Due to Mexican turmoil, will The Donald fortify the southern border or seek a self-serving win-win?

In Mexico, the value of the peso is falling; gas prices are rising; there is looting; there are protests; there are riots.

Will a flood of economic refugees come streaming over our southern border as some believe, and how will The Donald address this crisis once in office.... soon?

Well, he can do his best to use some form of stricter enforcement to fortify the border and to turn back the invading hordes, or...

... he may follow the well-worn adage in politics which is: “Never let a good crisis go to waste.”

From The Donald’s standpoint, would it not be a big waste to let a prime opportunity for self-aggrandizement slip away by not saying something like: “Look, let’s placate our Mexican friends south of the border simply and easily so that they don’t storm our southern border en masse. We can just see to the lowing of gasoline prices; it's just that simple. I will quickly dispatch my Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, to Moscow to consummate the $500,000,000,000 oil exploration deal that he intended to consummate with pal Vladimir Putin before those silly-stupid sanctions against Russia were implemented.The supply of oil will go up, and the price of gasoline will go down. Why, it’ll be a win-win for Mexicans and Americans alike, and the southern border will not be stormed! I’m so smart; I am the best deal maker. Don’t you just love me, your President. Now, bow down and grovel in humble appreciation?”

And, so, the Trump/Putin bromance continues bound in business matrimony, a match made in heaven. Such are the days of our lives.

a reply to: theworldisnotenough

I say self serving win-win, because that's all Ego Bloaticus Maximus cares about.

And why would we step in on the oil deal? The greedy, corrupt Mexican government got themselves into this, it's not our job to step in.

www.businessinsider.com...

The price increases come as part of a planned liberalization of Mexico's energy market, which involves the move from subsidies that kept gas prices low to a market-based pricing scheme that will adjust prices at the pump more frequently.

People keep bitching about US involvement and influence in foreign countries, but NOW you expect us to come to the rescue?
Let the Mexican people deal with their own mess.

a reply to: theworldisnotenough

I'm not sure where you got the idea that Trump would EVER support the Mexican government, but we are already starting off the Trump administration at odds with them because of the wall thing and who will be paying for it. I wouldn't count on Trump tackling a source problem for illegal immigration if it means helping out the Mexicans. Instead he'll use everything you just said as a bigger reason to pitch his wall.

a reply to: DAVID64

People wouldn't have a problem with the U.S "coming to the rescue"...

It's the "spreading of democracy" via obliteration that tends to piss people off.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: theworldisnotenough

I'm not sure where you got the idea that Trump would EVER support the Mexican government, but we are already starting off the Trump administration at odds with them because of the wall thing and who will be paying for it. I wouldn't count on Trump tackling a source problem for illegal immigration if it means helping out the Mexicans. Instead he'll just use everything you just said as a bigger reason to pitch his wall.

I had advised the alt-right on a another message board that they shouldn't count on any wall (nor any deportation drive, either). These will just be more broken promises along with the non-indictment of Hillary Clinton that will go down The Donald's memory hole (shifty bastard).

Just say he did do what you say in the OP, how is that a bad thing?

Everything you described sounds beneficial to everyone, is it just because its Trump?
Would it still be bad if Obama did it?

Seriously what am I missing?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: theworldisnotenough

I'm not sure where you got the idea that Trump would EVER support the Mexican government, but we are already starting off the Trump administration at odds with them because of the wall thing and who will be paying for it. I wouldn't count on Trump tackling a source problem for illegal immigration if it means helping out the Mexicans. Instead he'll just use everything you just said as a bigger reason to pitch his wall.

It's not a matter of supporting the Mexican government. I don't know how you discerned this from my original post. It's about using a crisis to line one's own pockets.

Anyway, when Mexico's problems start to become our problems, then they have to be addressed by us one way or another. Just don't count on a proper addressing by Donald Trump.

a reply to: theworldisnotenough

True, but the REALLY hardcore Trump supporters and Trump himself aren't known for getting far into the nuances of problems. If the wall fails then Trump fails. He isn't going to get away with selling a different fix to the problem.

There will be a flood of immigrants crossing the border.

And with that crossing some contractor will lobby congress for the handling of all those immigrants.

God Bless Capitalism, cost overruns and deep government pockets.

a reply to: theworldisnotenough

Let's do a quick history lesson to show you how Mexico's problems end up being "solved" by the US. Ok first off. It isn't said often but NAFTA destroyed Mexico's economy. The US complains about the outsourcing of jobs from American soil, but Mexicans lost their agricultural industry thanks to American food being able to be mass produced to the point where the US government pays subsidies to farms NOT to grow more food. Mexico literally had the rug pulled out from under their economy.

This all happened in the 90's by the way. They actually got it worse than we did since we had other industries to fall back on. They didn't; well except crime.

So throughout the end of the 90's and into the 2000's was when illegal immigration started kicking of. INSTEAD of addressing this obvious problem, Bush followed by Obama, trying to placate and compromise with Republicans, ramped up illegal immigration enforcement. Obama ended up deporting more people than any other President; often being called the "Deporter in Chief". Though that fact largely tends to go ignored by the right.

Also, another problem appeared. As the 2000's continued, the cartels in Mexico seized more and more control of the country (thanks in large part to the destabilized economy from NAFTA). This is where we started to see the escalation of force between moving people over the border and our immigration enforcement stopping that. The cartels got SO bad that during Obama's administration we had the DREAMERs Act which was to acknowledge the families and children leaving war torn areas destabilized by them. Though at no point was there an attempt to actually help these countries being torn apart.

At NO point during any of this did anyone want to hear about Mexico's and Central American countries' problems that were causing them to send all these people northward. At EVERY opportunity the American right has yelled for more enforcement and a wall. So that is what the people will get. If they don't then Trump will fail in their eyes.

Why build a wall when most illegals fly into LAX or Atlanta on a tourist visa and just never go home.

The wall is just a symbol....

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: theworldisnotenough

Let's do a quick history lesson to show you how Mexico's problems end up being "solved" by the US. Ok first off. It isn't said often but NAFTA destroyed Mexico's economy. The US complains about the outsourcing of jobs from American soil, but Mexicans lost their agricultural industry thanks to American food being able to be mass produced to the point where the US government pays subsidies to farms NOT to grow more food. Mexico literally had the rug pulled out from under their economy.

This all happened in the 90's by the way. They actually got it worse than we did since we had other industries to fall back on. They didn't; well except crime.

So throughout the end of the 90's and into the 2000's was when illegal immigration started kicking of. INSTEAD of addressing this obvious problem, Bush followed by Obama, trying to placate and compromise with Republicans, ramped up illegal immigration enforcement. Obama ended up deporting more people than any other President; often being called the "Deporter in Chief". Though that fact largely tends to go ignored by the right.

Also, another problem appeared. As the 2000's continued, the cartels in Mexico seized more and more control of the country (thanks in large part to the destabilized economy from NAFTA). This is where we started to see the escalation of force between moving people over the border and our immigration enforcement stopping that. The cartels got SO bad that during Obama's administration we had the DREAMERs Act which was to acknowledge the families and children leaving war torn areas destabilized by them.

At NO point during any of this did anyone want to hear about Mexico's and Central American countries' problems that were causing them to send all these people northward. At EVERY opportunity the American right has yelled for more enforcement and a wall. So that is what the people will get. If they don't then Trump will fail in their eyes.

It didn't help that the Obama administration armed the cartels.

a reply to: Middleoftheroad

Of course. Mistakes were made, and both sides of the partisan aisle are guilty. But the point is that US politics is poison for any country south of us. If those countries want to fix their problems; they are on their own. Especially with Trump in charge.

a reply to: grey580

The flood of illegal aliens has been happening for decades.

Time to remove as many as possible-as quickly as possible.

a reply to: olaru12

If the wall is "just a symbol" then you shouldn't have a problem with it.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Middleoftheroad

Of course. Mistakes were made, and both sides of the partisan aisle are guilty. But the point is that US politics is poison for any country south of us. If those countries want to fix their problems; they are on their own. Especially with Trump in charge.

Yep, but we want to redo the Nafta trade deal. So now is the time for Mexico to try and work with Trump so they can benefit as well.

a reply to: theworldisnotenough

If Trump is serious about stopping the illegal migration across the Mexican border, he could use this crisis in Mexico along with a false flag terrorist attack along the border where terrorists from Mexico are implicated to start a military policing operation along the border.

This would fall short of a declaration of war, but would include shelling Mexican towns and vilages across the border along with drone and air strikes. By destroying the Mexican towns he would cut off the way stations that support the migrants.

Another benefit to that strategy would be to commence an endless miltary engagement that would spur economic growth in the US.

a reply to: Middleoftheroad

If Mexico knew what was good for them, they'd back out IMMEDIATELY and never look back.

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: theworldisnotenough

If Trump is serious about stopping the illegal migration across the Mexican border, he could use this crisis in Mexico along with a false flag terrorist attack along the border where terrorists from Mexico are implicated to start a military policing operation along the border.

This would fall short of a declaration of war, but would include shelling Mexican towns and vilages across the border along with drone and air strikes. By destroying the Mexican towns he would cut off the way stations that support the migrants.

Another benefit to that strategy would be to commence an endless miltary engagement that would spur economic growth in the US.

I'm having trouble seeing the "benefits" to any of what you just said here. Are you being serious here?