Would Mexico survive a war against the US?

[Stormbreed]

Not only would Mexico survive, they would win. Lets just say I'm glad I took a Spanish foreign language class in high school.

LMFAO

Mexico is already part of the USA so is Canada

[Kotuthan]

LMFAO

Mexico is already part of the USA so is Canada

US uses attack against Mexico.
It hurts itself in its confusion

[Ivanstone]

The US would lose. A war would disrupt the cocaine trade and what are America's wealthy supposed to do then? The US economy would collapse.

[ParanoiD84]

The US would woop everyones ass in a total war with no rules.

[Alydael]

The US has not won a conflict since Desert Storm.

Mostly you have spent billions of dollars and been badly outmanoeuvred by small numbers of insurgencies with homemade explosives.

It is not "politically correct" to point this out, but it is an objective fact. Your military is basically a useless white elephant.

You would probably manage to murder a lot of children and civilians. Most people don't consider that a "success".

I hate to say it, but I agree with you.

It is amazing to me, but we spend so much money on our military- then are routinely defeated by small bands of insurgents with much less tech and training.

This has been going on for decades now, in various theaters.

I always wondered how this is acceptable to people.

I don't know- but if I was spending as much money as we do on our forces and still losing- heads would roll.

Yet- we always celebrate our military like it is the strongest in the world and no one seems to ever get in trouble (or even held accountable) for all the losses.

We should have crushed all those insurgencies without a second thought, what gives?

I could see one insurgency- with a very clever commander maybe outwitting a stronger force for a period of time (his luck will run out though), but each and every single one outwits us?

I agree with the other comments- with a track record like that- I wouldn't take on the cartels in Mexico.

[draynay]

Is this against one Mexican country or all three?

[msdos]

Wars have to have a purpose and goals in mind, otherwise what's the point? It would be cheaper to persecute and lock up the perps and their family/friends/gangs.

[Dellis0991]

We would win but there is a lot of sympathy for Mexico and I would like to believe that most of the countries in Central America and Some in South America would back them up. We would win quickly but the fallout would be bad because out allies would not condone this.

[Jingoism]

Of course not. The mexicans can't even defeat their own criminal organizations, too lazy to fight unless they're fighting to cross the border illegally.

[Surfd]

I hate to say it, but I agree with you.

It is amazing to me, but we spend so much money on our military- then are routinely defeated by small bands of insurgents with much less tech and training.

This has been going on for decades now, in various theaters.

I always wondered how this is acceptable to people.

I don't know- but if I was spending as much money as we do on our forces and still losing- heads would roll.

Yet- we always celebrate our military like it is the strongest in the world and no one seems to ever get in trouble (or even held accountable) for all the losses.

We should have crushed all those insurgencies without a second thought, what gives?

I could see one insurgency- with a very clever commander maybe outwitting a stronger force for a period of time (his luck will run out though), but each and every single one outwits us?

I agree with the other comments- with a track record like that- I wouldn't take on the cartels in Mexico.

You know what else amazes me? The fact that never, in the history of the American Military, have they EVER successfully completed an internal audit. Not a single branch, division or organization funded as part of the American Military has ever successfully completed a financial audit. Considering the metric fuckton of money you dump into that yawning pit every year, I think this should alarm you significantly. I mean, if Google or Amazon failed an audit, heads would roll, but apparently the most powerful military organization in the world doesn't even have a standardized system for inventory tracking, and have been known to accidentally ship ARMED NUCLEAR FUCKING MISSILES halfway across the country without even knowing that they have done so.

There is apparently an entire cottage industry in the Financial Accounting sector built around attempting and failing to get literally any branch of the American Military even remotely close to being Audit Capable......

Check this article out for a truely epic breakdown of the complete clusterfuck that is American Military accounting: https://www.rollingstone.com/politic...ystery-807276/

[Dellis0991]

The US would woop everyones ass in a total war with no rules.

No we won't, Russia fight with the MAD doctrine. This planet would become a irradiated graveyard.

[Cyi]

Given some of the responses, I feel I should elaborate on my statement. When people bring up the word War, I think of War, not localized skirmishes dealing with insurgents. In War, most rules go out of the window and militaries are allowed to do what militaries due, kill large swaths of people, both innocent and of military value. Vietnam and the recent skirmishes in the middle east dont meet the standard of gloves off war fighting. When politicians get in the way, militaries struggle because they are handcuffed. This isn't to say a War cant be fought with rules, Desert Storm is a great example, but we also fought a more typical enemy in this case, so rules worked. When fighting gorillas or insurgents, things need to get messy.

In all accounts that matter to a war fighter, we have won the majority of conflicts we have participated in. We have lost many "political" wars, but that isn't the fault of our military industrial complex. To compare the two would do a diservice.

If we went to War with Mexico, shit really would have hit the fan and thus, we would wipe the place out. You simply cannot match the US in terms of shear military power, resources and experience. If you can name one better, please do.

So again, I say, yes we would win a War with Mexico and I find it silly that anyone would think otherwise. If you add in the 350 million privately owned firearms as well, things really get interesting.

- - - Updated - - -

No we won't, Russia fight with the MAD doctrine. This planet would become a irradiated graveyard.

We all lose in this scenario as we also prescribe to the MAD doctrine.

[Stormbreed]

I'm fairly certain they are not.

Do not think for one moment, they are not, Canada and Mexico depend on the USA for everything.

[Stormspark]

America Has Been at War 93% of the Time – 222 out of 239 Years – Since 1776

It's in their nature.

Relevant.

[Alydael]

You know what else amazes me? The fact that never, in the history of the American Military, have they EVER successfully completed an internal audit. Not a single branch, division or organization funded as part of the American Military has ever successfully completed a financial audit. Considering the metric fuckton of money you dump into that yawning pit every year, I think this should alarm you significantly. I mean, if Google or Amazon failed an audit, heads would roll, but apparently the most powerful military organization in the world doesn't even have a standardized system for inventory tracking, and have been known to accidentally ship ARMED NUCLEAR FUCKING MISSILES halfway across the country without even knowing that they have done so.

There is apparently an entire cottage industry in the Financial Accounting sector built around attempting and failing to get literally any branch of the American Military even remotely close to being Audit Capable......

I think if we ever audited the military- we would find a lot of shady stuff going on. I think our government (both the Dems and Pubs) are a part of that- so they don't push for the audit. They are probably taking tons from lobbyists for the military related industries.

It is alarming to me that we send a 15$ million dollar cruise missles to blow up an "airfield" in Syria which amounted to a couple of paved strips (probably not even costing 100,000 to build total). Yet, no one asks questions.....

We have jets worth millions of dollars a piece- yet we lose to forces which are actually made up of our old vehicles (look at some of the videos of ISIS military parades- they are driving second hand pick up trucks) and old weapons we sold to "rebels" in the region.

You would think people would be furious about this (its our tax dollars). Not to mention, the costs of wars since the 80's has been, roughly, 20 trillion dollars. Hey! look at that! That's exactly how much we owe China! Wow, what a coincedence! So, we basically borrow money from China to lose to rag tag groups of insurgents that use second hand weapons.......

Yet, no one is asking questions about this? Not only do they not ask questions- people are actually looking for more war? With that track record?

Sometimes, you just have to shake your head and wonder what the heck is going on out there with the world!

[Dellis0991]

Yeah they would. The US said they would destroy the Afghan Mujaheddin and now 10 years later they are working on a peace treaty with them.

The Mujaheddin is something different then the Mexican army because fighting a guerrilla army is hard on the count that you can't distinguish civilians from combatants till the guns come out and usually that don't happen until its too late. Also that whole situation would've devolved into what we seen today and what Reagan did only bought us time anyway, Mexico on the other hand don't got the arms and tech to hurt us...

[vastx]

Be sure to surpress those vietnam flashbacks tho.

Our military was severely handicapped by our own government. War wasn't executed nearly at 100% ability.

- - - Updated - - -

America Has Been at War 93% of the Time – 222 out of 239 Years – Since 1776

It's in their nature.

That's insanely deceptive. The Banana Wars? And the Cold War?

About flipped over backwards in my chair with that eye roll.

[Surfd]

The Mujaheddin is something different then the Mexican army because fighting a guerrilla army is hard on the count that you can't distinguish civilians from combatants till the guns come out and usually that don't happen until its too late. Also that whole situation would've devolved into what we seen today and what Reagan did only bought us time anyway, Mexico on the other hand don't got the arms and tech to hurt us...

Did you miss the part where people have pointed out that a bunch of Arabs with practically no funding to speak of (comparatively) have still been doing a pretty damn good job bruising your asses with like 20 year old tech held together with spit and duct-tape? About the only advantage you have when it comes to mexico is that you don't need to worry about the costs of international staging, as they are basically neighbors. But unless you are willing to pretty much level the entire country from one end to the other, it will just be Vietnam 2.0. With the added fun that the enemy is literally right in your back yard instead of on the other side of the planet unable to hit you back.

[Raelbo]

If the US decided to actually wage war on Mexico, the country would be utterly obliterated.

Beyond that though, I am not sure what the US would hope to accomplish. The US struggles to "win" wars because of how the victory conditions are defined. Destroying another nation's military, government, infrastructure, economy etc is the easy part. Not easy is subduing and controlling the population.

[Puupi]

That's insanely deceptive. The Banana Wars? And the Cold War?

About flipped over backwards in my chair with that eye roll.

Not familiar with the Banana wars?

The Cold War is explained in the brackets. Or are you saying the US didn't partake in the war in Afghanistan?