millions in this country after he made that statement, because they know full well why he was making it. Such ineptness makes me feel embarassed for him, but I have no doubt his black arrogance will not allow for any embarassment on his part. I’m sure he’s congratulating himself on how cleverely he handled the situation, just as he did when he called whites cowards for failing to address the issue of race.
This entire administration is beyond bizarre. The entire globall economy is crashing and their front burner items are, benefits to blacks, socialist controls, and gun control, as well as a fairness doctrine, attempting to keep broadcasters from revealing their childishly hidden agendas en masse to the people in this country. Nothing is being done to stimulate the economy or to protect the border.
Besides ignoring the economic catastrophe, they could be facing a narco-state takeover to our south at any moment that would probably mean the final straw for the existence of this country and would set it instantly aflame with Mexicans, both legal and illegal here, who have relatives that would be counted as collateral damage in any US/Mexican conflict that would be sure to follow. Blacks would also become involved against Hispanics by supporting “Obama’s war.”
Whites would be in there probably with fully formed militias trying to protect their families, friends and properties. It would be a mess, but it’s not as important to concentrate on to this pitiful administration than banning guns and trying to prevent criticism of their unintelligent agendas via the airwaves. These dopes I truly believe don’t have a clue as to the seriousness they’re facing. They are still having their nightly White House parties and the naturally arrogant messiah eats up the adulation he receives. In fact he can’t really exist without it.
Well, for those of you who voted for this pitiful man, I hope you like the probable future you’ve created for us, because try as you may to deny it, it will not mean we aren’t in for a very bad situation.
It´s all a matter of political will. It took Mussolini but two regiments of Bersaglieri and six months to make short of the Sicilian Maf (most of whom washed unto US shores where the FBI coddled them and nursed them and employed them to protect the harbours from nonexistent Nazi saboteurs - a classical case of Bad Idea).
The 100,000 number sounds awfully high - it must include every last water carrier.
These ‘soldiers’ don’t have to be so well trained, just ARMED! all of our own military don’t have the same training as, say, the SF/Rangers Marine Recon/Seals and I think many have paid for that lesser training with their lives.
Legalizing drugs is the best option.
Go have a look a Professor Norm Matloff’s-a member of the numbersusa.com collective- recent post-yesterday-about the debate between two hindu “Americans” about the H-1 B visa program. Professor Norm Matloff stated that he opposses the H-1 B visa program because it harms hindu “Americans”. For Professor Matloff and Roy Beck ,Native Born White Americans have no legitimate racial interests. Only hindus,hispanics and muslims have legitimate racial interests. Do not send penny to numersusa.com. I despise numbersusa.com.
