Summary
President-elect Donald Trump and his incoming administration are debating the extent of potential U.S. military action against Mexican drug cartels.
Options discussed include targeted airstrikes, cyberattacks, covert operations, and “soft invasions” using special forces. Trump has warned Mexico to curb fentanyl trafficking or face military intervention.
His key appointees, such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, support some form of military action, framing cartels as terrorist threats.
Critics fear this could escalate tensions with Mexico and spark significant international controversy.
If the cartels start openly fighting back on U.S. soil, this administration will immediately change the rules of engagement to shooting anybody who physically approaches the U.S. border overnight. I’m talking literally within hours. This is exactly what they want. They are looking for any excuse they can use to leverage support from border states in deploying automated defense systems.
There is no scenario where the cartels engaging in insurgency on U.S. soil does not result in immediate shock and awe military tactics in response. There will be no more consideration for civilian deaths. Anybody within shooting distance of the border will be designated as an enemy combatant. That’s what will happen. Make no mistake about it.
I have no doubt it would be used to escalate things further. But I must say, that wouldn’t matter. All the tech and loose ROEs in the world cannot kill an idea.
I’m not entirely sure what you mean by this? It seems to me like you are saying that cartels are somehow engaged in an ideological war, and I don’t really see any evidence of that. Can you elaborate further?
They are characterized as religious organizations but they operate in many ways like the Mob. It’s a lifestyle and a shadow government and a religion. They originate from Mexico’s civil war in the early 1900s. So they are as much an institution as the government itself.