"Mexican military chopper crosses the border, shoots at agents"---News Tuscon

a reply to: g146541

I agree, he did break a Mexican law.

...and I also believe an aircraft flying into another sovereign nation's airspace without clearance is a violation.

Game on!

originally posted by: Fylgje
It sounds like Mexico needs some freedom. When they start doing things like this then it's time to line our borders with the military and stop it. The US should retaliate immediately. This is an act of aggression and an act of war.

The US violates Mexican airspace all the time and vice versa sometimes it is a mile or two or in this case 90 meters. When two nations with stong ties are jointly patroling a common border this is not unsual. They normally just contact each other. In this case the chopper chasing drug dealers fired a couple of shots not knowing it had barely crossed the border. Warning shots no doubt as they saw unknown armed men, before realizing their mistake.

So it's a matter of joint ties and how well laws are enforced.

Again, everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others.

a reply to: kismetpair927

So how does it feel when others come to our country and shoot at us ..lol
This was a small incident, and already panicking? ..We've been doing a HELL OF A LOT MORE than that to others every chance we get ..!

Until someone outright bombs the sh**& out of us ..and defeats us .. we will not learn to leave others in peace ..

originally posted by: Fylgje
It sounds like Mexico needs some freedom. When they start doing things like this then it's time to line our borders with the military and stop it. The US should retaliate immediately. This is an act of aggression and an act of war.

retaliate? Are you kidding me?

Man, some people are just flat out war-crazy.....

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: FlyersFan
a reply to: neo96
Thing is .... bring in tens of millions of illegals and then give them all amnesty. Then they become citizens and voters. So yes, the illegals have serious future potential as a voting block for someone ....

Sure do.

7 amnesties

IF a certain party would stop alienating us. They wouldn't have to make people from other countries their 'base'.

Every few years when the LEGALS have wised up to their snip.

It's amnesty time!.

So this is all a left thing, right? Its only the dems, right?

As the nation's attention turns back to the fractured debate over immigration, it might be helpful to remember that in 1986, Ronald Reagan signed a sweeping immigration reform bill into law. It was sold as a crackdown: There would be tighter security at the Mexican border, and employers would face strict penalties for hiring undocumented workers.


The law granted amnesty to nearly 3 million illegal immigrants, yet was largely considered unsuccessful because the strict sanctions on employers were stripped out of the bill for passage.

www.npr.org...

Again, this is not a partisan thing.

If Mexico was a large oil producer I imagine this would have been a great casus belli. My imagination is running with the possibilities for this event, but it was probably just a stupid crew or crew member on this helicopter, who did something stupid. Granted it was much more than a mistake or accident, and one has to be pretty callous to attempt to kill someone, especially in this manner. I mean you have to assume that you could kill somebody if you are going to be raining fire down on them with such a large caliber weapon.

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Wookiep
a reply to: captaintyinknots

We don't need to militarize our "streets" to protect our borders, I'm not talking about a police state.

We're hardly under attack.

Some would beg to differ.

I am one of them.

They cry about those 'illegal' invasions in the ME.

But its crickets about that foreign invasion in to this country that has been going on for decades.

Why hasn't the right done anything about it? As you said it has been going on for decades so why haven't they militarized the border. Is the GOP afraid their supporters will lose their cheap labor force?

a reply to: buster2010

Is the GOP afraid their supporters will lose their cheap labor force?

What 'cheap' labor force ?

Think you mean the long lines at the welfare office.

Why work ?

When they don't have to.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: buster2010

Is the GOP afraid their supporters will lose their cheap labor force?

What 'cheap' labor force ?

Think you mean the long lines at the welfare office.

Why work ?

When they don't have to.

So they aren't taking our jobs and ruining the middle class then?

a reply to: kismetpair927

I don't quite understand Mexico's thoughts on this. "Hey, let's attack a richer* and better equipped nation and see what happens...". It's like they're trying for the Darwin award.

As Yuppa said, I believe a military presence on the border is a good idea. We need less militarized forces within our country and more at the border, not the other way around.

originally posted by: captaintyinknots

Again, this is not a partisan thing.

For some folks it is ALWAYS a partisan thing.

>sigh<

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: buster2010

Is the GOP afraid their supporters will lose their cheap labor force?

What 'cheap' labor force ?

Think you mean the long lines at the welfare office.

Why work ?

A cheap labor force is correct. Here in Mexico one cannot be hired into a legitimate job nor obtain government benefits if their immigrations status is not correct. The US could do the same if it really wanted to, but that would defeat the purpose of keeping the back door open to undocumented immigrants. You may find this shocking but some politicians try to pander to their larger constituency by giving a false public stance on hot-button issues while in reality their loyalty and vote goes to the business community that contributes generously to their election fund and welcomes labor cost-cuts and other political benefits in whatever form they can receive them - so that 'back door' stays open to people who will work cheap, forego many normal work benefits available to legitimate workers, and not complain.

When you speak of the "long lines at the welfare office" I am assuming you have been there and have seen them, and that you know those persons are not US citizens or otherwise legitimate immigrants with the proper status? Or are you perhaps 'profiling' those persons based on apparent race or ethnicity?

As regards this border-crossing incident, it appears to be akin to a foot-foul or an out-of-bounds play. Blow the whistle and throw out a penalty marker, it's not like the US hasn't commited any similar foul in the past. These things will happen again, I am sure, such is life in this neighborhood. But I suppose if you're the bigger team you expect you can play more Fast and Furious without a foul, eh?

a reply to: Erongaricuaro

A cheap labor force is correct

I don't think so especially considering that 'living wage' crap that is going on.

Then figure in that 'raise the minimum wage crap.

And then there is facts like this:

100 million Americans not working

The 102.159 million Americans not working in December is not the all-time record of Americans not working. That all-time record was set in October, 2013, at 102.896 million. The employment-population ratio that month was an even more pitiful 58.2%.

WELFARE LINES.

Quote Erongaricuaro - "A cheap labor force is correct"

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Erongaricuaro

I don't think so especially considering that 'living wage' crap that is going on.

Then figure in that 'raise the minimum wage crap.

And then there is facts like this:

100 million Americans not working

WELFARE LINES.

I have no doubt you folks are going through hard times and it is tough to make ends meet, even that it is being made tougher with wage and labor laws. Those are reasons cheap labor that would work below the legal wage, overtime, and conditions standards is being hustled through your back door by your own business community who are buying off your politicians to keep those doors open instead of re-instating temporary migrant worker programs like you had in the pre-80's era.

No doubt you have lines at the Welfare offices, but are you sure most of those people are not US citizens or do not have the proper immigrations status? I am guessing some people who are complaining about this are assuming their skin color is what determines their citizenship or immigrations status, or is just a handy way to "profile" them.

originally posted by: captaintyinknots
a reply to: Wookiep

We don't need to militarize our "streets" to protect our borders, I'm not talking about a police state.

You are talking about putting military inside of the borders of this country. That is militarizing our streets. The minute you have military protecting the border, you will have military used with INS, which means you will have military on your streets.

Unless you are talking about simply stationing military along the border, but not giving border control any power over them, i fear its a VERY slippery slope.

Some would beg to differ.

As is their right. But they are wrong. Plenty of places in the world are under attack. Our southern border isnt one of them.

Thats not to say it wont ever get there, but in the real world, funneling money and drugs and weapons into an area, then claiming "we're under attack" when those things are used, isnt very logical.

You are twisting words and ideas in order to make it more sinister than was intended. You don't need military in order to protect the boarder better. Using better weapons and armored vehicles would be a start, and wouldn't require any military what so ever.

Just looking for an argument in other words.

Cnn is now reporting that a Mexican official is refuting the claims that it shot at agents in U.S. territory.

Link

originally posted by: neo96
Even with the corruption of the Mexican military.

The US border will never be militarized.

That would inflame the base of a certain political group who just wants their votes.

Doesn't matter to them one damn bit who gets killed.

Should the border be secured ?

Yes!.

Should border agents be shot at.

NO!.

and it won't be some of that "certain political group" getting killed, either.

the mexicans should have been forced to give tomerissi (sp) back for that little wrong turn.

correct me if im wrong but anything coming im from another nation is sopose to be military
it would be a foren threat

and in this case yea should of been shot down like they couldent tell who they where shooting at

act of war maby not but i garentee u of they lets say did this to a base close to the boarder it would not of been a apoligy but hunted down and killed

someone needs to buy the boarder patrol a couple of Omen 300 win mag ar-10's Yep a semi 300 win mag. That'll shut down any more "accidental" shots being fired at boarder patrol by the mexican military. Cars, helicopters all of those would be toast with one of those firing back at it.