this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2024
347 points (100.0% liked)

World News

45629 readers
2479 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum dismissed reports of a potential U.S. “soft invasion” to combat cartels as “entirely a movie,” emphasizing Mexico’s sovereignty as a free, independent nation.

The Rolling Stone report claims Donald Trump’s incoming administration is considering covert military operations in Mexico, including airstrikes and assassinations of cartel leaders.

While Trump and key officials like Pete Hegseth and Marco Rubio support such measures, experts warn they could backfire by boosting cartel recruitment, undermining Mexican sovereignty, and fostering cartel-Mexican authority collaboration.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 118 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Fuckin wild that we’re reading shit like this.

[–] Blackout@fedia.io 85 points 4 months ago (4 children)

He's not even in office yet and threatening war with Mexico. This is going to be a long 4 years

[–] RamblingPanda 34 points 4 months ago (3 children)

*Soft war. Just the tip.

I still can't believe America voted for this. Holy shit.

[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I hope he tells all the troops its a soft war, has them walk leisurely across the boarder, to be met with a wall of mexican flac

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 22 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Didn’t the nazi’s start with their neighbors too?

[–] superkret@feddit.org 18 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The Nazis annexed 3 neighbors without even firing a shot.
The US doesn't even have 3 neighbors.

[–] philpo@feddit.org 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)
[–] superkret@feddit.org 14 points 4 months ago

Who the fuck are you calling "you*?

[–] azimir@lemmy.ml 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Land connected countries I think it's only two (direct neighbors): Mexico and Canada. Is there another country I'm missing? If we can continue down south we get into Guatemala and Belize. If we allow water traversal, then the Caribbean is full of places.

I don't see many of these locations not fighting back one way or another, either directly or through international responses. Germany at least had some casus belli for annexing territory through ethnic/cultural grounds and/or historical border European nation border changes. The US has no such thing to work with, we'd just be obviously complete assheads to annex anything at this point.

[–] Zron@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Land connected is 2, but Cuba is also right there

[–] azimir@lemmy.ml 7 points 4 months ago

We also have a bit of an established history invading Cuba.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] kautau@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago (1 children)

As long as it ends in 4 years. Otherwise it’s going to be much longer and much bloodier

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 23 points 4 months ago

2016-2020 was filled to the brim with daily headlines of all the stupid, backward, hateful, fascist shit trump & co were up to. The next n years will be no better.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 39 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Looking like Mexico will be Trump's Poland.

[–] rockerface@lemm.ee 25 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If things go south here in Ukraine, Poland still has a chance to be Trump's Poland

[–] whithom@discuss.online 35 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Think the ML bears will be around to call out genocide?

[–] illegalflyer@lemm.ee 31 points 4 months ago (2 children)

So funny to me how Lemmy users love beefing with each other. They live in your head rent free. No one even said anything you're just sitting there creating situations in your head like the right wingers you "hate"

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 31 points 4 months ago

I'm pretty sure you're a Lemmy user.

[–] Doorbook@lemmy.world 34 points 4 months ago (2 children)

This feels like musk motivation there it must be for lithium in Mexico.

[–] b161@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 4 months ago

You mean Mr “we’ll coup whoever we want”. Surely not.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Brkdncr@lemmy.world 30 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Hopefully Mexico won’t announce they found oil or lithium near cartel territories anytime soon.

[–] azimir@lemmy.ml 21 points 4 months ago

Mexico doesn't have to announce it. The US is more than happy to make the announcement before them. Evidence includes "Yellow Cake", "WMDs in Iraq", and the fact that our incoming president lies without even thinking at all times.

[–] sik0fewl@lemmy.ca 15 points 4 months ago

Mexican president dismisses possible ‘soft invasion’ by U.S. troops as ‘a movie’

Aww, but I've already seen this one. It's called Sicario: Day of the Soldado.

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 11 points 4 months ago (1 children)

"soft invasion"? Do you mean some kind of "special operation"?

I wonder where these ideas are coming from?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago

Any offensive attack against any central or south American country would cause a catastrophic chain of events that would end America as a global power. First it would not only put us at war with every central and South America country but most of the EU and UN nations. South and Central America countries would instantly nullify their anti nuclear weapon agreements. Add in the fact that a large percentage of US citizens have ties to those nation so instantly there would mass unrest in every state. Hell the military wouldn't be able to mobilize enough people willing to kill friends and family for an offensive war.

[–] Assman@sh.itjust.works 8 points 4 months ago (6 children)

Personally I think it's high time Mexico accepts some help with their cartel problem. They've literally made zero progress after decades.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 53 points 4 months ago (10 children)

That's up to Mexico to decide, gringo. Short your own shit first. Maybe end the stupidity of the war on drugs that caused the cartels to become economically powerful in the first place. Then let's talk.

[–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 17 points 4 months ago (3 children)

I think even if the US legalized all drugs today the cartels would still be in business. Human smuggling, human trafficking, extortion, kidnapping, and even avocados! The genie has been out of the bottle for a very long time.

[–] Tinidril@midwest.social 18 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Avocados tell you what the end game is. The cartels are going to use their money hordes to form corporations. Then they will buy out the government to take over Mexican sovereignty. That's how the US "defeated" organized crime.

[–] 3laws@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago

Flashbacks to the United Fruit Company... Wait, I don't even have to go that far... Flashbacks to Chiquita Brands International.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 12 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Ending prohibition ended the reign of that generation of American gangsters though. Beyond that, I'm for a whole bunch of bleeding heart pinko policies. Open borders for example, a Pan-American Schengen.

[–] greenashura@sh.itjust.works 6 points 4 months ago (3 children)

You do realize cartels and human trafficking groups exist because there's a high demand of that in the USA?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Assman@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You wanna talk about all those dead politicians or no?

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 15 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah, all of them were killed with U.S. weapons funded by U.S. money. We need to get our shit together and stop hurting our neighbors.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

And if people have questions what I mean, I've said it before, if you want to make America great, it is made up of ~35 countries, independent. Working trade deals, cutting funding from militant or criminal groups such as the cartels everyone brings up and forcing them to economically suffer while supporting our neighbors by redirecting outsourced jobs that are going half way around the world to China to our neighbors in South America. A great example have said before is farming fish. We farm fish in the U.S. ship them to China for packaging and then all the way back to the U.S. for sale. That is a huge hit on the environment and an opportunity to bring jobs to markets and strengthen them in much closer regions. Assist in stabilizing the currencies and economies for our neighbors and we stop any such border crisis. Otherwise we pay an indefinite extremely high cost that prolongs suffering for both us and them. If you want America to be great, start with us earning the respect of those around us and becoming the ally they want to support, not out of fear but out of that respect. Those trade deals allow those countries to stabilize inflation, get control on crime, and become better places to live for their populations. That means stability and no reason to leave their culture behind and flee into a dangerous world of hate many people have fostered. Kill hate with responsible kindness.

Welp, I'm drunk

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Tinidril@midwest.social 21 points 4 months ago

America need some help too. Organized crime in the US just merged with corporations and bought up most of the politicians. Now their crimes are mostly legal.

[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 9 points 4 months ago

It won't be, nor should it be, the US "helping"... we literally elected our cartel leaders to POTUS....

[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Wrong, the demand for the illegal drugs is in the USA and you need to cut that off.

[–] Siegfried@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Personalmente, espero que no seas yankee

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Allonzee@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

As an American, I have no one to support in this escalating conflict.

[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Would the Mexican MAGAT voters support a US invasion of Mexico?

[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

That is how tv "celebrity" trump views the world. Drama is his life's blood.

load more comments