Armed Mexican personnel surround and disarm US soldiers on US SOIL

The international border is in the middle of the Rio Grande. The river is usually dry right now, maybe just a trickle of water. There is a working relationship with Mexican Police "usually". Sometimes BP and Mex PD meet on of the riverbank to ask each other for help searching for subjects in the rivers vicinity. Does shit get out of hand once in a while, yes.

Mexican Military is a whole different animal. They DGAF! They roll gun trucks with belt fed weapons and battle rifles, HK G3's. They work for the cartels providing security, patrol and intel operations. They are pretty good at decoying LE to an area then allowing drugs/people to get by in another area. Usually when there is Mex mil presence, shit is happening somewhere.

What happened to those soldiers is f%@ked up. Complacency, lack off situational awareness probably. There is a good read on Lightfighter forum on what happened.

LE is usually outgunned on the border, you sometimes have to pick your gunfights.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lowprone

As usual Big Army has it's head up it's a**, and somebody will get killed before we fix this mess.

---

Would it be incorrect to say Big Army really doesn't want the job of acting as a symbolic force at the border?

I'm all for the military securing our southern border, if you look here and other places, I've said it before. But, at the same time it needs to be more than just at the edict and whim of the current POTUS. There needs to be funding and planning for a coherent, permanent strategy.

If you think of it in terms of training opportunities it has a lot going for it, if managed and funded properly.

Folks in the area, how much of your land are you willing to have the gov take by imminent domain? ETA: I ask that question because according to USA Today:

USA TODAY NETWORK obtained digital property maps from all 13 Texas counties with border frontage, and analyzed every parcel within 500 feet of that mid-river line.

If the wall and construction for it were to overlap that swath, it would require seizure of some portion of almost 5,000 chunks of land, nearly all of it privately owned.

Is such a seizure feasible? Consider the progress made after the Secure Fence Act, when U.S. officials filed more than 320 federal court actions to condemn private properties.

Some cases were settled for as little as $100 for an easement. Others resulted in federal payments as high as $5 million for 6 acres. But, nine years after the first cases were filed with a federal court in Brownsville, 85 remain in litigation.

How far back should we go - ten miles? How much that cost?

FWIW, this USA Today series seems pretty infomative, you can navigate it from here: https://www.usatoday.com/border-wall...nce/605855001/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 26 Inf

Would it be incorrect to say Big Army really doesn't want the job of acting as a symbolic force at the border?

I'm all for the military securing our southern border, if you look here and other places, I've said it before. But, at the same time it needs to be more than just at the edict and whim of the current POTUS. There needs to be funding and planning for a coherent, permanent strategy.

If you think of it in terms of training opportunities it has a lot going for it, if managed and funded properly.

Folks in the area, how much of your land are you willing to have the gov take by imminent domain?

---

To me, if the military won't protect our borders, then it needs to be disbanded as an institution. I can promise you that when Jefferson et al were writing the Constitution they NEVER believed the military would be used for "peace keeping" in places like Kosovo etc....They exist to defend this country. Period. They are under the authority of the civilian government, they don't really get a vote in the mission honestly. Lastly, unlike the crap in Kelo etc....eminent domain for "forts, magazines" etc....is actually specified in the US Constitution. Whether someone likes it or not, that's a legitimate use of the condemnation authority of the government. It should be a fair but swift process.

Video released of armed men escorting illegals across the border.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/heavily-a...ce-video-shows

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flenna

Video released of armed men escorting illegals across the border.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/heavily-a...ce-video-shows

---

All the more reason for our Armed Men to stop them. It's why we have them.....but, just another day on the border.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Esq.

To me, if the military won't protect our borders, then it needs to be disbanded as an institution. I can promise you that when Jefferson et al were writing the Constitution they NEVER believed the military would be used for "peace keeping" in places like Kosovo etc....They exist to defend this country. Period. They are under the authority of the civilian government, they don't really get a vote in the mission honestly. Lastly, unlike the crap in Kelo etc....eminent domain for "forts, magazines" etc....is actually specified in the US Constitution. Whether someone likes it or not, that's a legitimate use of the condemnation authority of the government. It should be a fair but swift process.

---

I don't think it is won't. I think it is more a matter of Congressional action to make it a permanent mission and funding it.

Troops were ordered to the border by the President, there are obviously troops there.

Like most of what President Trump initiates it was done on the fly, with little or no forethought as to how the action is going to be sustained or funded.

Lastly, unlike the crap in Kelo etc....eminent domain for "forts, magazines" etc....is actually specified in the US Constitution. Whether someone likes it or not, that's a legitimate use of the condemnation authority of the government. It should be a fair but swift process.

So, how much of you stuff is likely to get ED'ed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 26 Inf

I don't think it is won't. I think it is more a matter of Congressional action to make it a permanent mission and funding it.

Troops were ordered to the border by the President, there are obviously troops there.

Like most of what President Trump initiates it was done on the fly, with little or no forethought as to how the action is going to be sustained or funded.

---

Fair enough on the will/won't issue but as to Trump- What choice did he have? Congress has PROVEN they will DO NOTHING. For decades. Should the President (any President) as commander in chief simply sit back and ignore an obvious threat to this country? Let tens of thousands of people flood over our borders, and their success in doing so leading to still MORE people coming? Because they would...... He used what he had available, right, wrong, he DID SOMETHING and if nothing else at least raised the issue to a point of discussion that needs to be had.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by docsherm

I will break this down very simply.


Those soldiers are lucky as F@#K. Based on the reports and the description they were at best Mexican Army working for a Cartel. They could have rented up with tires around them and set on fire. Bad things happen to the CBP all of the time. Dealing with a foreign gov is easy..... they usually play by the rules and don't do crazy crap.

On the other hand when you are dealing with non-state actors everything goes out the window. That is what is going on there.

For anyone that HAS actually worked these areas the variables and actions must be relooked at as the rules of the game are completely different. Never take anything for granted. Don't think that the State Department will get you out because you may simply end up with a bullet in the back of your head in the middle of nowhere before it ever comes to that.

The real issue here is sending out a 2 man patrol without long guns. This is Big Army and they need to be rolling with the same rules they did in other parts of the world. 2 Vech minimum. The command needs to step up and not set the soldiers up for failure.

Does anyone remember the soldiers that got rolled up in Kosovo back in the 1990s? They get messed up and werr very lucky to get released.

---

Yep.

Those g-damn Mexicans were NORTH of the Rio Grande. Don't tell me they were "lost". Bullshit. Had I been in the same situation (one of TWO guys armed with only an M9 and faced with assault weapons) I'd have probably done the same thing. And hoped to God (as docsherm alludes to) that I didn't end up with a bullet to the back of the head in the middle of the desert.

The idea is to up the ante so to speak: no more two-man "patrols", instead several guys armed to the teeth with an Apache on call. I DO NOT GIVE A F**K if it "threatens" a war with Mexico. What the hell are they gonna do about it? They could/would be smoked in VERY short order. F**k them. Given the situation down on our southern border it should be made explicitly clear we aren't playing games, up to and including the sham Mexican "army" and their shady dealings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RioGrandeGreen

The international border is in the middle of the Rio Grande. The river is usually dry right now, maybe just a trickle of water. There is a working relationship with Mexican Police "usually". Sometimes BP and Mex PD meet on of the riverbank to ask each other for help searching for subjects in the rivers vicinity. Does shit get out of hand once in a while, yes.

Mexican Military is a whole different animal. They DGAF! They roll gun trucks with belt fed weapons and battle rifles, HK G3's. They work for the cartels providing security, patrol and intel operations. They are pretty good at decoying LE to an area then allowing drugs/people to get by in another area. Usually when there is Mex mil presence, shit is happening somewhere.

What happened to those soldiers is f%@ked up. Complacency, lack off situational awareness probably. There is a good read on Lightfighter forum on what happened.

LE is usually outgunned on the border, you sometimes have to pick your gunfights.

---

That is why I am 110% for killing them wholesale in situations like we are discussing. We EASILY have the ability to make them wish they'd never even thought of coming near the border. In these situations they are a hostile, armed force crossing our border. Deal with them like we did the Iraqi Republican Guards.....I have ZERO issues with that.

Next time take out the offending unit and even pop over the border and take out any backups in Mexican territory. Make it nasty enough and they'd only test it once. Screw the "international community" and any wailing or gnashing of teeth that would inevitably ensue. The only thing that would matter is that the Mexican "army" would be unwilling (and just as importantly UNABLE) to do jack shit about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ABNAK

That is why I am 110% for killing them wholesale in situations like we are discussing. We EASILY have the ability to make them wish they'd never even thought of coming near the border. In these situations they are a hostile, armed force crossing our border. Deal with them like we did the Iraqi Republican Guards.....I have ZERO issues with that.

Next time take out the offending unit and even pop over the border and take out any backups in Mexican territory. Make it nasty enough and they'd only test it once. Screw the "international community" and any wailing or gnashing of teeth that would inevitably ensue. The only thing that would matter is that the Mexican "army" would be unwilling (and just as importantly UNABLE) to do jack shit about it.

---

Hell Yeah.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk