346
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by Aatube@kbin.social to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world

Mark Meckler is the president of the Convention of States Foundation and a leading proponent of the right-wing movement to get state legislatures to call for a dangerous Article V convention that will consider constitutional amendments to radically alter American government and society by making much of what the federal government now does unconstitutional.

“I don’t think there’s any way to solve this permanently without military action,” Meckler declared. “[We need a buffer zone] like the DMZ between the Koreas. It needs to be a kilometer of cleared territory that is a no man zone; you come in here and we believe you have hostile intent, we’re going to clear you out.”

“We need to exterminate the cartels and that means going into Mexico,” Meckler asserted. “Now people would say, ‘You’re violating a sovereign country’s territory.’ Well, Mexico is not a sovereign country any longer. Mexico is a failed narco state. The federal government is not in control of their military. The federal government is not in control of their police Their state governments are not, their local governments are not in control of their police forces. That is a failed narco-terrorist state and so we have to treat it as such.”

“To me, this is like Gaza. They’re invading our country. They’re invading our country every day. They’re killing our people, and we have to go in and use maximum force to oust them and create a buffer zone along the border. If we do that, we’ll have border security. It’s that simple.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

US doesn't go to war without an economic incentive. Oil, opioids, etc.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

No we solved that in Iraq. The big money maker is the war itself. Supplying the soldiers, bases, and Reconstruction needs. All at an outrageous markup and done as cheaply as possible. (If it gets done at all)

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Right, absolutely no oil in Iraq...

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Iraq famously retained control of its oil. International news conferences and everything. While some American companies got contracts to run oil fields from the Iraqi government, there's also Chinese and Iraqi companies with significant holdings there too.

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

The disruption of supply while the fields burned and had to be rebuilt made a killing for the Saudi Arabian friends/sponsors of the Bush family.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

The contracting for services to the oil fields is up to the companies that won the auctions from the Iraqi government. Which also falls under, Reconstruction and service contracts. Furthermore, that doesn't mean we get the oil. That oil is still owned by the company that owns the rights and most of it goes to Asia.

The closest we came to "doing it for the oil" is to increase the global supply of oil. And when I tell you they made ten times as much supplying and building the FOBs, I am not being sensational.

this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2024
346 points (100.0% liked)

Not The Onion

12561 readers
289 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS