See, now you're on my beat. "Why don’t we make serious efforts to help Mexico root out the corruption and cartels tearing apart that ancient land? Surely a failed state on our border is a very bad thing."
Yes, a failed state on our border is a bad thing, and that's where we're living now. Mexico IS a failed state, the government is a wholly owned subsidiary of the cartels and has been for decades. The government of Mexico doesn't want any assistance, and in fact is anti assistance in the extreme.
Why?
Two reasons,
one-- the government IS the cartels at this point, why would they want our assistance in being not part of the cartels? That's like Gotti wanting assistance in eliminating organized crime in NYC. Two -- The US is viewed (and this is a historically accurate view) as someone who "helps" in central and south America by putting puppets in place, sending corporations down to do unto central and south America what the powers of Europe have done for centuries to Africa, and then splitting before the bill comes due.
Plus we are always a four year term away from "Eh, Central America is boring, lets go look at what Africa is doing."
So, how do you help someone who doesn't want your help? Remember, that guy in Venezuela was legally elected (the first time) because he promised people what they said they wanted! Well, when you want the impossible, the horribly possible is what you get instead, as citizens of every communist nation ever have learned to their sorrow.
What all of the western hemisphere has learned from the 1920s to the 2020s is that how America "helps" is by funding a revolution, propping up a guy that we like, no matter what the locals think, thus picking a winner and a loser, much like Europe did in the middle east for a couple hundred years.
Is that all we've done there? Well, no, we did a lot of good things too, but "the evil that men do, live long after them." That's what is REMEMBERED.
"Why don’t we assist the legitimately elected leader of Venezuela depose the current illegitimate government? Surely an illegitimate government that has destroyed a rich nation’s prosperity, leaving citizens without so much as food security shouldn’t be allowed to stand."
Uh, CIA Operation PBSuccess White curtesy phone, please. See also Pinochet, Iran-Contra, '76 Argentina coup, '71 Bolivia coup, 74 Brazilian coup, '73 Chilian coup, and on and on...
We don't have a track record that would entice the population at large of any western hemisphere nation to want our hands anywhere near them. So what would you have us do?
"But we can help. Publicly and privately.
We hold vast intelligence gathering capabilities. Vast diplomatic power. Vast economic power. We should use them to help our neighbors."
We have intelligence gathering capabilities, yes, but who runs that? CIA, DIA, NSA, and NRO. Those are names that are not in good color south of Texas.
Vast diplomatic power? Sir I think you are living in the past. Biden pretty much destroyed any vestige of diplomatic power we might have had, and frankly we didn't have that much south of the border to begin with. If you're not trusted, you have no diplomatic power. As I mentioned, south of the border, we're not trusted.
Vast economic power? We have had full sanctions, virtually every economic tool at our disposal deployed against Cuba since 1961, has it changed anything? We've had almost every sanction we can use deployed against Venezuela for twenty years. Change? NADA. See also Iran.
At the end of the day, you can not free a man, you can, at best hand him the tools to free himself. If he doesn't want to be freed, you can't do anything to help him. If you free him against his will, he will just go back to a new master. (See most of the middle east for object lessons, test on Tuesday.)
The best thing we can do south of the border, is first make sure that border is SOLID. I mean, ants can't get across the thing solid. Then offer to trade with the people we like, and refuse to trade with those we don't. Other than that, keep our hands out of it! Maybe in fifty years or so, they might trust us enough to offer help and suggestions, but I doubt it.
Thanks for this. Many of your points are well taken, and I appreciate the opportunity for discussion!
On Mexico: I don't disagree with what you've written. Indeed, I think if we follow this course you mention "The best thing we can do south of the border, is first make sure that border is SOLID. I mean, ants can't get across the thing solid."
We can help the people of Mexico. Because actually securing our border would deprive the cartels of the billions of dollars they make supplying our illegal markets. That would in time drastically reduce their power, and the resources they use to corrupt. That would drastically help, I believe, that nation.
But, of course, Presidents throughout my lifetime, from both parties, have talked a good game about securing the border. They have the power to do it, and they certainly have the resources to do it. None ever have. Will our current President do it? Maybe, but I have a difficult time believing the promises made by anyone in high national office.
On Trust: You write "We don't have a track record that would entice the population at large of any western hemisphere nation to want our hands anywhere near them." And again, I don't disagree. But while they don't trust (and I also agree with good reason) the US, I would argue that they don't trust our competitors either (mainland China &c.)
If I'm right that the 'other guys' aren't trusted either, that at least puts us on equal footing with competing nations. Panama ceded operations of canal ports to China because we weren't paying attention. The moment we paid attention, that changed. In another example, over the past few years the influence of China has grown by leaps and bounds in Brazil. I would argue this is because we left a void.
Yes, we have done much bad to our southern neighbors over our history. Heck, I've been at Chapultepec Castle and seen the place where the Ninos Heroes perished at the hands of our forces in a misguided invasion. That stuff is hard to overcome, just like our own Alamo has become such a potent symbol. But I think it can be overcome, with enough time, and enough good instead of the CIA's evil plotting that you mention.
On Longevity: You write "Plus we are always a four year term away from "Eh, Central America is boring, lets go look at what Africa is doing."" I can't argue against this point. It is certainly correct, and a problem moving forward.
All I can respond is that perhaps with time, we can create a general belief that it is important for us to keep an eye on our own backyard. We watch the minutiae of European states with the eyes of a hawk, and have done so for generations, but don't see what is huge and plainly visible right here in our own neighborhood. The canal again is an example. The only way we can get the political folks to start looking around at our own neighborhood is if people do it first.
On Sanctions: You write "We have had full sanctions, virtually every economic tool at our disposal deployed against Cuba since 1961, has it changed anything? We've had almost every sanction we can use deployed against Venezuela for twenty years. Change? NADA. See also Iran."
I agree. Economic sanctions don't work. I would suggest that rather than the economic stick we instead use the economic carrot. I think that you and I probably agree on that, as you also write: "Then offer to trade with the people we like, and refuse to trade with those we don't." Incentives, not sanctions.
On Freedom: You write "At the end of the day, you can not free a man, you can, at best hand him the tools to free himself. If he doesn't want to be freed, you can't do anything to help him. If you free him against his will, he will just go back to a new master."
I agree. And will not even attempt to argue differently
My Nutshell: Following the World Wars, we decided to police the world. Then more recently we decided to become Daddy Warbucks to the world. The current Administration is pulling back on both of those things, which I believe to be a very good thing. The focus should be on the United States and the welfare of its citizens first and above all. But I would argue that as we expand that focus outward to a lesser or a greater extent, our backyard is at least as important as places half a world away.
I could not agree more! Cleaning up our own backyard would be good! Especially before telling the rest of the world what to do.. or even interfere with their business...
International relations are important yet interfering and overreaching seems to have become a problem.. for gain of course.
The world would be a better place if we'd just focus on and solve our own messes first instead of distracting us with outside drama and foreign "stuff". Our grass is wilting :) and the solution is not out there. It is internal and local.
Yes.. globalism.. selling out to "foreign" ... losing our culture, our believes and our economy.. what a lousy decision that was! Hahaha
We have lost our independence it seems.
I believe people are waking up to all the deceptions and betrayals over the last 50 years and we will start being very careful whom we "give the rudder".. I have a sneaky suspicion that our new set of "rulers" come with a new set of dangers.. AI for instance.. another example to giving the responsibilities into a "entity" that we ourselves cannot predict fir certain.. and in my opinion it would be really good if people would find some intelligence themselves or maybe just some common sense.. as if cell phones were not the biggest warning sign ever.. giving away responsibility is never a good thing.
The old wisdom: "if you want it done right, do it yourself" comes to mind.
This leads me to the thought that centralized government might have to be re- thought, too big to be held accountable.. is seemingly the problem .. all around. Checks and balances ...
where did it all go.. integrity..
it will not be easy, people have gotten used to all the comforts...
I agree, our central government here in the US has grown far too large to be held accountable. And it was never intended to be so large. It was supposed to take care of a few very specific things, leave the rest up to the States. We do well to walk back towards that initial vision I believe.
See, now you're on my beat. "Why don’t we make serious efforts to help Mexico root out the corruption and cartels tearing apart that ancient land? Surely a failed state on our border is a very bad thing."
Yes, a failed state on our border is a bad thing, and that's where we're living now. Mexico IS a failed state, the government is a wholly owned subsidiary of the cartels and has been for decades. The government of Mexico doesn't want any assistance, and in fact is anti assistance in the extreme.
Why?
Two reasons,
one-- the government IS the cartels at this point, why would they want our assistance in being not part of the cartels? That's like Gotti wanting assistance in eliminating organized crime in NYC. Two -- The US is viewed (and this is a historically accurate view) as someone who "helps" in central and south America by putting puppets in place, sending corporations down to do unto central and south America what the powers of Europe have done for centuries to Africa, and then splitting before the bill comes due.
Plus we are always a four year term away from "Eh, Central America is boring, lets go look at what Africa is doing."
So, how do you help someone who doesn't want your help? Remember, that guy in Venezuela was legally elected (the first time) because he promised people what they said they wanted! Well, when you want the impossible, the horribly possible is what you get instead, as citizens of every communist nation ever have learned to their sorrow.
What all of the western hemisphere has learned from the 1920s to the 2020s is that how America "helps" is by funding a revolution, propping up a guy that we like, no matter what the locals think, thus picking a winner and a loser, much like Europe did in the middle east for a couple hundred years.
Is that all we've done there? Well, no, we did a lot of good things too, but "the evil that men do, live long after them." That's what is REMEMBERED.
"Why don’t we assist the legitimately elected leader of Venezuela depose the current illegitimate government? Surely an illegitimate government that has destroyed a rich nation’s prosperity, leaving citizens without so much as food security shouldn’t be allowed to stand."
Uh, CIA Operation PBSuccess White curtesy phone, please. See also Pinochet, Iran-Contra, '76 Argentina coup, '71 Bolivia coup, 74 Brazilian coup, '73 Chilian coup, and on and on...
We don't have a track record that would entice the population at large of any western hemisphere nation to want our hands anywhere near them. So what would you have us do?
"But we can help. Publicly and privately.
We hold vast intelligence gathering capabilities. Vast diplomatic power. Vast economic power. We should use them to help our neighbors."
We have intelligence gathering capabilities, yes, but who runs that? CIA, DIA, NSA, and NRO. Those are names that are not in good color south of Texas.
Vast diplomatic power? Sir I think you are living in the past. Biden pretty much destroyed any vestige of diplomatic power we might have had, and frankly we didn't have that much south of the border to begin with. If you're not trusted, you have no diplomatic power. As I mentioned, south of the border, we're not trusted.
Vast economic power? We have had full sanctions, virtually every economic tool at our disposal deployed against Cuba since 1961, has it changed anything? We've had almost every sanction we can use deployed against Venezuela for twenty years. Change? NADA. See also Iran.
At the end of the day, you can not free a man, you can, at best hand him the tools to free himself. If he doesn't want to be freed, you can't do anything to help him. If you free him against his will, he will just go back to a new master. (See most of the middle east for object lessons, test on Tuesday.)
The best thing we can do south of the border, is first make sure that border is SOLID. I mean, ants can't get across the thing solid. Then offer to trade with the people we like, and refuse to trade with those we don't. Other than that, keep our hands out of it! Maybe in fifty years or so, they might trust us enough to offer help and suggestions, but I doubt it.
Thanks for this. Many of your points are well taken, and I appreciate the opportunity for discussion!
On Mexico: I don't disagree with what you've written. Indeed, I think if we follow this course you mention "The best thing we can do south of the border, is first make sure that border is SOLID. I mean, ants can't get across the thing solid."
We can help the people of Mexico. Because actually securing our border would deprive the cartels of the billions of dollars they make supplying our illegal markets. That would in time drastically reduce their power, and the resources they use to corrupt. That would drastically help, I believe, that nation.
But, of course, Presidents throughout my lifetime, from both parties, have talked a good game about securing the border. They have the power to do it, and they certainly have the resources to do it. None ever have. Will our current President do it? Maybe, but I have a difficult time believing the promises made by anyone in high national office.
On Trust: You write "We don't have a track record that would entice the population at large of any western hemisphere nation to want our hands anywhere near them." And again, I don't disagree. But while they don't trust (and I also agree with good reason) the US, I would argue that they don't trust our competitors either (mainland China &c.)
If I'm right that the 'other guys' aren't trusted either, that at least puts us on equal footing with competing nations. Panama ceded operations of canal ports to China because we weren't paying attention. The moment we paid attention, that changed. In another example, over the past few years the influence of China has grown by leaps and bounds in Brazil. I would argue this is because we left a void.
Yes, we have done much bad to our southern neighbors over our history. Heck, I've been at Chapultepec Castle and seen the place where the Ninos Heroes perished at the hands of our forces in a misguided invasion. That stuff is hard to overcome, just like our own Alamo has become such a potent symbol. But I think it can be overcome, with enough time, and enough good instead of the CIA's evil plotting that you mention.
On Longevity: You write "Plus we are always a four year term away from "Eh, Central America is boring, lets go look at what Africa is doing."" I can't argue against this point. It is certainly correct, and a problem moving forward.
All I can respond is that perhaps with time, we can create a general belief that it is important for us to keep an eye on our own backyard. We watch the minutiae of European states with the eyes of a hawk, and have done so for generations, but don't see what is huge and plainly visible right here in our own neighborhood. The canal again is an example. The only way we can get the political folks to start looking around at our own neighborhood is if people do it first.
On Sanctions: You write "We have had full sanctions, virtually every economic tool at our disposal deployed against Cuba since 1961, has it changed anything? We've had almost every sanction we can use deployed against Venezuela for twenty years. Change? NADA. See also Iran."
I agree. Economic sanctions don't work. I would suggest that rather than the economic stick we instead use the economic carrot. I think that you and I probably agree on that, as you also write: "Then offer to trade with the people we like, and refuse to trade with those we don't." Incentives, not sanctions.
On Freedom: You write "At the end of the day, you can not free a man, you can, at best hand him the tools to free himself. If he doesn't want to be freed, you can't do anything to help him. If you free him against his will, he will just go back to a new master."
I agree. And will not even attempt to argue differently
My Nutshell: Following the World Wars, we decided to police the world. Then more recently we decided to become Daddy Warbucks to the world. The current Administration is pulling back on both of those things, which I believe to be a very good thing. The focus should be on the United States and the welfare of its citizens first and above all. But I would argue that as we expand that focus outward to a lesser or a greater extent, our backyard is at least as important as places half a world away.
we seem to be mostly in agreement, as is moot to fellow travelers.
Indeed Brother! But, I may have a touch of the pollyanna inside! 🤠
Thank you!
I could not agree more! Cleaning up our own backyard would be good! Especially before telling the rest of the world what to do.. or even interfere with their business...
International relations are important yet interfering and overreaching seems to have become a problem.. for gain of course.
The world would be a better place if we'd just focus on and solve our own messes first instead of distracting us with outside drama and foreign "stuff". Our grass is wilting :) and the solution is not out there. It is internal and local.
I'm glad you enjoyed this essay!
It is a truly sad state of affairs when we have people working hard here, who can't afford a home, but we send untold billions overseas.
Yes.. globalism.. selling out to "foreign" ... losing our culture, our believes and our economy.. what a lousy decision that was! Hahaha
We have lost our independence it seems.
I believe people are waking up to all the deceptions and betrayals over the last 50 years and we will start being very careful whom we "give the rudder".. I have a sneaky suspicion that our new set of "rulers" come with a new set of dangers.. AI for instance.. another example to giving the responsibilities into a "entity" that we ourselves cannot predict fir certain.. and in my opinion it would be really good if people would find some intelligence themselves or maybe just some common sense.. as if cell phones were not the biggest warning sign ever.. giving away responsibility is never a good thing.
The old wisdom: "if you want it done right, do it yourself" comes to mind.
This leads me to the thought that centralized government might have to be re- thought, too big to be held accountable.. is seemingly the problem .. all around. Checks and balances ...
where did it all go.. integrity..
it will not be easy, people have gotten used to all the comforts...
I agree, our central government here in the US has grown far too large to be held accountable. And it was never intended to be so large. It was supposed to take care of a few very specific things, leave the rest up to the States. We do well to walk back towards that initial vision I believe.
Yes! Agreed. Industry and Lobbyists .. way too much of that going on.
Local will be the solution all around I believe.
Then we know what is in our food and won't get caught up in global madness like Covid and such. A lot less "outside" dependency and influence.
One thing about Covid, it certainly showed how vulnerable our supply lines were, and highlighted the real need to bring manufacturing back home.
Exactely! We have become too dependent.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx0G5mjhPsU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx0G5mjhPsU
Perhaps, this link is inappropriate, my apologies... I believe anywhere on our planet we must have truth and justice, especially in Mexico.