ON SUNDAY, IN the wake of a military operation to kill one of the country’s most infamous drug traffickers, clashes broke out across the Mexico, leaving dozens dead and producing shocking images of roadblocks, armed men in the streets, and panicked civilians ducking for cover.
Within hours of the operation in which troops killed cartel boss Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes, known as “El Mencho,” in a rural hideout outside Guadalajara, gunmen loyal to his Jalisco New Generation Cartel group poured into the streets of several cities, burning buses and firing automatic weapons.
“The city was completely emptied,” said David Mora, an International Crisis Group analyst who happened to be in Guadalajara on Sunday, of the aftermath of the violence. “I mean it was a ghost town — there was no one on the streets yesterday.”
The fighting left at least 70 people dead, including 25 members of Mexico’s National Guard, which carried out the mission guided by intelligence from counterparts in U.S. military and law enforcement, according to President Claudia Sheinbaum.
It’s an acceptable price to pay because this will surely end the supply of drugs to America. They’ll give up the huge profits after this. Americans will stop taking drugs and the problem will go away so we can refocus on what we were doing before. What was that? Oh yeah, prosecuting the Epstein villains.
Well, he got the head he wanted. What now happens to pesky brown people outside the US, he could not care less…
Kind of wild how the article greatly ignores that it is also funded by US Business owners with brutal quotas for human trafficking to the US.
Has there been a single civilian casualty? I’m asking honestly, because I haven’t heard about it. All the major outlets that have reported on it thus far all say the death toll belong solely to the soldiers and the cartels.
Fyi - sorry for the screenshot but the site wouldn’t let me copy.
That certainly doesn’t make a case for calls for peace. Sounds like a good reason to keep hunting Cartel.
When alcohol was illegal in the US, when people would die from alcol poisoning from a bad batch that was made in a bathtub, and mafia owned all the alcohol sale in US, and when there was a dispute, they handled it with Tommy guns, and civilians would die, did we fix the issue by legalizing alcohol or have some childish idea of just hunting the mafia members over and over?
This dude really came in here with an antiregulatory, antigovernment, general comment to defend the Cartel.
Hey, dude, have fun working for the Cartel. They’ll treat you right. /s
I don’t think they were defending the cartel. I think they were saying that actually hunting the cartel members is almost pointless. The better solution in their opinion is to cut off their revenue source by providing a safe and legal route to drug access.
Making points about how sometimes government actions can cause indirect harm in a discussion thread about how the Cartel are threatening to harm innocents if the Government keeps fighting them is a defence of the Cartel.
I don’t think advocating for a course of action that dismantles an organization can be considered advocacy. I could see it being a critique of the current course of action, but saying we should change tactics is hardly an argument that our goals are wrong.if someone is trying to mine rock with a pencil, and someone comes over and suggests a mining drill, its not really a defense of the rock.
I’ve re-read your response a few times and it may be lack of sleep, but I’m struggling to mentally register what you were trying to saying.
My interpretation of what they were saying wasn’t in defence of the cartel, but that a different course of action would be more impactful. Fight them by targeting their revenue stream.
It’s always good to remove the head of a cartel, but you could argue the way it was carried out had no thought behind the immediate repercussions on civilians.
The way we are going about it is making it worse though. Since fragmenting the sinaloa cartel in the 00’s at the bequest of the US, it was predicted that it would make it all worse, that the offshoots from that cartel would be more violent, and that came to pass.
I’m not saying do nothing, but I’d like to hear what the people that knew the operation to smash Sinaloa originally was going to make the problem much worse have to say about what to do next.
Cartels are like any gang: there’s social pressure to join, the promise of respect and riches, and for some, it may be the only way out of a life of poverty.
The problem is the rot runs too deep. Well intentioned politicians are murdered (to preserve power or existence), and the cartel often infiltrates police and armed forces to stay steps ahead.
Going after a cartel boss sends a message to the narcos (they’re not untouchable). I think you are right in the sense that the lower level members should have some way out of the lifestyle that doesn’t necessitate violence. That’s a hard problem to solve.
Conversely, we’ve seen the cartel assassinate political candidates in “peaceful” years. Peace can only come from equality not subservience.
Democracy in Mexico made it clear the people do not want the Cartel around.
You must never let the Cartel threaten you or anyone else with violence. Tolerance ends with the intolerant.
During the actual operation in the gunfight with el mencho’s henchman a pregnant woman was killed I think I read.
Insert Shrek meme here.
Man of you are going to die, but that’s a price I am willing to pay.
clashes broke out across the Mexico
