At Least 13 States Burn In Mexico as Cartel Retaliates Against U.S.-Assisted Federal Killing of 'El Mencho' (lataco.com)
from return2ozma@lemmy.world to world@lemmy.world on 23 Feb 00:32
https://lemmy.world/post/43468444

#world

threaded - newest

FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world on 23 Feb 01:10 next collapse

As someone who isn’t that well-versed in Mexico’s politics, how does the country handle something like this?

HeyJoe@lemmy.world on 23 Feb 02:33 next collapse

It doesn’t, which is why they never really handled it themselves. I will never understand loyalty like this.

couch1potato@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 23 Feb 05:58 collapse

This happened about 3 years ago too and it just went away on its own after a few days.

supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz on 23 Feb 01:24 next collapse

The situation in Mexico remains highly fluid, with the potential for further power struggles within CJNG factions or from rival groups attempting to exploit the power vacuum. No reports of civilian deaths as of the publishing of this story. Nor has Mexico’s President made any appearances at the current time.

OwOarchist@pawb.social on 23 Feb 05:14 collapse

No reports of civilian deaths as of the publishing of this story.

That’s pretty impressive, actually. And reassuring. Hopefully it stays that way.

FiniteBanjo@feddit.online on 23 Feb 06:06 collapse

It’s a pretty good sign that the Mexican Feds are competent and in charge. If this were a Trump-run op then it would be a shitshow, I’m sure.

alonsohmtz@feddit.uk on 23 Feb 10:59 next collapse

What? It’s a sign that the cartels chose not to kill innocent people.

hector@lemmy.today on 23 Feb 14:12 collapse

The Mexican government is a shit show, and because of their decision bringing the military into domestic affairs it’s a matter of time before they live under a de facto military dictatorship.

If our administration in the US gets what it wants in bringing the military into domestic affairs here, we will suffer the same fate as the army sees the levers of power, and the weakness of civilian leadership, and subordinates or outright takes power. As sure as the sun rising.

FiniteBanjo@feddit.online on 23 Feb 22:14 collapse

In previous administrations the Cartel had political power and involve the military as they saw fit. If the choice is between two authoritarian groups then I’ll choose the nice lady who locks up coke fiends.

hector@lemmy.today on 23 Feb 22:20 collapse

Whatdya mean? Amlo was the same party, Sheinbaum is an extension of him basically, and they’ve long terms I think, 6 years or whatever.

Calderon is rumored to have been put into office with the help of the cia cheating at their elections, idk if that is true but it was widely thought to be true at the time. He started the war against the cartels for the US that wanted it.

Idk about Fox, Vincente Fox, I think he was after, idk if I’m missing one. But he was more right wing. He would’ve been with the US on whatever they wanted more even if looking the other way on some corruption that is endemic.

But amlo was the one that brought the military in I think, or at least very much increased their involvement in policing.

So idk which two groups you refer to, and locking up coke fiends is not helpful at all, locking up violent cartels that kill people is. Coke users are just going to happen, ruining their lives for using drugs solves nothing. And I believe in personal freedom and don’t think it should even be illegal as such perhaps.

Kidnapping 30 people and then beheading them and affixing their heads on cactus bordering the highway however, that is the sort of thing that needs to be stopped.

CandleTiger@programming.dev on 23 Feb 05:14 next collapse

Has anybody here got enough information and familiarity to suggest whether violence is likely for Puebla and Oaxaca specifically? I’ve got family on a tour group in Puebla tonight and flying out of Oaxaca tomorrow. Wikipedia calls out Puebla specifically as a CNGJ-dominated area, so……

hector@lemmy.today on 23 Feb 14:00 collapse

Idk I read the violence spread to other states, that they burned supermarkets in the Yucatan for instance. Which is a different state, and a tourist spot.

jimmy90@lemmy.world on 23 Feb 10:36 next collapse

i think something like this will happen when the trump regime collapses

Kcap@lemmy.world on 23 Feb 10:54 next collapse

So, I live in San Diego, and frequent Tijuana and B.C. often. A few years ago, there was a similar cartel flare up. One of their top people was captured and they wanted him released. They vowed violence and set taxis on fire in many major cities including Tijuana and Ensenada. I was at a chill bar in Tijuana that night and all the lights came on. They took our bucket of beers and food away and kicked us all out. Everyone was panicking except for the locals. The food stalls didn’t close, but everything else did. We went home, no panic at the border crossing. The cartel released a statement explicitly saying they had no intention of hurting innocents or tourists, but the media spiral was already far gone. I dunno, I respect their candidness, and don’t ever really feel that scared as a respectful traveler, but who knows.

REDACTED@infosec.pub on 23 Feb 14:33 collapse

How sweet of them, to destroy everything I’ve built/own instead of just killing me

lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world on 23 Feb 11:55 collapse

Why is the cartel burning random cars, buildings, and businesses? Are they like rioting? Or do they have something against the particular owners of these things or is there a coherent strategy?

The article says that the burning cars are for a blockade. Are they pulling people out of cars and setting them on fire? What about the buildings and the Costco? What kind of blockade does that form?

hector@lemmy.today on 23 Feb 13:57 collapse

The Sinaloa cartel has done this a couple of times, once when Guzman’s son was captured the first time by the federals, they started burning shit and blockading roads and whatever else, shooting shit, in a show of force and the federals released him.

Since then I guess that might have emboldened them at this strategy, Mexico seems like they won’t repeat that kind of capitulation.

But yes, it’s rather random, they burnt some supermarkets in the Yucatan even just yesterday or whatever and that’s not even the same state. It would make more sense to do targeted violence, but also would further escalate things.

The federal units are rather known for being heavy handed, and torturing people. Also half of their cartels are now run by their former army guys, they use army units for most of this, I called them federals but it’s mostly armed forces.

After the US got Calderon in the 00’s to target the cartels, it was mostly sinaloa, as I understand it, and they played a long game, quiet, sneaking product in shipments, working through existing criminal networks. After they were smashed, they splintered into multiple other groups that fell into fighting over territory, many of which supplanted existing criminal groups rather than working with them.

In that fighting, many brought in former army guys for protection, the zetas, and those zetas predictably ended up seizing control of a great many. It’s actually indicative of the future of the Mexican state itself. Any time you bring the army into domestic affairs, it’s a matter of time before they see the levers of power, the weakness of civilian leaders, and they subordinate the political leadership, if not take it outright.

But anyway, half of the cartels are now run by these former army guys, like the specialized army units that hunt these cartels, that are known for executing prisoners and torturing them and such.