Day-Dreaming

Consider this scenario.

1. Illegal Mexican nationals inhabit, say, Arizona to the point of being a majority; the US government does nothing about it.

2. The Mexican government allows them to retain their citizenship.

3. The Mexican Nationals try to chase all the Americans who are not of Mexican descent out of the state--aka cleansing ethnically.

4. The Americans fight back.

(Yes, I know. Some of this isn't make believe.)

What do you think the US would do if Mexico came to the aid of their countrymen?

What would it do if Arizona declared its independence from the US?

And, forgetting the fact that the US has Mexico overwhelmingly outgunned--the fact that might usually makes right--who would be morally in the right?

UPDATE: Reality mirrors fiction and turns it on its side.

Security is being heightened along the southern U.S. border because of a threat that warring Mexican cartels may send hit men into the United States, authorities said Monday.

Law enforcement officials would not discuss specific security measures being taken at the ports of entry, along the border or in the city of El Paso, Texas.

"We received credible information that drug cartels in Mexico have given permission to hit targets on the U.S. side of the border," El Paso police spokesman Officer Chris Mears said.

You don't think what has happened in the Republic of Georgia could happen here? Think again.

Comments

[Pasadena Closet Conservative]

Saw the article in the L.A. Weekly and went right to your blog. Keep up the good work! I have added you to my blogroll.

[Punditarian]

As you may know, there are several extremist groups working day & night to make this nightmare a reality (MEChA, La Raza Unida, the O.L.A., etc.) The racist, fascist state these groups plan to establish in what is now Arizona, New Mexico, California, Texas, and Colorado (along with the northernmost states of Mexico) would be horrific. The guerilla war that will occur when they reach the tipping point of enough support in a large enough segment of the population will gravely threaten every American.

[Robert]

I'm sure this will offend someone, and I probably have some of the history wrong ...

But I thought you were talking about the events leading up the war for Texan independence. (you know, the Alamo, Santa Ana and all that?) until I got to the end of your post.

[baldilocks]

Actually, that's why I didn't pick Texas for my hypothetical. :-)

[MTheads]

It's definitely true that if a country can't defend its territory or rely on a stronger ally to defend it for them, some other group will take it. I suppose this could be seen as a kind of natural morality. That said, I think it'll be a long time before the U.S. is unable to defend its territory.

[baldilocks]

Of course we'd be able to. The question is, under stated hypothetical circumstances *should* we?

You'd think it was a given, but people are saying that Georgia "invaded" South Ossetia--the country's own territory.

[MTheads]

What should we do in the stated hypothetical situation....can I flip a peso?

[baldilocks]

Ha!

[Casey]

The problem, Juliette, is that Georgia -as a country- is less than 20 years old, and South Ossetia is a big, fat, hairy wedge stuck into the middle. Ossetia is politically and culturally distinct from Georgia. Consider it a going-away present from the Soviets.

Please note that I am no way saying that Russia is right and Georgia wrong. I would rather say that Georgia reacted to an irredentist movement in a clumsy and heavy-handed way, providing the Russ with a golden opportunity to jump in, feet first, with both hobnailed boots.

Actually our nascent country did try to horn in on an adjacent fellow-imperial-subject region about 22 years after founding our own government, but the Canucks weren't having any.

Please recall that many of the CIS elements are really just break-away Imperial provinces. That hardly makes them countries. Look at the problems faced by Imperial Britain's former colonies in India.

Heck, look at the former Czechoslovakia, now the Czech Republic and Slovakia.

[baldilocks]

All that is fine, but it should be pointed out--especially to the Russia apologists--that the moral ground used to determine who is right and who is wrong in these situations is ever shifting. The advocates of international law need this reminder also.

[John in Michigan, USA]

MEChA, La Raza, etc. are racist orgs, have territorial ambitions, and are generally bad news. But is the Mexican government anywhere close to giving them helicopter and fixed wing support? Intelligence support? Diplomatic support on the world stage? That would be news to me.

Those would all be pre-conditions before we could get to a Russia-Georgia situation.

You have to realize how bad the Georgian situation was, even before the Russians escalated. There had been dueling artillery barrages in S. Ossetia for MONTHS BEFORE the Russians finally moved massed armor in and started making the headlines we've seen.

There are, for lack of a better word, class distinctions in parts of Mexican society. The people in government and business, particularly, see themselves as modern and respectable and look down on the border bandits, who they do not consider to be respectable folks. At least, that is my impression from talking to Mexican citizens and visiting there once. Am I wrong?

It is very hard to imagine that the Mexican government would ever permit things to get anything close to even the pre-conditions I mentioned. They control their army, not the groups that you mention. Beyond that, even if the Mexicans elected a Chavez, or the Mexican government just plain collapsed, the Mexican Army, federal police, etc. are reasonably professional and have strong ties to the US Army, FBI, etc.

I am not minimizing our border problems, I just think you fail to realize how bad the situation in S. Ossetia was, and how long it had been lingering before it started making major news.

You say "Some of this isn't make believe", which I suppose is true; but some of it is make believe. I'm saying, the parts that are make believe, are even more make believe than you realize.

[baldilocks]

How do you know that things are more make-believe than I realize, John? This post does not represent the totality of my knowledge about Mexico and the only reason why I would *guess* that you would *guess* that it did was so you could poo-poo the scenario.

[John in Michigan, USA]

@baldilocks:

True, I don't know how deep your Mexico knowledge goes; deeper than mine, probably. Or your Georgia knowledge, for that matter. If you have relevant knowledge, tell me what it is? Are there other posts I should read?

Maybe I can boil it down this way: It is a reasonable day-dream to speculate that the border situation, which today is basically a gang and smuggler's paradise, could one day evolve into bona-fide guerilla warfare.

But even if guerilla warfare become a permanent feature of the US-Mexico border, it will never be as bad as Georgia, because the Mexican guerillas would not be state-sponsored. Ignored, at times even tolerated, by the Mexican federal government, perhaps, but not sponsored. For example, I just can't see the Mexican Army mobilizing to support the guerillas.

It comes down to the difference between state-sponsored guerillas and free-lance guerillas. The guerillas, if it came to that, would be fighting both US forces and Mexican forces. Where am I wrong?