this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2023
4 points (100.0% liked)

World News

32288 readers
744 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But

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

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The subject of this post is that "nearly 80%" of the border fence is in Mexico's Sovereign border, so I don't see the issue with them removing the trespassing part of the fence.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That would literally be an international incident, no?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In the sense that we are all international citizens and that any action by anyone near any border is an international "incident", sure I guess.

But if you want to be honest and acknowledge that calling something an "international incident" is a pretty loaded term, then I would say absolutely not.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Im not sure I understand. You don’t think forcing another nation to clean up a mess we made is enough of an international incident to be called an international incident?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

A friend of mine has land up in vermont that borders canada. Directly behind his property line is Canada. If I take a beer can and throw it into Canada, is that an "international incident"?

Is the collapsing fence that quite possibly goes into the Canadian border illegal? Is it an "international incident?"

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There’s a news report about 80% of Vermont’s trash winding up in Canada, is that not an international incident?

I’m just trying to understand your own words, and you’re getting worked up. What do you think the words “international incident” mean?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The Cuban Missile Crisis, A U2 being shot down in Soviet Air Space, trash being blown into Canada, are these things equivalent to you?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You’re arguing for states having free reign to fuck with international entities by doing whatever they want - up to, but not including, the Cuban missile crisis?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Absolutely not. I'm saying that trash on an international border isn't an international incident unless you are trying to make mountains out of mole hills. Neither is building a fence there.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So if that’s not what you’re arguing for, where is the line when something becomes an international incident?

It seems to me like you aren’t sure or at least aren’t capable enough to communicate your position clearly, but you have a visceral need to keep arguing because your heels are so dug in already.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not trying to come up with a general legal definition of "international incident." I am merely disagreeing with calling this specific thing an "international incident," at least unless the person using the term explains why they chose that term, and why that term matters in this case. But for me, international incident has much more weight then a fence that was built in the neutral area between two sovereign but friendly open-border nations.

If you still want to go down the international incident branch, I'd consider the agricultural practices of US farmers in California drawing too much water for our downstream neighbors much more appropriate.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s an international incident because it requires international intervention to solve.

If you look up the definitions of “international” and “incident” in any dictionary it should be pretty straight-forward to understand why anyone would use that term to describe the situation at hand. But somehow you’ve decided it’s not that - but you can’t say why specifically, nor can you define what qualifies as an international incident.

But he owes you an explanation?

Ok 🤣

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ok. Trivially it's an international incident as this is occurring in the border region between The US State, Texas and The free and soverign state of Tamaulipas, Mexico. So what?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You said it wasn’t a big deal because it wasn’t an international incident.

Honestly what the fuck are you trying to say?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No I said it wasn't a big deal at all calling it an "international incident" changes nothing because at the end of the day it's just a fence.