Risk of 'Rapid and Sudden Collapse'

[Canuck_Buck]

Mexico and Pakistan are at risk of a "rapid and sudden collapse," according to a recent report from the U.S. Joint Forces Command.[/b]

The assessment comes as President-elect Barack Obama prepares to tackle international challenges including the conflict in Gaza, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and tensions between India and Pakistan.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,479906,00.html

The report says a collapse in Mexico seems less likely, but noted that the government infrastructure is "under sustained assault and pressure" from drug cartels and gangs. A collapse within the United States' southern neighbor would also "demand an American response based on the serious implications for homeland security alone."

[8D][8D][8D][8D]

[Alsatian]

That is really spooky. If total collapse occured in Mexico, that would be yet further incentive for those guys to swim across the Rio Grande and take up residence in this country, maybe bringing their criminal gangs and drug lords with them. Maybe we could avoid this problem right up front by banning commuting in the back of pick-up trucks?

[James B]

Stock up on ammo before osama thins it out with further taxes and what he considers REASONABLE regulations of guns. When he made that statement I really cringed inside.[:@]

[Alsatian]

ORIGINAL: James B

Stock up on ammo before osama thins it out with further taxes and what he considers REASONABLE regulations of guns. When he made that statement I really cringed inside.[:@]

Yah, I hate that "reasonable" standard. That standard doesn't cut it in most practice of law, as the standard is not a standard but is intrinsically subjective. I bought about 14 boxes of HeviShot 12-gauge shotgun shells at the end of the 2007-2008 waterfowl season (14x10=140 rounds). Was thata reasonable quantity of rounds? I've got a 16 gauge shotgun -- ammo is getting scarcer. If I bought 200 rounds (8 25-shell boxes) would this be reasonable? Would 140 rounds of 12-guage shells be reasonable; 200 rounds of 16-gauge shells be reasonable; but a combined 340 rounds be unreasonable? I'm thinking about buying a 10-gauge shotgun but am concerned about the future availability of 10-gauge rounds. Would it be reasonable to amass 400 rounds of #2 HeviShot Goose rounds in 10-Gauge which might be a lifetime supply for me, given I'm 51 years old and the primary application would be for goose hunting trips? I find that my .25-06 is finicky about what ammo I feed it -- shooting well with Hornady Custom 117 grain Boat Tail Soft Point bullets and shooting other rounds I've tried poorly. I find that Hornady recently stopped marketing my favored round. Would it be excessive to accumulate a stock of these now discontinued loadings?

What is a reasonable number of firearms? Does a shotgun for ducks, a shotgun for geese, a rifle for deer, a rifle for elk, a .30-06 back-up rifle, a couple of legacy shotguns handed down from deceased relatives, a couple of .22 long rifles exceed the reasonableness standard? Is my wife the judge of what a reasonable number of firearms is? If sheis the judge of the reasonable number of firearms I retain, am I the judge of the reasonable number of pairs of shoes my wife may possess or the number of times our furniture needs to be relocated in our living room?

[909bowsniper]

I knew all along his gun crap would creep in....and now that it will to some extent, those same people on here that were all for him will be turning their computers off early and won't be saying to much. Before he was elected, I knew that he would mess with gun control, but I heard from so many people on here...No he won't. I think alot more will come from him concerning gun control than you expect...

[Knightia]

A collapse within the United States' southern neighbor would also "demand an American response based on the serious implications for homeland security alone."

The most cost effective way to cover the most area of border- would be the extensive use of mine fields Imo.



But that would be just to easy & cheap & effective? Besides the various complains it would generate with various(humanitarian? peta?) groups?

Homeland security could be -uncle sammy giving every citizen in this country a new rifle & 2 to 4 week(low payed)payed vaction per yrto its border states( hunting& fishing licencesincluded where possible)to guard its open borders etc.


Course thats all a day/nite dream/wishfull thinkingon my part[&:].

REality will be ALLthe citizens of this countrywill be lucky to keep & injoy the guns & rights they have now( sparse in some places)- in the near future.

[Alsatian]

ORIGINAL: targethogs

I knew all along his gun crap would creep in....and now that it will to some extent, those same people on here that were all for him will be turning their computers off early and won't be saying to much. Before he was elected, I knew that he would mess with gun control, but I heard from so many people on here...No he won't. I think alot more will come from him concerning gun control than you expect...

Targethogs: Of course, we are jumping the starting gun a little. Obama has not voiced any intentions of messing with gun control legislation so far. The stuff about him being in favor of reasonable gun control is an articulation of his position that has been in play since long before he received the Democratic nomination. I'm distrustful of him -- and more importantly, the Democrats as a now solid block (house of representatives with a Democrat majority, senate with a Democrat majority, a Democrat president) are not to be trusted on gun control-- but so far "nichts Neues." I'm hoping the Democrats will focus their efforts on giving away our tax dollars in various bailout schemes to curry favor with their client constituents.