It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The Pentagon does have a plan to deal with Mexico "NORCOM"

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on May, 1 2010 @ 04:01 PM
Many years ago, Ronald Reagan's defense minister Casper Weinberger wrote a book called "The Next War", a series of scenarios of future international conflicts. In one script, the U.S. is forced to invade Mexico because the drug cartels had seized the presidency and presented a national security threat to Washington. This scenario is still operative at the Pentagon and has become a crowbar to beat Mexico into submission.

What does Washington want from Mexico? On the security side, the U.S. seeks total control of Mexico's security apparatus. With the creation of NORCOM (the North Command) designed to protect the U.S. landmass from terrorist attack, Mexico is designated North America's southern security perimeter and U.S. military aircraft now has carte blanche to penetrate Mexican airspace. Moreover, the North American Security and Prosperity Agreement (ASPAN in its Mexican initials) seeks to integrate the security apparatuses of the three NAFTA nations under Washington's command. Now the Merida Initiative signed by Bush II and Calderon in early 2007 allows for the emplacement of armed U.S. security agents - the FBI, the DEA, the CIA, and ICE - on Mexican soil and contractors like the former Blackwater cannot be far behind. Wars are fought for juicy government contracts and $1.3 billion in Merida moneys are going directly to U.S. defense contractors - forget about the Mexican middleman.

On the energy side (the "prosperity" euphemized in the ASPAN), the designated target is, of course, the privatization of PEMEX, Mexico's nationalized oil industry, with a particular eye out for risk contracts on deep sea drilling in the Gulf of Mexico utilizing technology only the EXXONs of this world possess.

so I guess in the coming days weeks and months we'll see how this all plays out and if the Pentagon gets is NORCOM idea up and running

This little book might just be in your local library or Amazon lists it
The Next War (Hardcover)
~ Caspar Weinberger (Author),
Peter Schweizer (Author)
Lady Margaret Thatcher (Foreword)

[edit on 1-5-2010 by DaddyBare]

[edit on 1-5-2010 by DaddyBare]

posted on May, 1 2010 @ 04:54 PM
No offense bro

but having a plan
and implementing it
are 2 different things.

And we have already seen and heard
Obama's stance.

It's a mid-term election yr

and his answer is:


so a plan with no implementation
is no plan at all

posted on May, 1 2010 @ 05:04 PM
reply to post by boondock-saint

I'm not so sure about that...
the momentum behind this grows daily the outcry louder with each passing day...

In all my years of following this issue I've never seen anything like what were seeing right now. the public is so hyped on both sides he's not going to be able to put his hands in his pockets this time. the longer he drags his feet the closer we come to more bloodshed right now it seems as if everyone is waiting for that first shot to signal the next phase... its not going to blow over this time

can he really do nothing?

posted on May, 1 2010 @ 05:06 PM
reply to post by DaddyBare

Interesting take DaddyBare, I have been wondering myself what has been driving this feverish crescendo of anger regarding illegals. The debate has raged before but this is a bit different. The timing is odd to me. I'm not sure it's a prelude to an actual military action in Mexico but, I do find it interesting considering many people are advocating it now. As for Obama, I think you seriously underestimate the political pressure he's under Boondock. This guy can't do anything he wants. And imagine this-What if there was a large attack originating from south of the border?

posted on May, 1 2010 @ 05:08 PM
reply to post by boondock-saint

Wow, did you even read what DaddyBare's post is about?

I think there may be quite a bit of truth in it. Maybe not an all out war but maybe joining forces with the Mexican goverment to control those "bloody cartels" in exchange for ...?

posted on May, 1 2010 @ 05:11 PM
reply to post by daskakik

I'm not saying this "IS" going to happen..
I'm saying there is a plan and its been on the table for a very long time...
long enough than maybe someone would be happy to nudge things in that direction?

posted on May, 1 2010 @ 05:20 PM
reply to post by DaddyBare

Really? I must have mistaken you for the guy from the "Just ask? I can predict the future" thread.

Well that seems to be the MO. And the last step is getting the citizens to focus their anger in a certain direction so that when the decision is made everyone is behind "them".

[edit on 1-5-2010 by daskakik]

posted on May, 1 2010 @ 05:39 PM
reply to post by DaddyBare

Funny that a good bulk of ATS is constantly on the look-out for a false flag. So much so they freaked out when an old oil rig on it's way to getting deconned tipped over. Could the false flag being unfolding right in front of them without them noticing?

posted on May, 1 2010 @ 05:49 PM
reply to post by antonia

That's entirely possible. A few preliminary events that build up to the real attack, just to establish a scapegoat beforehand. Just like when Clinton failed in his attempt to kill Osama. Osama, Obama, just made that connection. Hmmmm....

posted on May, 1 2010 @ 05:58 PM
reply to post by warpcrafter

Everyone is so busy fighting I don't think they'd notice it happening.

posted on May, 1 2010 @ 06:44 PM

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by DaddyBare

Really? I must have mistaken you for the guy from the "Just ask? I can predict the future" thread.

when I can successfully draw all the power ball numbers I'll lay stake to that claim but in the meanwhile don't put to much faith in my precog abilities...

For this to come about we still need a rather dramatic trigger... few more dead ranchers is only get the national guard posted at the border... If say we had a small American border town wiped out, or 'El Chapo' Guzman declares himself King of Mexico, (Not as unlikely as you'd think) then we might see the Pentagon put this plan into action...

For now were missing a triggering event.... but we all know how fast things change round here

[edit on 1-5-2010 by DaddyBare]

posted on May, 1 2010 @ 07:20 PM
My question is how will the Elites profit from this? Taking down Mexico would be a huge undertaking. Just exactly how much oil does Mexico have?

Interesting perspective.

S & F

posted on May, 1 2010 @ 07:53 PM
reply to post by SLAYER69

Remember this was Casper Weinberger plan, we knew a lot less about Mexican reserves way back then... they only real Benny would be in granting the big oil companies greater freedom in a broader area of the gulf waters, on course there are still great untapped mineral resources in country we still know nothing about...
setting that aside the real aim and taken the quote from the book
U.S. seeks total control of Mexico's security apparatus. With the creation of NORCOM (the North Command)
seems to be major interest

posted on May, 1 2010 @ 07:57 PM
reply to post by SLAYER69

this is what i could find regarding that issue. i was looking at the gold stats and they ain't half bad.

[edit on 1-5-2010 by antonia]

posted on May, 1 2010 @ 08:14 PM
This is interesting considering current events. In my opinion though, and this isn't a knock against progressives (okay maybe, but only a lil'), it would take Republican war-hawk leadership to pull something like this off. The Dems historically don't have the stomach for it.

Also, let's not forget that warplan scenarios like this aren't exactly uncommon in military circles. Weinberger may have been tasked with this one under Reagan, but the Pentagon has been coming up with end-game scenarios for virtually everything under the sun - I read one a few years back that was released by ABC News where they had plans for a military takeover of Canada - everyone made a big deal about it, but the fact is it was in a pile with hypotheticals like former Satellite states beginning incursions into Russia, another German uprising against the rest of mainland Europe and OPEC cutting off all oil shipments to mainland Europe.

All of the above aside, this is interesting that it's coming up now. I do wonder if the purported "accident" on the BP oil rig in the Gulf has anything to do with this... combine that with an ever-greater focus on illegal immigration and you never know what predator eyes think when they look at Mexico City...

I still say it would take a giant a-hole of a Republican to do this...

posted on May, 1 2010 @ 11:28 PM
reply to post by DaddyBare

Read that book a few times....class act that Casper.

Second line...He and Col. North saw eye to eye.

So I heard but just talk.


Also in the book..Taiwan, Japan....Japan surprised me as much as Mexico but after looking at the history I agree with Casper.

[edit on 1-5-2010 by whiteraven]

posted on May, 1 2010 @ 11:35 PM
reply to post by Legion2112

The Dems historically don't have the stomach for it.

wrong...WW two...WW 1...Vietnam.

Also Cuban Missile Crisis. Plus lots of others.

Two party's one plan.

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 12:08 AM
Completely different scenarios from this proposed plan - Woodrow Wilson and FDR were basically pushed into WWI and WWII. As far as the Cuban Missile Crisis, again, vastly different scenario - Viet Nam, JFK was adamantly opposed, assassinated, replaced by a suspiciously more war-friendly LBJ and then had Nixon take the reigns from there. Apples and Oranges to Weinberger's plan... which is just that, a plan. A suggested course of action in the most hypothetical of circumstances.

And since 1980, the Republicans have been the ones who're more apt to engage in hostilities...

God, does everyone on this thread have to think that these mock scenarios are actual courses of action that the government is going to take? Especially ones that are more than 25 years old?

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 05:25 AM
reply to post by Legion2112

I do agree with you on a good many points...
25+ year old hypothetical scenario AKA War Game...
Typically Dem's have no stomach for starting a war...

but the flip side is we do have dead Americans on US soil.
Soon it'll be 30 thousand dead down in Mexico in what looks more like war lords carving out territory rather than a traditional civil war...
Add to that NAFTA made it so a lot of factories that make goods for Americans were moved south of the border and their disruption could be potentially destabilizing....

Yes it is a mock scenario crafted half a decade ago and at the time would have been pretty far fetched...that is until the start of April when cartels took on two Mexican Army units in a bold attack with weapons that put them on pretty equal footing with the Army....

Like I said before I don't think were there yet... we still lack that big dramatic triggering event... if it comes, Casper Weinberger's legacy might just get dusted off and put to practical app ya know..

[edit on 2-5-2010 by DaddyBare]

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 10:35 AM
You make a valid point. There's a big difference between a hypothetical wargame scenario involving a military takeover of American Samoa and one involving the toppling of the Mexican Government that's suddenly leaked to the press when ranchers get 86'd by illegal immigrants, our social services programs in the SW are hemorrhaging because of illegal immigrants and an international oil rig gets taken down in the Gulf of Mexico triggering the largest economic disaster of our age...

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in