<3 Lauren Southern is back with a new documentary, Borderless

The Pentagon's newest bat drones are silent and almost indistinguishable from the real thing in the dark, while they have been working hard to be able to launch 400 or more drones at a shot from a semi-truck, complete with machine guns and whatever. They won't break them out for the peasants, not in broad daylight anyway. It only brings down the value of their products. Weapons are our largest money making export, and you don't use a cruise missile to stop a bar fight. Mexican peasants think they are somehow special from home grown American ones, and the Pentagon's job is to control the gates between different slums. Nonlethal weapons are what I would expect them to break out, but such things can include weapons with unknown side effects or that can even produce permanent blindness.

There is a growing market for crowd control weapons as global warming heats up, while Donald Duck is proof a loose cannon on deck can be used to drum up business. The Pentagon is always on the look out for a chance to turnover their stock.

 

We lasted long enough in Nam. But a military encounter in Central America would probably not last a week. Think Panama. Why are we talking about war with Mexico/Central America?

 

Mexican trafficking has become such a problem the drug lords of some gangs are famous for cutting off the heads of entire villages and lining the road with them. All roads lead to Rome, which is now run by a Neo-Nazi. I know, its difficult to keep up with all the political subtilties, but Donald Duck is fucking insane and reality TV is not a reliable source of reality. When the Governor of Texas threatened to secede from the union, the Mexican cartels told him to stop spouting smack or they might take it personally. They're an affront to the dignity of southern gentlemen Libertarians everywhere!

 

The US has a permanent presence in Panama, probably enough to fend off an invasion of the country. Its empire baby, get with the times. The robots are next and all that matters is how cheap it becomes to occupy any territory. One third of the continental US we took from Mexico, saying we deserved it more. If we can push them all the way back to Panama, we'll be able to charge more at the gate. Canadians are good neighbors, they understand these things, and supply us with all the lumber and water we can use.

If you think about it, invading Mexico is cheaper than building a wall. Especially if you reinstate the draft. Then we can replace all the Chinese sweat shops...

 

Remember Cabo Wabo in Baja San Lucas ..

 

Wait a second now, you're overlooking the Mexican-American war as well as various cash settlements the US made to secure property from Mexico. If the US was hell-bent on conquering Mexico, why did they stop at Mexico city? And why did they cede the territory they won in battle (which created today's border)? American altruism?

Seriously, before the outrage of the Alamo the Mexican army was routinely routing American forces. They came into the US looking for trouble and found it. The US didn't simply "take" territory from Mexico. And Mexico back then was nowhere near as pathetic as Mexico is today. They were a serious force augmented by the French for decades.

 

The sad truth is, Mexico wasn't worth the trouble, which their own wars and political problems to this day testify to, but times change and we need someone to replace the Chinese. The US already made the obligatory efforts to play nice with the Mexican government, but it would help enormously if we could just run the country a little more directly. We'll be sure to appeal to the native population and give them all the benevolent dictators we can. Its better for business.

 

Well put...

 

Except he forgot the Chinese. We used them to build the railroads because they work hard, we used blacks as slaves, and we used Mexicans to pick our crops, mow our lawns, and build our houses faster. Now even building houses is about to be automated, so we're throwing them back over the border. Automation is the future, just ask the Pentagon.

 

Here's what I have on that. I hope it's helpful and not annoying.

 

I didn't forget them, we were talking about Mexico.

 

The entire world economy is about to be automated. Small businesses around the world have already embraced the first affordable robots, while it is currently estimated every bureaucrat in DC can already be replaced with existing AI. Amazon has moved next door to the Pentagon so they can share drones, Google acts like they own the internet, but only because they do, while Microsoft has invested all their research into topological quantum computing and plans to patent the laws of nature next before IBM. Meanwhile, Canada has promised the US all the water we can politely ask for, while Mexico has asked for reassurances their own water won't be cut off. That would be the next move by our glorious leader, is to simply cut off their water, while throwing them back over the border.

Americans are so famous for treating their slaves nice, the NAACP had to go after the farmers for not even providing water sometimes, so they're used to being treated like crap. Now we can sell them bottled water. Somebody tried to do that to a town on lake Michigan, but they weren't interested. The Chilean people threw them out, but if we cut off the water to Mexico its a monopoly that nobody can dispute, and Canada will either look the other way or be bought out. You don't want to drink Mexican water anyway.

 

Dude my nitrous oxide tank is running out trying to keep up with you.

 

You lose me with the term slaves. If you're being rhetorical, I guess it makes sense. After all, the NAACP is a 20th century entity.

 

Yeah, we treated our Black slaves like animals, we treated the Chinese like foreign devils, and we treated the Mexicans like poor relatives of the Mafia. Even now, it would probably be easier for the US to just buy out their government and we have to tell them to not try to bribe our cops. They don't have the kind of money it takes, and if you have that kind of money its usually cheaper to spend it on a lawyer.

 

"We thought it was a dry heat" should be the title of a book about why we lost Vietnam.


I scrolled through about 5 minutes. Seemed like she was anti-NGO, and didn't seem to think the people who were in camps in Morocco were humanitarian migrants because they had to pay to be smuggled. Hard swipe left.

 

Many Vietnam vets will tell you we lost the war because the troops lacked the ability to kill their commanding officers. Thankfully, the Pentagon saw the solution and has invested heavily in robots and AI, fully aware that military intelligence is an oxymoron. Terminator bots empowered to kill their generals are what we need to win some wars.

 

For anyone wondering like me, here is a site that talks about the outcomes of the Vietnam war in a very succinct manner. https://thevietnamwar.info/who-won-the-vietnam-war/

...

 

I've never been to Cabo Wabo though I've heard it talked about.