Mexico seeks US probe of border tear gas

[BerserkerCatSplat]

It's clear that Americans are under the delusion that they are somehow entitled to do whatever they want in their country

:lol: If Americans aren't allowed to do what they want within their borders, who is?

 

[Blind_Io]

Screw their sovereignty. They have no respect for ours, why should we have any respect for theirs. Go look at some of the stuff that fuckwit President Bush has said over the past few years. It's clear that Americans are under the delusion that they are somehow entitled to do whatever they want in their country and ignore their laws and territorial borders. When we take measures to secure our land and protect our sovereignty they attack our border patrol. Once they have made the first attack against Mexican employees on Mexican soil we are supposed to - what, exactly? Run away? Screw that.


The self appointed World's Police don't see anything wrong in screwing with another country's borders. These bloody prisoner flights from Iraq landing without qauthority on European soil etc. is even worse than shooting tear gas over the border of Mexico, you are screwing with so-called friends! And you bloody guys wonder why some in this world hate you (and i mean the country, not the people) so much?

There is something very different from starting a foreign war (and trust me, I'm very much opposed to that too) and taking less than lethal measures to protect one's self on one's own soil when attacked by foreign nationals. Simply using the "I'm rubber and you're glue" defense doesn't work here and it hasn't since 4th grade. I'm not talking about dictating policy to Mexico, I'm talking about changing our policy to "sour the milk" and remove the incentive for illegal immigration. I'm not talking about policing the world, quite the contrary, I'm talking about policing our own territory, on our side of the border. If Mexicans, civilian or otherwise, attack our border agents I feel it is their right, nay, their duty to react to that attack. At no time did I state or imply any changes to Mexico's domestic or foreign policy. President Fox has made it a platform to criticize any attempt by the US to police it's own border or restrict the movements or privileges of illegal Mexican worker on our soil.

Now, with that in mind, you have the stage to explain how Bush's war in Iraq has anything to do with our problem of illegal immigration. You have built a nice little Straw Man, but unfortunately you utterly failed to address any points I have made. Go back and try it again, this time stay on topic. If you want to debate the war and prisoner flights, I am more than happy to discuss it (it will be a short debate, I agree with you on that issue).

The US has a long history with dictating policy in the countries to its South, why do you think they are so screwed up.

Right, because all of Central and South America's woes are because of US policy . It could also be that when the US was getting involved in that part of the world it was to try to stabilize it and do some good. I'm not saying that it worked or that the US had the right to do that, but even given that we have been involved in that part of the world I don't think you can say that the entire hemisphere's problems can be blamed on the US.

About the most heavy-handed thing we did is build the Panama Canal, and I don't think anyone can argue that the entire planet benefited from that intervention.

Yes, we did take a chunk of Mexico following the war, but that was the point of the war in the first place. The US is not alone in waging war for territory. Let's not forget that the Mexican-American War was fought because Texas chose to leave Mexico and join the United States. Mexico did not recognize this claim and tried to reclaim the territory (and lost to the Texans in 1936). Mexico considered Texas a rebel province. The territory that was turned over to the US by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hildalgo was so far from the bankrupt capitol that is was essentially lawless. It served no useful purpose to Mexico and they had no means to police or support the territories. Turning them over to the US ended hostilities and consolidated Mexico's holdings into something more manageable.

If we are going to impeach nations for deeds of the past under past leaders, that's fine by me. I am constantly reminded by Europeans that we are a young nation. The interesting thing about less history is that there's fewer skeletons buried in it.

 

[Scooby5]

Now, with that in mind, you have the stage to explain how Bush's war in Iraq has anything to do with our problem of illegal immigration. You have built a nice little Straw Man, but unfortunately you utterly failed to address any points I have made. Go back and try it again, this time stay on topic. If you want to debate the war and prisoner flights, I am more than happy to discuss it (it will be a short debate, I agree with you on that issue).

In your head right now is the fact that the story was about illegal immigration.

It's not!

The story, as written is purely about American Border patrol shooting tear gas into Mexico. This is different from the illegal immigration question and i did say that in my earlier post and of course the Iraq war does not relate directly to it either, i'm not stupid. The issue is of the violation of another country's borders where i brought up the rights of European countries to know of prisoner flights etc. because for those flights the Americans were acting against the principles of some of the sovereign states where they were landing, and some that had not even sent troops to Iraq.

The problem is the whole issue of we'll do what they fuck we want and we don't care what anybody else thinks, including those that are supposed to be our allies.

tigger: The i'll-shoot-you-because-you-throw-stones-at-us idea only lowers the standards and makes your border patrol no better than those guys throwing rocks. If you are not in range they won't throw rocks. You are giving them a target, goading them if you will. If you stand far enough back and they come into the US to throw rocks at you instead, then fine, hit them with 45's if you want, i don't care.

BerserkerCatSplat: i kinda copied and edited too quickly before heading to a meeting this morning, but theirs and ours....... yeah ok

 

[Blind_Io]

You are wrong, illegal immigration is an issue here because that is the main issue facing border guards. The Border patrol are despised by illegal immigrants who, for some reason, feel they are entitled to enter the US illegally. The border patrol stands in their way and thus become a lightning rod for attacks and violence. Lets not forget that the Border Patrol was attacked first and they reacted with a very measured response: CS gas cannisters. Not bullets, not grenades, not even anything that would bruise as much as the rocks that were being thrown at them. They protected themselves with tear-gas. The Mexicans' rights were not violated in any way, if they tried that with their own Federales they would probably have been shot. If Americans threw rocks at federal agents they would have had CS gas fired at them too. The citizenship of the aggressors was not an issue. The response would have been the same.

Once again, this is not an unprovoked armed incursion over the border into another nation. This was a measured response to an unprovoked attack on federal agents on our side of the border. You still have not explained how you would want them to respond. You would have our border patrol back down when confronted with a threat? Do you think that would do anything to reduce future attacks or save lives? It would simply show the Mexicans that if they are aggressive they can make the Border Patrol run away. That would result in more and bolder attacks and someone will end up getting shot and killed.

Stop bringing up Iraq and prison flights. It's a non-issue here. Stop clinging to your Straw Man.

 

[tigger]

It isn't a moral issue, its a legal one. The Mexicans shouldn't be throwing rocks. The Mexican Government should be doing all they can to stop their citizens breaching the border before they start attacking the US border guards actions and crying foul , but that does not justify the firing of tear gas across the border.

If a private citizen from the US shot a few rounds over the border would that justify a Mexican military strike on his town?

I follow that same logic, but take a different conclusion. Because the Mexican authorities are unwilling to police their border (or willing to bring about any social change that would keep people from leaving in droves), we are justified in keeping people from illegally immigrating to our country. We could do the same thing the Mexicans do and institute a "shoot on sight" policy for illegal immigrants, but the US Border Patrol has chosen to use non-lethal means of repelling them.

Now for your question. If a private US citizen shot some Mexicans (not just put some rounds over the border), Mexico could certainly use that for justification to go to war. Wars have been fought over less. But would it happen? Nope.

I'm not talking about policing the world, quite the contrary, I'm talking about policing our own territory, on our side of the border. If Mexicans, civilian or otherwise, attack our border agents I feel it is their right, nay, their duty to react to that attack. At no time did I state or imply any changes to Mexico's domestic or foreign policy. President Fox has made it a platform to criticize any attempt by the US to police it's own border or restrict the movements or privileges of illegal Mexican worker on our soil.

If I could I'd +rep you. Well said.

tigger: The i'll-shoot-you-because-you-throw-stones-at-us idea only lowers the standards and makes your border patrol no better than those guys throwing rocks. If you are not in range they won't throw rocks. You are giving them a target, goading them if you will. If you stand far enough back and they come into the US to throw rocks at you instead, then fine, hit them with 45's if you want, i don't care.

Why should we have to 'surrender' our territory, our sovereignty, to some guys throwing rocks? There are plenty of places where chucking a rock at a soldier will get you shot dead. As far as I'm concerned, these guys lobbing stones should be happy this isn't one of those places. So should their hypocritical government.

Read:

You are wrong, illegal immigration is an issue here because that is the main issue facing border guards. The Border patrol are despised by illegal immigrants who, for some reason, feel they are entitled to enter the US illegally. The border patrol stands in their way and thus become a lightning rod for attacks and violence. Lets not forget that the Border Patrol was attacked first and they reacted with a very measured response: CS gas cannisters. Not bullets, not grenades, not even anything that would bruise as much as the rocks that were being thrown at them. They protected themselves with tear-gas. The Mexicans' rights were not violated in any way, if they tried that with their own Federales they would probably have been shot. If Americans threw rocks at federal agents they would have had CS gas fired at them too. The citizenship of the aggressors was not an issue. The response would have been the same.

 

[Interrobang]

Some of you are totally mixing up topics here. Us-immigration policy and how to deal with a poor neighbor, are not the subject.

Border Patrol getting attacked, defending themselves - even if it means shooting tear gas over the border ... that is the topic. And though I might not agree to the general Us-american View on those topics wich are not the subject here ... I have to agree that if Mexican authorities fail to secure the border and then Mexicans attack Us-Borderpatrol from Mexico ... the use of tear gas and pepper-spray is a very reasonable response. Let?s face it ... acording to the stereotype - if I were throwing a Rock at an Us-american Officer, I?d probably expect to be shot with leathal ammo. It is almost a slight surprise the "answer" at the Mexican Border is so reasonable ...

 

[argatoga]

If a private citizen from the US shot a few rounds over the border would that justify a Mexican military strike on his town?

I am sorry but that is a bit too extreme and hurts your argument. Shooting at people with non-lethal force who are attacking you is justified. It is Mexico who should not be allowing this to happen in the first place, the US border patrol were defending themselves; if the US patrol backed away than why should the US bother with a boarder at all if they aren't willing to defend it.

Right, because all of Central and South America's woes are because of US policy . It could also be that when the US was getting involved in that part of the world it was to try to stabilize it and do some good. I'm not saying that it worked or that the US had the right to do that, but even given that we have been involved in that part of the world I don't think you can say that the entire hemisphere's problems can be blamed on the US.

I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek there. Many of those countries had issues regardless of US intervention, however the US has not exactly helped the situation over the years.

About the most heavy-handed thing we did is build the Panama Canal, and I don't think anyone can argue that the entire planet benefited from that intervention.

I agree the Panama Canal was a good thing for the world. Another case of the US military helping both itself and the civilian world, just like GPS.

Yes, we did take a chunk of Mexico following the war, but that was the point of the war in the first place. The US is not alone in waging war for territory. Let's not forget that the Mexican-American War was fought because Texas chose to leave Mexico and join the United States. Mexico did not recognize this claim and tried to reclaim the territory (and lost to the Texans in 1936). Mexico considered Texas a rebel province. The territory that was turned over to the US by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hildalgo was so far from the bankrupt capitol that is was essentially lawless. It served no useful purpose to Mexico and they had no means to police or support the territories. Turning them over to the US ended hostilities and consolidated Mexico's holdings into something more manageable.

Of course the US deserves the land it got from Mexico, it won the war. Just as I don't expect Germany to give half their country to Austria, or for France to give Bordeaux back to England. I mentioned the war because it was an example of the State's less than rosy relationship with Mexico in the past.

If we are going to impeach nations for deeds of the past under past leaders, that's fine by me. I am constantly reminded by Europeans that we are a young nation. The interesting thing about less history is that there's fewer skeletons buried in it.

I agree 100%. The US has done horrible, horrible things, but so has the rest of the Western world.

 

[hansvonaxion]

I am sorry but that is a bit too extreme and hurts your argument. Shooting at people with non-lethal force who are attacking you is justified. It is Mexico who should not be allowing this to happen in the first place, the US border patrol were defending themselves; if the US patrol backed away than why should the US bother with a boarder at all if they aren't willing to defend it.

Tear gas can be lethal.

I took it to an extreme to show why escalation is a poor option.
The main difference is that the Mexicans are just citizens and if they throw rocks then thats basically a domestic policing issue. The US Federal agents are under direct control of the Gov. and their actions can be considered a reflection on the Gov.

Rocks being thrown over the border is hardly a threat to national security. The best response would be to ask guards to step back a few metres and make a request to Mexico to control the situation. Take it from there.

It seems that people are generally split on this issue with Americans on one side and the rest of the world on the other. I think its because of the mixing up of the immigration issue with the situation in question and the obvious emotion involved. If I were American I might well feel the same way.

 

[Blind_Io]

^ What Mexican Guards?

 

[bafranksbro]

Rocks being thrown over the border is hardly a threat to national security. The best response would be to ask guards to step back a few metres and make a request to Mexico to control the situation. Take it from there.

We are not in a world where Mexico would ever help control the border situation. It is their position that Mexican citizens should be able to come into the US as they please illegally. The main and almost only thing standing in the way is an overstretched border patrol. The Mexican gov't would never go out of their way to help in a situation such as this, just look at their response for evidence of that. They go as far as giving out pamphlets and videos informing Mexican citizens of how they might successfully get into the US illegally.

 

[argatoga]

Tear gas can be lethal.

Ditto for rocks.

 

[phuckingduck]

Tear gas can be lethal? Or the canisters it's delivered in? Cuz if you stick around long enough to die of the actual gas....

 

[Blind_Io]

If someone has a preexisting respiratory problem the gas can trigger an asthma attack and result in death. It's very rare, however and anyone who sits around in the cloud of the stuff deserves to be the next Darwin Award Honorable Mention.

 

[phuckingduck]

I didn't know it could induce an asthma attack. Guess my asthmatic ass can't protest Oh well, go majority!

 

[Scooby5]

You still have not explained how you would want them to respond. You would have our border patrol back down when confronted with a threat? Do you think that would do anything to reduce future attacks or save lives?

I did, twice.

Stop provoking these guys into throwing rocks in the first place by being close enough for them to aim at. These guys cannot throw rocks further than your guys can shoot gas canisters from guns. If you must shoot them wait until they actually cross the border, if they cross the border. At that point i don't care anymore, do what they hell you want. Dress them up and have them dance the can-can for all i care.

Stop bringing up Iraq and prison flights. It's a non-issue here. Stop clinging to your Straw Man.

Again, the issue IS......... Border Sovereignty. It is not economics, it is not illegal immigration, it is not really civil rights and the rest, it IS American government officials shooting tear gas across a border into another country. The issue of prisoner flights is the same issue, Border Sovereignty!

 

[Blind_Io]

So your solution is for us to stay out of our own backyard because someone else is being aggressive? If your neighbor started throwing shit at you every time you went into your back garden, would you just never go there? Of course not, you would call the police. Now what would the police do if the neighbor started throwing stones at them when they are talking to you in your back garden? Think they would just go inside and pretend he's not there? Would they advise you to abandon your property because of an aggressive neighbor (assume you aren't in the UK). No, they would go take care of it. In this case the authorities were attacked directly and they responded to an attack. Their being there does not cause someone to throw stones, only the person who picks up the stone and flings it has that title. Everyone is responsible for their own actions and must face the consequences of those actions. In this case the Mexicans chose to attack US Federal Agents over the border on US soil. The Mexicans started this conflict, not us.

The issue is Border Sovereignty, but that is tied to Mexico's utter lack of respect for the border. They actively assist their citizens in getting over the border into our country, subverting our laws and impacting our economy. These issues are all related. We put border guards on our side of the border. They violated our sovereignty by attacking our government security agents.

This is all about sovereignty, and we are trying to protect ours. Be not fooled, they are not the plucky upstarts taking on the big bad evil government. They started a fight with border guards and they got gassed. There was no permanent damage, but if they start a fight we will fucking finish it.

 

[bafranksbro]

Look at the article, the Border Patrol reported almost 1,000 incidents of officers being attacked. Most of those are from rock throwing, this isn't some small issue. For example look at this article from 2005, they damaged a helicopter and forced it to make an emergency landing, with rocks. Rocks can do serious damage and these aren't no pebbles they are grapefruit size rocks and bricks.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/25/border.incident/

 

[Crazyjeeper]

As someone who lives in a city full of both legal and illegal immigrants (Dallas, Texas) I am going to say that I think the Border Patrol's actions were justified and I don't understand the fuss about tear gas. Be happy it wasn't nerve gas or bullets. I say lets just build the damn fence, and put some people on it. On the flip side of that, when we build the fence, we need to create avenues to allow immigrants easier entry on a guest worker plan. Its OUR border, we can do what we want with it.

 

[argatoga]

I say lets just build the damn fence, and put some people on it. On the flip side of that, when we build the fence, we need to create avenues to allow immigrants easier entry on a guest worker plan. Its OUR border, we can do what we want with it.

The fence would be incredibly expensive to build and maintain. Also it isn't that hard to cross over an undefended - it can't all be manned - fence if you have the will to do so. Remember the border is around 2000 miles.

 

[Crazyjeeper]

Well, maybe if our forces were everywhere but home it would be easier to man the fence, but that is a different debate for a different day.