671
submitted 1 year ago by livus@kbin.social to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml

A joint U.S.-Mexico topographical survey found that 787 feet of the 995-feet-long buoy line set up by Texas are in Mexico.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] venusenvy47@lemm.ee 184 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Sounds like Mexico can just take down most of this thing.

Edit: As a US citizen, I support Mexico's immigration services to detain any Texas construction workers that illegally cross the border to service this thing.

I also would support the governor of this region of Mexico to put these construction workers on a bus and drop them deep in the heart of Mexico somewhere.

[-] comedy@kbin.social 90 points 1 year ago

They should. Send Abbott a bill for polluting their waterway too, while they're at it.

[-] venusenvy47@lemm.ee 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Probably the only reason Mexico hasn't already pulled it out is because they don't want to waste money that they know will never be reimbursed to them.

Maybe the US will take it down and bill Texas themselves.

[-] parrot-party@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

Removing it has to be cheaper than installing it. Bleed Abbott if he wants to play this game.

[-] zackwithak@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

Depends how much cheaper I guess. Texas is about 70% richer than Mexico (by GDP)

[-] jscummy@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

As funny as it would be, taking it out on construction workers who probably didn't choose to be there seems a little unfair

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They should just be drowned. That's the purpose for this barrier, so I think it'd be fair to drown anyone working to construct it. (I don't condone drowning the workers, but the workers should stand up against their employers due to drowning risk. If they don't listen, maybe they should have an "accident" and "drown" instead and the workers take control.)

[-] wheresmypillow@lemmy.one 102 points 1 year ago

Every state’s geography has different challenges. Texas is blessed with natural resources and rich farmland. It is a rich state. Spending that money on murder buoys instead of immigration services is a crime against humanity.

[-] spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works 58 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

LOL CBS! There is no such thing as "technically" in Mexico. The barrier is in Mexico and Mexican authorities should just cut it up and remove it.

[-] stu@lemmy.pit.ninja 26 points 1 year ago

And make America pay for it! That'd make me laugh every time I think about it for now and forever after Donald Trump tried to get Mexico to pay for his dumb fucking wall.

[-] poprocks@beehaw.org 31 points 1 year ago

They should sell it back to Texas at a huge markup. Then when it floats back over to their waters, sell it back again, and again, and again. Endless money stream.

[-] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago

This game has so many infinite money glitches.

[-] CIA_chatbot@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago

Can we just wall off Texas at this point? Let them have their own shitty country

[-] Chainweasel@lemmy.world 56 points 1 year ago

Let's give it back to Mexico, the Republicans were screaming that we should let Russia have Ukraine because it used to be part of Russia, and as it turns out Texas used to be part of Mexico. Problem solved.

[-] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago

Throw in Florida as a tip.

[-] Kungolicious@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago

Damn, you really hate Mexicans don’t you?

[-] xuxebiko@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

Calm down, Satan!

[-] SuiXi3D@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

Hey, some of us don’t have a choice but to be here.

[-] CIA_chatbot@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I’m in Idaho, so fair enough

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] GlendatheGayWitch@lib.lgbt 23 points 1 year ago

I thought that the treaty from the Spanish-American War made the Rio Grande neutral territory. Any land that appears in the middle of the river doesn't belong to either country.

Unless there have been other treaties that I didn't learn about in my history classes, the buoys technically are infringement on neutral territory.

[-] PyroNeurosis@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

How does that figure when the river changes course? Does texas/mexico suddenly have more/less land and everyone's chill?

[-] CurlyMoustache@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Totally nothing to do with the Rio Grande-case, but I find it interesting seeing how borders are drawn when time goes on. Look at the original 13 states in the US. Lines are squiggly, and made with care after the terrain. Then, some time has passed, and the US started to grow eastwards. Then the borders were made quickly with rulers.

You see the same in Australia. NSW and Victoria is a bit squiggly for a while, but then the colonisers said "hand me the fucking ruler, cunt!"

[-] Longpork_afficianado@lemmy.nz 7 points 1 year ago

Pretty much, yeah. A lot of property boundaries are defined in refererence to adjacent bodies of water. It makes sense too, otherwise you'll get weird edge cases where 3m^2 of land on the mexican side belongs to USA because the river drifted since 1850. What are you gonna do with that little plot? Swim over there and put a fence around it?

[-] GlendatheGayWitch@lib.lgbt 5 points 1 year ago

Yeah, pretty much.

One time there was also an island that appeared in the Rio Grande that some people claimed as another country with a flag and everything. The US military kicked them off of it.

[-] DAMunzy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago

America following a treaty that doesn't benefit itself...

[-] rgb3x3@beehaw.org 16 points 1 year ago

US: "Everything on this side of the line is ours, those are the rules."

Mexico: "But you can't keep moving the line into my side, that's not fair!"

US "Yeah huh, mom said that's how it works."

Mexico: "No she didn't! You're lying!"

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 14 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Nearly 80% of the controversial floating barrier Texas state officials assembled in the middle of the Rio Grande to deter migrant crossings is technically on the Mexican side of the U.S.-Mexico border, according to a federal government survey released on Tuesday.

The river barrier, assembled near the Texas border town of Eagle Pass, has come under national and international scrutiny, including from the Mexican government, which has strongly voiced its objections to the buoys.

But Steve McCraw, director of the Texas Department of Public Safety, said preliminary information indicated that the first person found dead had "drowned upstream from the marine barrier and floated into the buoys."

Abbott and other Texas officials have insisted the buoys are necessary to stop migrants from entering the U.S. illegally, and the state has refuted claims it violated federal law and international treaties when it set up the floating barriers without permission from the Biden administration or Mexico.

The survey could add a new legal dimension to the Biden administration lawsuit, which argues that Texas violated a longstanding law governing navigable U.S. waterways when it set up the buoys without federal permission.

Unlawful crossings along the southern border fell to the lowest level in two years in June, a drop the Biden administration attributed to a set of asylum restrictions and programs that allow migrants to enter the U.S. legally.


I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] livus@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

From the article:

Nearly 80% of the controversial floating barrier Texas state officials assembled in the middle of the Rio Grande to deter migrant crossings is technically on the Mexican side of the U.S.-Mexico border, according to a federal government survey released on Tuesday.

The revelation was made public in a federal court filing by the Biden administration in its lawsuit against the barrier, which Texas set up in July as part of an initiative directed by Gov. Greg Abbott to repel migrants and repudiate President Biden's border policies.

The river barrier, assembled near the Texas border town of Eagle Pass, has come under national and international scrutiny, including from the Mexican government, which has strongly voiced its objections to the buoys. Advocates, Democratic lawmakers and a Texas state medic have also expressed concerns about the structures diverting migrants to deeper parts of the river where they are more likely to drown. 

Earlier this month Mexican officials recovered two bodies from the Rio Grande, including one that was found floating along the barrier, but the circumstances of the deaths are still under investigation. Mexican officials condemned the barrier in announcing the discovery of the bodies. But Steve McCraw, director of the Texas Department of Public Safety, said preliminary information indicated that the first person found dead had "drowned upstream from the marine barrier and floated into the buoys."

Abbott and other Texas officials have insisted the buoys are necessary to stop migrants from entering the U.S. illegally, and the state has refuted claims it violated federal law and international treaties when it set up the floating barriers without permission from the Biden administration or Mexico. (Article continues)

[-] Neato@kbin.social 27 points 1 year ago

and the state has refuted claims it violated federal law and international treaties when it set up the floating barriers without permission from the Biden administration or Mexico. (Article continues)

That's the clincher. States are 100% not allowed to treat internationally or make policies regarding other countries.

[-] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

Building a fence has nothing to do with that. If Texas had setup a federal border crossing, that would be illegal. If Texas had that fence constructed in such a way that a federal border crossing were blocked off, that would be illegal. A natural land border augmented with a fence isn't an international incident and you don't need permission from the federal government to do that.

[-] SterlingVapor@slrpnk.net 13 points 1 year ago

You sure as hell do when you put 80% of it outside your borders, outside US borders no less

This kind of thing could spark a war in different circumstances - imagine the Mexican army goes to dismantle the buoys in their borders, and one of several possible groups from Texas confronts them and it leads to a skirmish

Mexico would be entirely within their rights - it's on their property and it's suspected to be leading to deaths

[-] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

Sounds like if the Sovereign Nation of Mexico is as upset about them as you are, they should go remove them.

[-] some_guy@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

But

A natural land border augmented with a fence isn’t an international incident

load more comments (16 replies)
[-] Vytle@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Guys no one tell the democrats that increased border security dispraportionately benefits mexico over the U.S.

[-] natryamar@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago

How so? Is this because it prevent workers from leaving/brain drain?

[-] LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

So Mexico built the wall and Texas taxpayers paid for it. Brilliant!

[-] crenshawthesynthman@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 year ago

I was pro border wall until this

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2023
671 points (100.0% liked)

World News

32285 readers
532 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS