Why designating cartels as terrorist organizations or using the military to go after them in Mexico will fail

[Caveira]

8 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

Nope, absolutely not.

I've already said what Obama did was wrong, so you'll have to present an actual justification instead of a lame "whataboutism" (shout out @Interviewed_at_Weehawken)

I responded before seeing the page or two of arguments on the topic.  Carry on 

[JimmySpeaks]

13 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

 

I'll make it even more clear so you can maybe see where your mistake is and get a tiny bit smarter today.

AOC = X

The Squad = Y

Me: X does this.

You: But Y doesn't do that.

Me: Yes, that's why I said *X* does that, not *Y* does that.

 

Squad = led by its most popular member AOC 

[JimmySpeaks]

17 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

You just said socialists, like the squad, don't tow the party line, so which is it? 

That’s what you said 

[JimmySpeaks]

18 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

You just said socialists, like the squad, don't tow the party line, so which is it? 

Let’s see all your proof that AOC is rowing the party line. I’m pretty sure there’s far more out there where’s not. 

[red viking]

Rowing, toeing. Same thing. 

[uncle bernard]

8 minutes ago, JimmySpeaks said:

That’s what you said 

No, that's what YOU said.

"I just watched a video of one of the squad members.  Far from towing the party line."

 

[uncle bernard]

8 minutes ago, JimmySpeaks said:

Let’s see all your proof that AOC is rowing the party line. I’m pretty sure there’s far more out there where’s not. 

For a recent example, she voted, with the Dem party line, against an amendment that stripped Israel of military aid. Other members of the squad - Omar, Tlaib, Lee - voted for the amendment, against AOC and the party.

[uncle bernard]

38 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

Those are exactly the type of boats they typically use.  You should watch To Catch a Smuggler: Tropical Takedown.  Reality show about catching the drug runners and the type of boats they use.  Besides, you are assuming that it's the only boat they are using.  

As for bombing of the alleged cartel members from Venezuela, as much as I want to see those criminals taken down, not sure I am in agreement with indiscriminately just bombing the boat.  My hope is that there were extenuating circumstances that called for this to happen, but if not, I don't think it is a "good thing" so to speak.

Well said.

21 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

Similar to my thoughts.  Had they approached the boat and been fired upon?  Arrest is often difficult when they jettison the cargo, but that still doesn’t deserve a missile.  I’m guessing there was resistance that wasn’t included on the video we watched. 

There was no resistance and the government is very open about that. It's actually the key detail of the case and why the video was released immediately and touted by the Trump admin. This was a precision military strike on an unsuspecting target. There was no attempt to arrest them and that is very important.

The Trump Administration's argument is that because they consider the cartel to be a terrorist organization, they are allowed to strike and kill them as enemy combatants, bypassing any responsibility to non-lethally apprehend them. Furthermore, Rubio said they don't even think that boat was coming to America!

[JimmySpeaks]

3 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

For a recent example, she voted, with the Dem party line, against an amendment that stripped Israel of military aid. Other members of the squad - Omar, Tlaib, Lee - voted for the amendment, against AOC and the party.

WOW. One  she has Jews in her district and needs their votes. Has nothing to do with the party line.  Good try though. 

Edited yesterday at 06:28 PM by JimmySpeaks

[JimmySpeaks]

3 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

No, that's what YOU said.

"I just watched a video of one of the squad members.  Far from towing the party line."

 

One. See what I did there?  I’m just like you now. Moving the goal posts. 

[JimmySpeaks]

3 hours ago, red viking said:

Rowing, toeing. Same thing. 

Toeing or towing.  ??  Same thing huh?  Bahahahahahhahaah.  

[red viking]

1 minute ago, JimmySpeaks said:

Toeing or towing.  ??  Same thing huh?  Bahahahahahhahaah.  

You called it rowing though. Pathetic. 

[JimmySpeaks]

1 minute ago, red viking said:

You called it rowing though. Pathetic. 

And you called it toeing. Pathetic..  you might not want to do the same thing when you’re calling someone out. Makes you look even dumber. 

Edited yesterday at 06:34 PM by JimmySpeaks

[JimmySpeaks]

3 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

Well said.

There was no resistance and the government is very open about that. It's actually the key detail of the case and why the video was released immediately and touted by the Trump admin. This was a precision military strike on an unsuspecting target. There was no attempt to arrest them and that is very important.

The Trump Administration's argument is that because they consider the cartel to be a terrorist organization, they are allowed to strike and kill them as enemy combatants, bypassing any responsibility to non-lethally apprehend them. Furthermore, Rubio said they don't even think that boat was coming to America!

It’s funny how you believe the government when it fits your narrative 

[red viking]

18 minutes ago, JimmySpeaks said:

And you called it toeing. Pathetic..  you might not want to do the same thing when you’re calling someone out. Makes you look even dumber. 

OMG. Are you serious? You're insisting that it's "towing?" As if I'm hauling the line with a tow truck?

LMFAO 100X. 

But I guess that's easier than trying to "row it." 

Edited yesterday at 06:53 PM by red viking

[WrestlingRasta]

I mean, even I thought this was funny….

 

 

[ionel]

8 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

I mean, even I thought this was funny….

 

 

So Trump isn't dead ... he was just playing video games the entire extended weekend.  

[Tripnsweep]

31 minutes ago, ionel said:

So Trump isn't dead ... he was just playing video games the entire extended weekend.  

Ctrl+Alt+Defeat

[Caveira]

Whaaaaaaaaaaat?

 

[Lipdrag]

On 9/3/2025 at 10:03 AM, uncle bernard said:

Why does being on US soil make a difference for you? That's why I asked the question. What is the difference between:

Killing a non-citizen off US soil or killing a non-citizen on US soil? Is the offense less bad once it's outside our borders?

If you'd support killing a non-citizen on US soil, but not a US citizen on US soil, why? Our constitution guarantees the same due process rights to non-citizens as citizens, so if you support killing a non-citizen on US soil, shouldn't you also support killing a citizen on US soil?

And if you support killing a citizen on US soil, what's the burden of proof necessary for such a strike. Do you believe the military/police should have the power to kill someone merely on suspicion of committing a crime?

They got due process when they were designated terrorist organizations.  If their own bosses did not tell them that they had been designated as terrorists then that is on the bosses - not us.

Foreign terrorists on or off our soil are given the status of enemy combatants (if they earn that status by wearing uniforms, etc) or worse if they do not abide by the rules of war.  Based on this the administration had no choice but to treat marauding and (probable) soon-to-be invading terrorists as terrorists.  We must all support killing foreign terrorists wherever and whenever we find them with some regard for the sovereignty of other nations.  On the high seas - no sovereignty issues.  Bombs away.

Now, is the term Terrorist properly applied?  Until an unelected and unaccountable local federal district judge says the terrorists ravaging our country with chemical warfare are not terrorists then they are terrorists.  And must expect terrorist-type consequences such as sudden death from above.

[mspart]

Yeah, that was pretty quick.   I don't think they even knew they had a problem 1 second after the hit.   

mspart

[Tripnsweep]

1 hour ago, Lipdrag said:

They got due process when they were designated terrorist organizations.  If their own bosses did not tell them that they had been designated as terrorists then that is on the bosses - not us.

Foreign terrorists on or off our soil are given the status of enemy combatants (if they earn that status by wearing uniforms, etc) or worse if they do not abide by the rules of war.  Based on this the administration had no choice but to treat marauding and (probable) soon-to-be invading terrorists as terrorists.  We must all support killing foreign terrorists wherever and whenever we find them with some regard for the sovereignty of other nations.  On the high seas - no sovereignty issues.  Bombs away.

Now, is the term Terrorist properly applied?  Until an unelected and unaccountable local federal district judge says the terrorists ravaging our country with chemical warfare are not terrorists then they are terrorists.  And must expect terrorist-type consequences such as sudden death from above.

The problem is that the cartels or similar organizations aren't like you think. It's not like they have some vast command structures, or membership cards or whatever. A lot of their smuggling and logistics are done by people who are independent contractors and don't know who is really hiring them. If they get caught, who cares, they were expendable. They can't give useful information, since they aren't actually members of the cartels or know anything. So wiping them out doesn't do much. Also the way the cartels operate isn't like what's on TV. This is a business to them and they understand the reality of it. So if they lose shipments, people get arrested or whatever, they know that happens. It's the cost of doing business, because for every shipment that gets found, dozens more are successful. 

I'll give you a fun example. I used to live in a very rural small town that happened to have a major interstate highway going through it. My dad worked in the local government and was close to the county attorneys office. One day they had arrested some Colombian national for having some significant weight of something. They set the guy's bail at like 50 or 100k or something like that. The county attorney comes in bragging that they'll nail this guy. Meanwhile an attorney showed up to post bail, and the CA said something like, he'll be back for that money. My dad knew better and explained they'd never see that guy again, because 100k was like couch cushion change to them, and it was worth paying to get their guy back so he couldn't say anything to anyone. The local yokels believed they'd get a major conviction and all they got was a forfeited bond. 

It's not like the movies or TV where if you get caught z the cartels will just murder you. That might happen if you steal from them or something, but mostly they are concerned with money, and killing somebody who can make money for them is counterproductive usually. 

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

31 minutes ago, Tripnsweep said:

The problem is that the cartels or similar organizations aren't like you think. It's not like they have some vast command structures, or membership cards or whatever. A lot of their smuggling and logistics are done by people who are independent contractors and don't know who is really hiring them. If they get caught, who cares, they were expendable. They can't give useful information, since they aren't actually members of the cartels or know anything. So wiping them out doesn't do much. Also the way the cartels operate isn't like what's on TV. This is a business to them and they understand the reality of it. So if they lose shipments, people get arrested or whatever, they know that happens. It's the cost of doing business, because for every shipment that gets found, dozens more are successful. 

I'll give you a fun example. I used to live in a very rural small town that happened to have a major interstate highway going through it. My dad worked in the local government and was close to the county attorneys office. One day they had arrested some Colombian national for having some significant weight of something. They set the guy's bail at like 50 or 100k or something like that. The county attorney comes in bragging that they'll nail this guy. Meanwhile an attorney showed up to post bail, and the CA said something like, he'll be back for that money. My dad knew better and explained they'd never see that guy again, because 100k was like couch cushion change to them, and it was worth paying to get their guy back so he couldn't say anything to anyone. The local yokels believed they'd get a major conviction and all they got was a forfeited bond. 

It's not like the movies or TV where if you get caught z the cartels will just murder you. That might happen if you steal from them or something, but mostly they are concerned with money, and killing somebody who can make money for them is counterproductive usually. 

Nepo baby has a story for every situation that arises in "non-wrestling topics"

[Caveira]

38 minutes ago, Tripnsweep said:

It's not like they have some vast command structures