"Mexican military chopper crosses the border, shoots at agents"---News Tuscon

News 4 Tucson has learned a Mexican military helicopter travelled [sic] across the border and fired on U.S. Border Patrol agents.

It happened in the early morning hours Thursday, west of the San Miguel Gate on the Tohono O'Odham Nation. The chopper fired on the agents but missed them. The chopper then flew back into Mexico. We're told Mexican authorities contacted the U.S. and apologized for the incident.

"Mexican military chopper crosses the border, shoots at agents"---News Tuscon

Hi guys, I did a search for this topic, but found only a similar incident from 2010.

I haven't seen any mention of this on the big national news channels, just this local news crew from Tuscon, AZ.

They are reporting that a Mexican MILITARY copter flew across the border, THEN fired 2 shots, missing border patrol agents. Multiple statements (in article link) from both Mexican and American governments indicate an apology was made.

Is this normal? A breach of airspace, followed by shots fired, and an apology suffices? In the midst of all this border drama, it seems very strange, almost dangerous, that they're keeping the incident mum. I'm a Yank, though, and have no clue about how often this stuff may occur. Any border-state residents able to comment?

Little strange it was a military copter, too; although I imagine they are in the cartels' pockets same as anyone down there.

See this is why border patrol needs to be militarized. I bet they would a thought twice about firing on a US military vehicle. Especially when they have some javelins they can retaliate with.

originally posted by: yuppa
See this is why border patrol needs to be militarized. I bet they would a thought twice about firing on a US military vehicle. Especially when they have some javelins they can retaliate with.

ahhh yes, thats the solution.....more military boots on the ground in america.

To take a shot at someone, requires them to visually identify their targets, line up the shot, and squeeze the trigger. which would require a lot of looking, and thinking how to hit the person. It sounds like their was No visual ID, or thinking on the part of the Mexicans.

a reply to: captaintyinknots

Better to have boots on the ground IN America protecting our own borders, rather than 20 other countries. Our borders should be our #1 priority, don't you think?

a reply to: Glassbender777

do you think their location (or the localtion of the shots fired) was unintentional, or based in something akin to boredom? Or by "no visual" do you mean to imply that they shot blind once across the border? I suppose it could be either way, really; just shootin' for the hell of it? Just trying to clarify, thanks for commenting!

originally posted by: yuppa
See this is why border patrol needs to be militarized. I bet they would a thought twice about firing on a US military vehicle. Especially when they have some javelins they can retaliate with.

you've hit the nail on the head surely! The US would be going mental if they hadn't agreed to let it happen to make it seem like its absolutely necessary to militarise the border?

originally posted by: Wookiep
a reply to: captaintyinknots

Better to have boots on the ground IN America protecting our own borders, rather than 20 other countries. Our borders should be our #1 priority, don't you think?

I dont think militarizing our streets is the answer at all, no.

Protect our borders? We're hardly under attack.

Even with the corruption of the Mexican military.

The US border will never be militarized.

That would inflame the base of a certain political group who just wants their votes.

Doesn't matter to them one damn bit who gets killed.

Should the border be secured ?

Yes!.

Should border agents be shot at.

NO!.

a reply to: neo96

That would inflame the base of a certain political group who just wants their votes.

It could be that...it could also be all the fat cats who make money hand over fist running things through that country. wouldnt sit to well with them now, would it?

a reply to: captaintyinknots

We don't need to militarize our "streets" to protect our borders, I'm not talking about a police state.

We're hardly under attack.

Some would beg to differ.

a reply to: captaintyinknots

.it could also be all the fat cats who make money hand over fist running things through that country

There is no could there .

That is the way it is.

There is one thing more valuable than money is the country, the vote.

That keeps them in power.

originally posted by: Wookiep
a reply to: captaintyinknots

We don't need to militarize our "streets" to protect our borders, I'm not talking about a police state.

We're hardly under attack.

Some would beg to differ.

I am one of them.

They cry about those 'illegal' invasions in the ME.

But its crickets about that foreign invasion in to this country that has been going on for decades.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: captaintyinknots

.it could also be all the fat cats who make money hand over fist running things through that country

There is no could there .

That is the way it is.

There is one thing more valuable than money is the country, the vote.

That keeps them in power.

I get your sentiment, but dont agree. With enough money can come votes. Thats always been the case.

Bottom line is, much of the violence we are seeing in mexico originates in washington.

a reply to: Wookiep

We don't need to militarize our "streets" to protect our borders, I'm not talking about a police state.

You are talking about putting military inside of the borders of this country. That is militarizing our streets. The minute you have military protecting the border, you will have military used with INS, which means you will have military on your streets.

Unless you are talking about simply stationing military along the border, but not giving border control any power over them, i fear its a VERY slippery slope.

Some would beg to differ.

As is their right. But they are wrong. Plenty of places in the world are under attack. Our southern border isnt one of them.

Thats not to say it wont ever get there, but in the real world, funneling money and drugs and weapons into an area, then claiming "we're under attack" when those things are used, isnt very logical.

a reply to: neo96

But its crickets about that foreign invasion in to this country that has been going on for decades.

Its funny, too, though, that those that are so up in arms about this so-called "foreign invasion" are the same people who want to protect the corporations that are paying them to be here.....

a reply to: captaintyinknots

We already have military on our streets!

We call them police!

What is even the point of having Homeland Security and a government that preaches they need to keep us safe, all the while ignoring our southern border security and influx of unauthorized visitors from who knows where just strolling on thru!

Military Equipment Rolls Into America's Cities

The Growing Epidemic of Police Violence: Is It Time to De-Militarize Police Forces?

a reply to: captaintyinknots

Unless you are talking about simply stationing military along the border

Yes, that is what I am talking about. We have hundreds of military bases inside our country, so I'm not sure what you mean by not wanting "military inside of the borders of this country". What's the problem with stationing them near the borders? Your average American wouldn't even know they were there, and I'm sure the residents of border towns would be happy to have them around.

As is their right. But they are wrong. Plenty of places in the world are under attack. Our southern border isnt one of them.

I think you're downplaying the situation quite a bit. That's your opinion though and I won't attempt to change it because I'm 99.999% sure it would be a waste of time.

originally posted by: captaintyinknots
Protect our borders? We're hardly under attack.

Attack? No. Coordinated civilian invasion? Yes. And a coordinated civilian invasion can be devastating to the country being invaded. Economically speaking, we can't handle the influx. There are a reason for countries putting limits on immigrants. The numbers aren't put there willy-nilly.

The Mexican gov't and other agencies down there are handing out maps to people telling them how to get here and where to find water crossing the desert, etc etc. They open the prison doors and put the maps in the hands of those they release. They send the poorest of the poor here in order to relieve the burden on the Mexican gov't.


As a veteran I offer a solution ... or at least something that would help.

BRING OUR TROOPS HOME. We shouldn't be in Iraq or Syria or Libya or anyplace else over there. Troops need constant training so use the desert crossing area in Texas, New Mexico and Arizona for training our troops. It's our border, we can secure it AND have our troops home and training. It makes sense.

a reply to: captaintyinknots

ts funny, too, though, that those that are so up in arms about this so-called "foreign invasion" are the same people who want to protect the corporations that are paying them to be here.....

No what is funny is that those aren't 'evil rich' people coming here.

That is poor people coming here that end up on the welfare lines, and every other social engineering program this country has to 'offer'.