Posted on 10/02/2011 4:45:25 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
The US government should consider sending troops to Mexico to combat drug-related violence, Texas Governor Rick Perry, who is seeking the Republican nomination for US president, said Sunday.
"It may require our military in Mexico working in concert with them to kill these
At present Barack Obama’s administration is providing serious financial support to Mexican security services, while the security services of two countries are closely cooperation, Radio Liberty reports.
(Excerpt) Read more at english.ruvr.ru ...
Full quote: ““It may require our military in Mexico working in concert with them to kill these drug cartels and keep them off of our borders,”
The US Government ofthen sent US Army patrols into Mexico during the Apache wars, and who can forget Ranald Mackenzie.
http://seducedbyhistory.blogspot.com/2011/09/bad-hand-col-ranald-mackenzie.html
“Mackenzie was assigned to Fort Clark to put an end to the plunder of Texas livestock by Indian raiders from Mexico. On May 18, in an extralegal raid, he burned a Kickapoo village near Remolino, Coahuila , and returned with forty captives. That and effective border patrols stopped the raiding.
In late 1877 Indians from Mexico were again raiding in South Texas, and by March 1878 Mackenzie was again at Fort Clark. He began patrols and in June led an expedition into Mexico. His incursion prompted the Mexican government to act, and by October the raiding had ceased.
I do not post that way and it is interesting that BobL feels empowered to instruct me.
I'll forgive him (and forget) on the Texas instate college tuition if he will come out for a border fence and be sincere about it. Border fence along as much of the 1969 mile US-Mexico border as we need. In all the strategic places. Its a no brainer Rick Perry!! Snap out of it! Get off your Texas trip if you want to go nationwide for President!
Its interesting how you won’t tolerate anyone speaking out against perry. Its amazing how you ask for links on extremely well documented facts, ones included in threads you have posted.
Your agenda is obvious, and its not educating on candidates. Your agenda is pushing perry regardless of what he’s really done or his position on the issues.
I haven’t been here 10 years and I know the rules. They are available to read if you look.
To claim you are unaware after 10 years is dishonest.
“I do not post that way and it is interesting that BobL feels empowered to instruct me.”
You really don’t want me to link to the spectacle you made of yourself last August with no less than JimRob, do you? (I’m trying to be nice here)
“If I am out of line, breaking rules, help me out. TELL ME WHAT THEY ARE!”
Spare me the ignorance act, will you. You’re not fooling anyone.
I’m not trying to fool anyone.
If there are rules tell me.
I don’t know what they are.
If you can’t or refuse to, then there must be none or they’re kept unknown for a reason.
It has come to my attention that there are rules to posting to different threads and for different primary candidates. Please tell me which candidates are involved and in what manner.
I am being criticized for not knowing the rules.
Please tell me the rules regarding posts to threads.
Apparently there is a different set of rules for an anti-Perry thread as there is for a thread that I, a Perry supporter would post (that if it’s designated as an anti-Perry thread I can comment but otherwise I am not allowed to respond to a negative poster on a pro-Perry thread).
Please explain. I am not the only FReeper in the dark about this.
Is there a LINK? A thread that goes over this posting etiquette?
Thank you for your assistance.
The Governor uses the same term for the fence that you do: “strategic.”
We already have the river. The fence is only effective in urban areas, to slow down people when there are already lots of people around.
The fence only works where there are frequent patrols and response from near by. It does not work if there’s no one to respond to breaches.
A fence is straight, the river curves back and forth. So, they build it inside the border, not on the border, giving up land that is US soil.
In the meantime, they cut off homes from the rest of the State, they deprive Texas farmers and ranchers their rightful access to their own property and to their water rights. This not only leaves wide swaths of the United States outside of normal defense, it makes it more expensive to run the farms, the ranches, and even regular households.
You’re really full of yourself.
“You’re really full of yourself.”
Wow, you’re almost as thin-skinned as Perry. Welcome to the BIG LEAGUES - as you and Perry are learning, this isn’t state politics anymore, and it’s a lot harder finding yes-men for coronations at this level.
You guys have to EARN your way to the nomination, just like the others.
Like I said, you’re really full of yourself.
“Like I said, you’re really full of yourself.”
LOL.
You’ve been posting on Free Republic for many years. If you don’t understand how this site works or what the rules are by now we can’t help you.
Sorry,
AM
According to your way of thinking, nasty name-calling, vile words, harrassing and personal attacks on other freepers (those comments that don't bother with addressing the issues) are okay with you....in fact, we should LOVE these low-life words and phrases because, according to you, "they open so many OPPORTUNITIES for us to....".....well, to do something or other that's supposed to be beneficial in your eyes....... I don't know quite what. I'm still wracking my brain.
However, you're entitled to your ethics-neutral views no matter how vicious the personal warfare is. I pointed out the ugly phenomenom being perpetrated by some freepers who will post ANYTHING that comes out of their feverish grey cells...and that's that.
Eagles Up!
Leni
I was disagreeing with that. I think the vitriol has been this bad before.
-- "they open so many OPPORTUNITIES for us to....".....well, to do something or other that's supposed to be beneficial in your eyes....... I don't know quite what. --
Independent research. Looking things up, digging for more detail, seeking "the truth."
Hotly contested statements and positions spark my curiosity.
-- However, you're entitled to your ethics-neutral views no matter how vicious the personal warfare is. --
I suggest that you do not know what my views are. I am confident in that, as my views are about as far from ethics neutral as one can find.
-- I pointed out the ugly phenomenom being perpetrated by some freepers who will post ANYTHING that comes out of their feverish grey cells...and that's that. --
As if the vitriol isn't obvious without being pointed out!
Anyway, I agree with the general observation that the level of vitriol is high. I make value judgments against the posters who engage in it.
Comparing apples to oranges?
He was talking about the drug cartels and violent criminals.
Also, it was 2 years ago that he said the quoted post.
Things have elevated to the level of war on the border since then thanks to President Obama.
Your talking about children of illegals who were brought over to Texas that have lived here almost all of their lives, have made good grades, stayed out of trouble and have committed no crime.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.