It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

It's time for intervention

page: 3
3
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2018 @ 07:03 AM
link   
a reply to: alldaylong

United States, and Canada.
edit on 10-8-2018 by BotheLumberJack because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 10 2018 @ 07:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: pointessa

originally posted by: YouSir
a reply to: Alien Abduct



Ummm...don't you think the cartels are already controlled by factions of US.inc....?

I mean just look at how the poppy...blossomed...after our country making in Afghanistan...they're now the number one producer...and an epidemic of heroin...into every small and large American community...

Why invade Mexico when we already control the cartels...

Drugs are a trillion dollar business...and Unk Sam is neck deep in distribution...


Problem...Action...Solution...








YouSir


Sadly, you are right. This is the most accurate post of the bunch. How naive to believe the US military is intervening to "help" another country, there is always an ulterior motive. Where were they in the Rwanda genocides? There was nothing to be gained or manipulated there.


That’s absolutely correct. When we went to war in Iraq the second time I was for liberating the Iraqi people however I knew they weren’t going in there for that reason although that’s what they said.

I called Rush Limbaugh and actually got on air. Here was my question that stumped him. Why are we liberating the Iraqi people but we don’t liberate the North Korean people when they are under more oppression than the Iraqi people? He couldn’t answer the question of course so he just danced around it for a bit then moved along.

I knew the answer and you know the answer, it’s because the only thing we will gain from invading and liberating the North Korean people would be a pile of American dead bodies. No oil there so the hell with their people.



posted on Aug, 10 2018 @ 09:46 AM
link   
What South America country's?

Not all South America are # holes.

Many are fast growing economy's that are quickly modernizing.



posted on Aug, 10 2018 @ 06:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

Hahaha, I got it... yeah, must have had my head down.



TheRedneck



posted on Aug, 10 2018 @ 06:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

have you looked at the numbers?

I think many american towns are just as bad.

i felt like you when i first heard but then i looked at the stats and listened to the boers say they will not leave and only need aid to defend themselves if need comes up.
edit on 10-8-2018 by howtonhawky because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2018 @ 08:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Vector99

Do you think that America has a right to intervene militarily in any arbitrary country around it, and for no good reason?

Isn't that just a bit evil?


They would if said country signed off on it. For instance in Mexico the cartels are so powerful they rival even their own government.


Do you honestly believe such a ridiculous statement?

That's like saying the Mafia are more powerful than the US government.

Lets look at some facts: Total earnings of all cartels per year, $49.4 billion max.

Total military budget of Mexico (excluding domestic budget for police, which is about $5 billion for Mexico City alone, with a total annual expenditure for the Interior Secretariat of $3.8 billion), $67.54 billion max out of a total GDP of $1,046 billion. (Mexico uses pesos but I have converted all figures to equivalent US dollars).

You have to remember that many of those same cartels are represented within US borders and yet the US government has not been able to remove them. This doesn't mean that they are more powerful than the government.


The Mexican government could sign a deal with us and allow us to go in and route out all the cartels and any other intity deemed a threat by the Mexican government such as very violent dangerous gangs.


It has. Mexican Drug War From Wikipedia The US and the American authorities combined have been working together for years.


They would probably have to make some minor to moderate adjustments to how their government operates so as to make it less susceptible to corruption.

However corruption may be an inherent feature in their culture and societal structure and it may just return after a short period.

I think our money would be better spent just building an extremely effective wall along with all the fancy security features that would play along with the wall to make it nearly impossible to cross. Hell we could build it with just one tenth of our military budget.


I don't think a wall will do a single thing to stop the problems.

The drug cartels will exist as the source on one side and the US populace will exist as buyers on the other. They will find ways to bypass the wall, through the air, by sea, across the Rio Grande and also by hiding drugs more effectively within legitimate cross border trade.

The solution to the drug cartels is to remove their profitability. To decriminalize drugs and supply them cheaply, legally, unadulterated and under medical supervision. Only then will addicts be entered into safe programs to reduce dependency (unlike just throwing them into jail which then become centers of criminal activity).

No one will pay for expensive and potentially dangerously adulterated drugs when clean, relatively cheap and legally acceptable drugs are available. The cartels would make no further money and would simply and rapidly go out of business.

IMHO.



posted on Aug, 10 2018 @ 11:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Vector99

Do you think that America has a right to intervene militarily in any arbitrary country around it, and for no good reason?

Isn't that just a bit evil?

No, I don't think they do, but I do think they will no matter our opinions, so wouldn't it be better to shift the focus to home?


Perhaps China should just invade the US, 'cause...


They don’t have the means to transport their troops safely across the ocean for an invasion of the United States (yet). Even if they did and they sent their entire army including their reserves they would fail. The citizens of the United States alone have 300 MILLION guns. We have the most experienced veteran fighters in the world because we are always in a war. Americans are the reigning champions of war standing on a 100Million corps pile with a kill death ratio that would give Satan an erection.


If China (or any other country) chose to invade America, it is most likely that their strategy would be to neutralize as much defensive capability as possible before a single foot soldier made landfall. Nukes would do it, but there are other ways, too.

People's Liberation Army Navy, Today, Strategy, plans, priorities - Wikipedia



posted on Aug, 11 2018 @ 12:14 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

China is a far cry from being able to come anywhere close to being able to take on the United States....for now, and for the foreseeable future.



posted on Aug, 11 2018 @ 12:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Alien Abduct
a reply to: chr0naut

China is a far cry from being able to come anywhere close to being able to take on the United States....for now, and for the foreseeable future.


The scope of the Chinese Military Threat - The Council on Foreign Relations



posted on Aug, 11 2018 @ 04:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Vector99

Hahaha, I got it... yeah, must have had my head down.



TheRedneck

Kinda scary when satire meets sarcasm, and mix in some politics....recipe for education.

I'm sure a lot of people shifted their thinking of me because of this thread and I don't care.

This thread was a bunch of conservatives bashing me for exploiting the military, while liberals stayed almost completely silent. Silent Confirmation. They didn't feel strongly enough to oppose this thread, because it seats well with their views. They probably silently supported it, because it would benefit their movement.

I like to make people think, and there isn't a whole lot of that going here on ATS as of the last couple years, on BOTH sides. Too much damn emotions, life goes on, I work too damn much to care about people's feelings.



posted on Aug, 11 2018 @ 06:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

Maybe it was about personality not politics.

💥



posted on Aug, 12 2018 @ 07:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Timely
a reply to: Vector99

Maybe it was about personality not politics.

💥[/quote
maybe you are wrong and its all about politics



posted on Aug, 12 2018 @ 07:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

Maybe !

Maybe not !

I assume you have definative assertationns ...your way ?



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join