• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. military report warns 'sudden collapse' of Mexico is possible

PeteEU said:
. And yes the murder capital was in Mexico in 2008, but a massive crime spree between rival gangs in a poor part of a country with the size and diversity of Mexico does not mean that the country is close to civil war..... and that is what I am trying to say.
Click to expand...


That's not what is happening. Mexico's president Calderon is sending military forces to fight the drug cartels in major cities, and they are fighting the military back. It's not the poor part of the country, on the contrary because of the drug influences, they are the richer parts of the country. The farther south you go, excluding tourist places, the poorer it gets and most of the fighting is in the northern part close to the US border. You are correct though about not being close to a civil war.
 
PeteEU said:
But in the end, the US government, hell even Canada and other countries in the region will not allow the Mexican state to fall into a failed state because of a bunch of stupid drug lords.
Click to expand...


lol, I can't wait to see the American publics reaction if it comes to that. For some reason lots of Americans have a hatred of Mexicans, whether it stems from immigration issues or just prejudice against them as a nationality. After all, they are invading us right now. :lol:
 
If Mexico were to undergo a dramatic transformation or revolution that would substantially alter its political landscape, that development would not be an unprecedented outcome of a major U.S. economic crisis. In fact, the economic carnage that followed the Panic of 1907 arguably paved the way for the Mexican revolution in 1910.

From Robert Bruner's and Sean Carr's The Panic of 1907:

Cahill [Historian Kevin Cahill] suggested that the financial strains in Mexico had political consequences and that the panic and subsequent depression were among the catalysts for the Mexican Revolution. “[Scholars] contend that because Mexico depended heavily on foreign markets and capital, particularly that of the United States,” Cahill wrote, the U.S. depression crippled the Mexican Economy. Generating widespread dissatisfaction with President Porfirio Diaz’s government, it thus was one of the factors that provoked the Maderistas and other revolutionaries to rebellion in 1910.”

For now, I believe odds are against a Mexican revolution-type event. Such a development is probably more likely in some other countries, particularly underdeveloped ones that have weak political and economic institutions and perhaps a history of ethnic rivalries.

The collapse of the housing bubble and its after-effects is potentially the kind of rare event that transforms a decade or perhaps longer. It is, by far, the biggest event of the early 21st century and perhaps the most significant one since the start of the Cold War. It will have profound and long-lasting economic, political, and social implications on a global scale.

It will likely lead to a larger role for government for quite some time. In its wake, the first serious efforts to begin addressing the financial imbalances associated with Social Security and Medicare could emerge. The crisis could transform the way global finance and trade are conducted. It will likely have geopolitical consequences that have broad balance-of-power implications. There will likely be a global effort to move away from exposure to a single reserve currency. Already, on more than one occasion senior financial leaders in Germany and China have made mention of a need to move away from a single reserve currency.
 
Last edited:
PeteEU said:
No I fully understand that the situation is very severe in parts of Mexico. And yes the murder capital was in Mexico in 2008, but a massive crime spree between rival gangs in a poor part of a country with the size and diversity of Mexico does not mean that the country is close to civil war..... and that is what I am trying to say.
Click to expand...

It's not going to be a Somalia-style civil war...but then, few civil wars are. Mexico does face the real possibility of an extended period of extreme violence between rival factions, which I would classify as a civil war.

PeteEU said:
The mafia wars of the 1930s were by the standards of the day, just as bloody and dangerous as what is happening in Mexico, does that mean the US was at the brink of civil war at the time?
Click to expand...

The mafia wars of the 1930s were never nearly as bad as what is happening in Mexico today.

PeteEU said:
The mafia wars in Italy has been going on for decades, with the mafia assassinating rivals, policemen and so on.. does that mean that Italy is on the brink of collapse?
Click to expand...

I have no idea, as I don't know much about the situation there. I just know that I spent about an hour in Naples and have no desire to ever go back.

PeteEU said:
The gangs of LA, and other cities murder each other over petty things, does that mean California is on the bring of civil war?
Click to expand...

No. Again, there is a big difference in scale between what is happening in LA and what is happening in Juarez. The former is mostly just small-scale, unorganized random crime. The latter is large-scale, organized crime by rival factions warring with each other.

PeteEU said:
Should the US be worried about the drug war in Mexico? Hell yes, but not because of a possible non existent civil war in Mexico, but because the war is fuelled by among other things the drug use of Americans,
Click to expand...

It's fueled by the PROHIBITION of drugs, not the USE of drugs.

PeteEU said:
and at some point if it has not already started, this war will spread into the US streets as the gangs will want to gain more territory, and I suspect the other drug gangs already in the US wont like that. I doubt the Russian and other Eastern gangs will be willing to give up turf... and they are not known for their nice tactics.
Click to expand...

Russian and Eastern gangs? In the United States? You watch way too many movies.
 
It's pretty sad when these drug cartels are better funded then the Mexican Government. I recall a documentary talking about how much more sophisticated the weapons used by the gangs were.

This is absolutely an adverse effect of drug prohibition.

ps. I'm going to be in Mexico in a week. :shock:
 
Last edited:
TheNextEra said:
That's true, but I have to ask yet again since you posted it, what does this have to do with Chavez\? You mentioned Chavez specifically is why I am asking. Was that just a slip and you meant the Mexico President?
Click to expand...

Chavez openly despises us and our allies. Mexico is one of our biggest allies in Latin America. A civil war in Mexico would give Chavez the perfect chance to spread his "Bolivarian Revolution" and eliminate a US ally.
 
americanwoman said:
Have fun, it's beautiful there. Sitting here at -15 degrees, I don't want to hear about it though :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Ha!!! I am actually learning to love Los Angeles...74 degrees today and sunny. Has been all week.

Sure as hell beats the weather in Alaska right now. Where I used to live the high is -10. :mrgreen:
 
chevydriver1123 said:
Chavez openly despises us and our allies. Mexico is one of our biggest allies in Latin America. A civil war in Mexico would give Chavez the perfect chance to spread his "Bolivarian Revolution" and eliminate a US ally.
Click to expand...

Chavez doesn't have the means to do to that IMO. Plus the Cartels wouldn't side with Chavez and those would be the people in charge of Mexico if a Civil war broke out.
 
Currently, Mexico, El Salvador, the Dominican Republic, Panama, Colombia, Perú and Chile are the only latin american governments that are allied with the U.S. The problem is that Chavez is creating bolivarian parties and organizations in all of this countries. That is impossible to reach in Colombia, because Chavez is seen as an evil dictator even by the most leftists of the country. He is related to FARC, and FARC is considered evil by the 98% of the population, incluiding communists and former helpers of the guerrilla. In this December, I saw something strange, I live in Medellin, a city far from the frontier with Venezuela, however in the street I am watching at least one car from Venezuela everyday, maybe some Venezuelans are migrating to Colombia just like Cubans in the U.S.

Mexico's state was very weak, so strong drugdealers have found a kind of refugee there. Currently the situation of Mexico is just like the situation of Colombia in the 80s with the terrorist cartels of drug. Also, Mexico is nearer to the U.S and is easier to traffic drugs from that country.

That is why Mexico is interested in making better relations with Uribe, Colombia has a lot of experience in the subject, just like the colombian soldiers that the EU decided to send to Afganisthaan to help solve the landmines problem there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom