Should the US start training military to handle violent gangs in other countries?

I'm not sure if there are other countries that have such problems with gangs as the Central American, Mexican and some South American countries, I would suspect there may be some in SE Asia and maybe Africa but they don't seem to directly effect issues in the US like those in our hemisphere. I also include in this list cartel's that sell/smuggle drugs, people, etc.

IIRC when England outlawed slavery they allowed their navy to attack, board, capture other ships involved in the slave trade and possibly execute the captains (& senior officers??) of the vessel. IDK if this is sensationalized Hollywood story line, but I think this is historical fact.

I don't see why the US couldn't do something similar with these gangs and cartels that are either undermining their official governments or taking hostile actions towards the US (sending drugs, gangsters, etc to the US).

I'm not sure if groups like ISIS, Al-queda, boko-harem, etc fall into this category but they operate very similarly to gangs.

Whether the military is the best option for dealing with these issues remains to be seen. This seems like the exact reason that the CIA was formed - for dealing with issues such as this but I think i would be more comfortable with the military handling the "action" with information gathered by the CIA/DIA.

When I talk about military action I'm not talking about sending an armada/fleet of ships and an entire invasion force of 10's thousands, but something much smaller somewhat like a peace keeping mission that the UN does. I know a lot of people will complain that it isn't our business and we need to stay out of it, but this latest caravan shows that these countries can't even control their LAWFUL citizens much less their outlaws. Their citizens can't even go through the lawful process of applying for citizenship and they break the laws expecting other countries to bow down for them (and if they don't we are called racist and other buzz words).

So if the problem has gotten so bad that people are leaving by the 1,000's then that seems to show that the government has failed. It is a failed state. That is good reason to send in military to help maintain peace and uproot out the gangs. If the people of that country complain, then tell them to keep their citizens in their country and stop sending them north as we have our own problems to deal with.

Should the US be the "Policeman of the World" (aka Global Hegemonic EMPIRE)?

NO.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

Nope, not unless we are absorbing said nation as a permanent territory under the rule of law of the US Constitution.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Should the US be the "Policeman of the World" (aka Global Hegemonic EMPIRE)?

NO.

So you didn't even read the post. Great. What you posted was covered. I'll bet 90% of your 25,000 posts are the same garbage where you don't even read what was written, you just blurt out whatever comes to mind from the subject. Star and cookie for you! Your screen name is very accurate!

Maybe you could slow down and actually contribute something of value. You might not have so many worthless replies.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

I read it.

And my response was spot on for it.

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

Nope, not unless we are absorbing said nation as a permanent territory under the rule of law of the US Constitution.

I agree with that to a large degree. If it truly is a failed state then I don't see why sending in troops to maintain order is out of the question. And if we go through that effort, then they should become a territory until they can prove they can self govern (and not in a year or two - must have a decent length track record).

I'm mainly talking about gangs/ countries that have a direct impact on the US, like El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico, etc. All of these countries act as a safe haven for much of the drugs and violence that happens in the US. How can that be dealt with without some kind of military intervention? I guess we could train their military but so many times that has backfired and the trained people turn against us either during the cooperative process or immediately after, so I don't think that is a good idea - which leaves using US military assets unfortunately.

No, for 1 we need to stop policing the world, let Europe handle it if some third world pest hole needs help.

second, any skills they learn handling "gangs" over there can be used here at home.

At this moment I am not concerned about the military turning on the people, that's not to say down the road they wont.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

The U. S can't even control violent gangs within its own borders...

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

Yes, most of these nations have proved numerous times that they are incapable of stable self government. If we are going to spill American blood to stabilize a nation and take care of the people, might as well make it a stable territory and keep the corruption down and protect the people from the criminals.

a reply to: infolurker

The biggest criminals in the world own the US government. And its chief export around the world is corruption.

And the MSM solution is to be the Policeman of the World.

a reply to: Irishhaf

Yeah!

"Our" militarized Police State isnt militarized enough yet!

FFS America is dead judging how lost "Above" Top Secret is anymore.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

The U. S can't even control violent gangs within its own borders...

Exactly, we need the troops at home to protect citizens from Antifa and other left wing gangs that openly advocate violence against civilians.

No one appreciates when the U.S. meddles in affairs around the world. Clearly other counties would rather handle these things over having us intervene. We need to take care of America first and fix our own problems.

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

The U. S can't even control violent gangs within its own borders...

Exactly, we need the troops at home to protect citizens from Antifa and other left wing gangs that openly advocate violence against civilians.

A gang is a gang is a gang, it makes no difference what the political leanings of said gang are, saying they need to engage only left wing gangs is bizarre statement to make, OK maybe not bizarre but certainly partisan.

Anyhow you yanks don't want the military on the streets unless of course you advocate for martial law.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Democrats are openly calling for violence in the U.S. so their gangs (like Antifa and BLM) are the ones we have trouble with right now.

a reply to: Metallicus

Groups like Antifa really just need enough rope to hang themselves, calling for military intervention is dangerous, what happens when they remove all the gangbangers who will they target next?

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

The U. S can't even control violent gangs within its own borders...

Exactly, we need the troops at home to protect citizens from Antifa and other left wing gangs that openly advocate violence against civilians.

So your now calling for martial law but only against those whose politics you don’t like.

Hmmmm.....

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Another member here the other day was calling for stop and frisk laws to be implemented.

How would the U.S. like it when the UN goes to chicago to address the gang violence overthere, or tell you how to do it? Just because you are a “powerful nation” doesn’t give you the right to meddle in another country’s affairs. The world doesn’t tell the U.S. how to conduct it’s internal politics, -allhough you might be forgiven for thinking that Soros is doing exactly that- so why should you guys be telling another country what to do? This is exactly why America has lost it’s popularty, especially in the ME, but also large parts of europe. Bluntly put and with all due respect, Mind your own business.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

The easy think to do, was to just make drugs legal.

You talk about history, what about the history of USA invading other states, everywhere the military goes, it brings death and destruction, AND REFUGEES!!!

The USA has some of the WORST gang problems in the world, so why shouldnt Europe, china or russia not send an army to "help" you guys solve the problems you obviously cant handle yourself?

Who helped create the drugproblems we have today? Wasnt that the CIA?

Why dont you guys do anything about the problems in Israel/palestina or Saudia Arabia? ohh thats right, those are your best buddies...