Annexing Mexico revisited
By Erik Rush
web posted February 27, 2006
Last summer, I penned a piece for WorldNetDaily called "The Case for Annexing Mexico", in which I (only partly tongue-in-cheek) offered the suggestion that Mexico be annexed to the United States in the manner of a protectorate or commonwealth (like Guam or Puerto Rico). Citing a variety of factors such as national security, drug trafficking, endemic and entrenched corruption in their government at all levels, illegal immigration and economic factors which (according to the scenario I put forth) could improve via this action, I set out general means by which this might be accomplished – peacefully, of course – and more specifically how ancillary contentious issues so prominent of late would be ameliorated.
The column was met with very mixed results. Some took it to be completely tongue-in-cheek, others used the opportunity to paint me (and of course all conservatives) as dangerous imperialists. At least one Mexican newspaper did a special feature on me, likening me to Pat Robertson as one of those dangerous "Christian" conservatives who view military incursion, assassination and clandestine action as solutions to all our foreign policy problems.
And although there were some moderates and conservatives whose reactions ran from "it's a great idea; I've considered it myself - it just might work" to "it's a great idea, but it'll never happen," there were also many folks of similar political leanings who believed it would just serve to drag us down economically, socially, and culturally. "Close the border and let them cannibalize themselves" – which, plainly our State Department and corporate interests will never let happen either.
Surprisingly, in the months since I wrote the column, quite a few things have come to light relative to the situation regarding our border with Mexico that lend even more credence to my suggestions.
Going back as far as 2002, news agencies such as the Associated Press, as well as media from the New York Times to the Washington Times and TownHall.com have run features citing corruption and collusion on the part of the Mexican police and military, drug cartels, and guess what – now, even our own government.
On September 25, 2002, Jerry Seper of the Washington Times wrote "This isolated area of the U.S.-Mexico border [Sonoyta, Mexico], a 100-mile-wide stretch of wild desert …has become one of America's newest drug corridors. Mexican drug lords, backed by corrupt Mexican military officers and police officials, will move tons of marijuana, cocaine and heroin this year over rugged desert trails to accomplices in Phoenix and Tucson…"
NewsMax.com, March 12, 2003; "Mexican Army Invades U.S.", by Phil Brennan: "It's the war nobody wants to talk about: well-armed Mexican soldiers storming across America's southern border, sometimes with guns blazing. ‘We are in state of war,' [Edward Nelson, chairman of U.S. Border Control]. ‘And we are fighting enemies who have brought the battle to our shores. If ever there was a time for the United States to put troops on the border, it is now.'"
The New York Times, July 5, 2005; "Corruption Hampers Mexican Police in Border Drug War," by Ginger Thompson: "…this country has been forced to re-examine its police as it struggles against a devastating crime wave that in the last six months has taken more than 600 lives. At least half those killings have happened in the six Mexican states along the border with the United States, where drug traffickers fighting for control of lucrative drug routes empty their automatic weapons on busy streets in the light of day…where powerful cartels took over large parts of the country by corrupting or killing police officers, politicians, journalists and judges."
And finally, on January 26 of this year, Sarah Carter, a reporter for the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin (Ontario, CA), reported in her article (part of an ongoing investigation on border corruption) "Cover-ups of Mexican military border crossings anger agents" that "Some officials suggested Wednesday that the confrontation between Texas law officers earlier this week was with drug smugglers, not Mexican soldiers assisting narcotics traffickers across the Rio Grande. But a Border Patrol agent who spoke on condition of anonymity said continuous cover-ups by Mexican and U.S. officials have put many agents and American lives in danger. ‘I think it shows how desperate the situation has become. I think it's insulting to expect Americans to believe what (Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael) Chertoff and the Mexican government are saying.'"
By the time Carter was interviewed earlier this month on Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, her investigation had uncovered the fact that the U.S. government has authorized $376 million to subsidize the Mexican military, and that Mexican drug smugglers had hired members of the international Mara Salvatrucha street gang (MS-13) to murder Border Patrol agents, according to a confidential Department of Homeland Security memo obtained by her publication.
So, while graft, murder, assassination, and substantially nasty firefights between the U.S. Border Patrol and Mexican police and military backing up drug cartels are commonplace and common knowledge to locals on both sides of the border, the political Left in America plays the Political Correctness game in the press, and those in Washington – right up to the President – play the diplomacy masquerade with smiling excrement in expensive suits, thieves and murderers of their own people – and ours. And apparently, we're also being made to pay for the privilege.
So cut the deal, pay the bribes, and annex Mexico. Unfeasible? Impractical? Insane? No – what has been reported by the press, both on the Left and the Right, and what I have summarized above reflect the unfeasibility, impracticality and manifest insanity of our government's current policies. Mexico's sovereignty is a joke; with their citizens' desire to cross our porous border by the millions and no will on our part to control it, it is coming to resemble a large ghetto within our nation anyway. Doing so, at least we'll have legal control over the region, increased security, and constructive economic influence.
Militarizing the border is the only other viable option. Either could be accomplished, although the former would outrage the internationalist Left and the latter would meet great resistance from both the Left and corporate interests – but it's time to stop playing both the Political Correctness game and the diplomacy masquerade; besides making us international whores, it endangers Americans in the border states as well as those who are valiantly executing their duties in order to keep our
border secure - at this point – very obviously in vain. 
Erik Rush is a New York-born Black columnist and author who writes "The Culture Shark," a weekly column of political fare. He is also a Staff Writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. The New Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers, journalists and grass-roots media outlets. An archive containing links to just about everything he's written is at http://www.erikrush.com.