That’s wrong, the US can eat a couple of countries just fine. The efficiency is atrocious, but the sheer inherited strategic power and logistics and stockpiles, and the amount of funding allowing to, say, build drones analogous to Russian “Geran” 100x times more expensive in the same amounts as Russia does, - all these make many wars a certain victory in the sense of destroying the other side’s forces and possibly civilian population.
Anyway. Two things.
1 - In his previous term there was squeal from all sides how he’s going to institute fascism right now. “The boy who cried wolves” may be a valid analogy or it may not. I think before anything like this the US will have an open change of the regime. At the same time - it’s very convenient to have the land border with other countries very narrow, when instituting totalitarianism (resistance fighters, people trying to flee, all kinds of stuff), so possibly eating Mexico and Canada and doing a regime change after that is good enough.
2 - Perhaps any kind of a war is easier done after, suppose, an economic crisis happens. AI bubble burst, or something like that.
A war with Mexico would be disastrous. Yes the US military and military industrial complex is much larger but Mexico is a huge country in land and population that has a much larger and diverse economy than Iraq and Afghanistan. They have a large population of people with engineering education and a large population of those employed in manufacturing. Mexico doesn’t have an incredibly huge domestic arms industry but it exists and what they do have is a huge manufacturing industry that I’m certain they would be able to take advantage of to churn out anything that can be used for war.
The loss of the US to Mexican manufacturing would mean significantly higher inflation and a huge increase to national debt that would also contribute to an eventual increase in inflation. Long term it would also mean Mexico joins the arms race for at least ground armies and missiles. Mexico does have a strong and growing tech sector. Mexico does not have a large military because they have not needed one. The only theoretical threat would be the US but that hasn’t been threatened in a very long time. A US invasion would motivate Mexico to being the regions South Korea but possibly much larger long term. Domestic resources and highly educated people and amount of people for active and reserve forces
The north is a lot more sparsely populated but I’d expect that to be where things trap out at with constant insurgency across the southwestern united states and northern mexico. War with either Mexico or Canada would destabilize the US domestically but Mexico probably far worse. By the time a sufficiently sized invasion force for the US military made it to southern mexico, bridges and cities would be boobytrapped and fortified to hell.
I’d question what every other country south of the US would do. Not active participant but proxy to ship arms from Russia, China, North Korea, Iran to Mexico now that international sanctions would not matter to Mexico. I doubt Brazil would be happy. I wouldn’t be surprised if this was the opportunity to grow their domestic arms industry and see their missiles in action and gain data. See a huge return of Brazil to the international arms market. Progressively send out their old stockpile to make way for their ongoing modernization efforts.
US economic and stockpile disaster in a time when one of the largest concerns is how bad the acquisition and production levels are for militaries in the US and western europe. How old and regularly in maintenance and need for replacement large naval ships. How expensive the missiles shot out of missile defense systems are. The maintenance needs that will be needed from the stress placed on actively fought against naval vessels and aircraft
Just as problematic is what this would mean for US military acquisition and development. It would shift back to ground forces when the US wants to focus on Navy and air. Disaster for the US and allies in the Pacific. Attacking Mexico would long term make the cost of maintaining the ground and air army just domestically much more expensive. It’d have to be larger now with a strong enemy with a huge shared land and maritime border. Plus how Brazil can benefit from a US-Mexico war. Alliances that can form in defense against a crazy US that’s gone back to cold war and earlier meddling in Latin America.
What would happen is early US war effort makes huge gains. Stockpile of missiles drop to levels where legal mandates of required stockpile levels near or are breached. Military ends up in a legal and logistical back and forth of can they fire more and why can’t we build missiles as fast as Russia and China. US populace unrest would make anti-Vietnam war protest look small. Riots would make post-MLK assassination look small. Mexico rapidly develops production for small cheap explosives and drones and develops international strategies to have international arms make it to Mexico. Brazil quickly ascends back to being a major international arms dealer. The US eventually has to withdraw from Mexico because of the cost of war and occupation of Mexico and domestic unrest
US military now has to primarily focus on the Americas rather than the Pacific, eastern Europe, and the Middle East because Mexico and Brazil are now hypercharged more than anytime in history to compete with the US. Their populations motivated. Mexico eventually joins BRICS. Major implications all over the world as the US just post-WW2 France and UK’ed themselves where those two trying to reassert their international empires without the US and failed by the 60s and took positions as US vassals. US wouldn’t become a vassal of any, but it’d have to pull back internationally majorly
Even a short attack and retreat like Iran would force a shift to domestic army instead of overseas. Mexico would instantly bump up their military expenses up to higher single digit percentages of the countries GDP and go on an acquisition spree while building up domestic arms industry
Americans would face high inflation, austerity, possibly high unemployment as hostility to American products and services increases. Another major decline in tourism. Huge cost of military benefits pay for anyone that was deployed to the active war zone, injured, survivor benefits, or just recruited to shore up needs domestically while maintaining overseas personnel. The US conservatives would have a marketing win but the whole of the US an international strength and influence loss. American people lose.
I think this is an evaluation based on wars of the past.
Without 1) autonomous combat drones, 2) new fascism in the USA allowing it to kill any amounts of foreign and its own civilians, 3) surveillance that wasn’t possible before our time, 4) computers making many decisions in real time.
With those present they can launch a swarm of AI killbots, possibly with tactical nukes, and be done before the general population even realizes well enough what happened (that’s a slow thing). No conscription\mobilization\losses - much smaller problems with Vietnam-like protests, morale, fragging.
This is an extreme fantasy, of course. Strongly inspired by Soviet post-WWII doctrine for a nuclear war plus new tools.
Dictatorships fall when they can’t keep promises to pay and feed their military anything of worth. Any attack on Mexico would be another major hit to US financing ability like the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were. The US has had to deprioritize development of a distinct navy 6th gen fighter jet to financially support the air force program. They scrapped plans for Zumwault destroyers for a new cheaper design. E7 AEW&C is on the chopping block which anything AEW&C is important for drones
Russia and Ukraine right now display the problems in difference in personnel numbers. For the amount of drones being manufacturered for Russia and Ukraine, on the front lines Ukraines lack of soldiers on the ground leaves gaps for Russian forces to push forward and create opportunities for encirclement. Mass production drones are not yet a replacement for human soldiers. Mass production drones don’t go very fast and far and they can’t Cary that heavy of munitions. Ground drones are far behind air based in terrain traversal. Large drones are expensive, use expensive munitions, and the US is slow to build things. The US unmanned systems are not good enough yet to replace a ground army and because of the Ukraine Russia war, drone counter technologies and strategies are being learned across the world like how the first Gulf War taught the world the importance of AEW&C
What swarm of AI killlbots does the US have that can take out the military of a country of 130 million people and successfully occupy and control this populace? With what money? How do they finance that with a worsening debt to GDP ratio? How well will US bonds sell to international buyers after going nuclear on Mexico? Go nuclear on Mexico and the wind. Managing the fallout drifting towards the US. There is no avoiding conscription. There is a reason the military is currently trying very hard with recruitment advertising in gaming tournaments and what not. War has not progressed in any country where machines can replace people
For the technological advantage of the US and Israel over Iran and Yemen, the US had to expend a large percentage of their THAAD stockpile to fend off missiles. Southern Mexico is the heart of the Mexican population. The US would need to defend its air assets across distances pushing well past a thousand of miles. It would have to expend a substantial amount of missiles to destroy other missiles that target US missiles and US infrastructure and sea vessels. A lot of expensive equipment. A lot of money. It would not be a quick war.
People thought Ukriane would fall within a month. Then people thought the Russian economy would collapse within a year and Putin deposed. It became a lot more murky. Current US (not previous US and not even Trump 1st era advisors thought Iran was quick work) and Israel thought it would be quick work to disable Iran and Iranian missiles wouldn’t be an issue for Israeli and American missile defenses. Pretty high percentage but enough makes it through to be an issue. So Iran and Israel, unsettled and the Houthis are back to shooting ships in the red sea and Israel beven after years of US, Israeli, and Saudi technological superiority. Probably a restart of the war in the near future as Iran replenishes it’s missile stockpile and defense systems through regional suppliers and domestic.
War with Mexico would not be quick. It would not be cheap. It would not be without major human ground forces. It would be the perfect opportunity for war in the pacific and middle east as the US just had to commit major resources to dealing with Mexico and suppress domestic unrest. All incredibly expensive for a country whose finances are built on the expectations and faith of international treasury buyers for American debt. The major international credit agencies would undoubtedly downgrade the US credit rating again complicating feeding the active American military and benefits for the retired
People concerned about the billions in recent years to Ukraine and Israel. Mexico and the international complications from opportunities made by the huge American blunder would mean trillions from the US to try to manage major wars at the southern border war, the war in Europe, the war in the middle east, and likely war in the pacific
Yes, but there are people in the USA who have made systems solving very complex tasks. Suppose people who’ve built Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Google - suppose they build the robotized system that is going to fight such a war. (Which is also similar to what Russia and Ukraine did, their new military development is all around local analogs of those companies.)
They have a whole new MIC emerging, with Palantir and more general companies developing new weapons. Mostly, like I said, autonomous drones (meaning far longer range, smaller vulnerability to jamming and miniaturization - what can you do against a killer bird the size of your fist?).
Russia and Ukraine are mostly fighting using drones and artillery now, with very small suicide groups of people used to find openings, infiltrate lines and take pieces of territory.
Suppose a military fighting just like today’s Russian or Ukrainian one attacks an unprepared old one, with very expensive and big AD batteries, artillery, tanks, infantry transports and so on, unprotected from swarms of cheap drones immediately killing anything detected. They might be able to wipe it all out like a week before the world around will realize that such a blitzkrieg has happened.
Also not only swarms themselves, but modern tools of operational control. Lots of blunders are due to living humans panicking or making emotional decisions and shows, or just not being able to process information quickly enough. Due to struggle for power, or crime. A swarm of drones doesn’t have those problems.
In any case, for the purpose of this fear it only makes sense to explore the possibility of it not making a blunder. What if yes - if yes, then either the general west supports such a war and Mexico is done, just slowly, like Gaza, or it doesn’t and then, I guess, the US is going to slowly drift out of relevance.
EDIT: And that fantasy of mine is connected to a situation where US leadership goes almost Khmer Rouge. So - a clearly suicidal, but murderous scenario. So - control over millions in such a model is done by killing many.
But you are right in there not being anything resembling such amount of equipment available now to use. So I’d expect all this to be at least a decade away even if it can happen.
That’s wrong, the US can eat a couple of countries just fine. The efficiency is atrocious, but the sheer inherited strategic power and logistics and stockpiles, and the amount of funding allowing to, say, build drones analogous to Russian “Geran” 100x times more expensive in the same amounts as Russia does, - all these make many wars a certain victory in the sense of destroying the other side’s forces and possibly civilian population.
Anyway. Two things.
1 - In his previous term there was squeal from all sides how he’s going to institute fascism right now. “The boy who cried wolves” may be a valid analogy or it may not. I think before anything like this the US will have an open change of the regime. At the same time - it’s very convenient to have the land border with other countries very narrow, when instituting totalitarianism (resistance fighters, people trying to flee, all kinds of stuff), so possibly eating Mexico and Canada and doing a regime change after that is good enough.
2 - Perhaps any kind of a war is easier done after, suppose, an economic crisis happens. AI bubble burst, or something like that.
A war with Mexico would be disastrous. Yes the US military and military industrial complex is much larger but Mexico is a huge country in land and population that has a much larger and diverse economy than Iraq and Afghanistan. They have a large population of people with engineering education and a large population of those employed in manufacturing. Mexico doesn’t have an incredibly huge domestic arms industry but it exists and what they do have is a huge manufacturing industry that I’m certain they would be able to take advantage of to churn out anything that can be used for war.
The loss of the US to Mexican manufacturing would mean significantly higher inflation and a huge increase to national debt that would also contribute to an eventual increase in inflation. Long term it would also mean Mexico joins the arms race for at least ground armies and missiles. Mexico does have a strong and growing tech sector. Mexico does not have a large military because they have not needed one. The only theoretical threat would be the US but that hasn’t been threatened in a very long time. A US invasion would motivate Mexico to being the regions South Korea but possibly much larger long term. Domestic resources and highly educated people and amount of people for active and reserve forces
The north is a lot more sparsely populated but I’d expect that to be where things trap out at with constant insurgency across the southwestern united states and northern mexico. War with either Mexico or Canada would destabilize the US domestically but Mexico probably far worse. By the time a sufficiently sized invasion force for the US military made it to southern mexico, bridges and cities would be boobytrapped and fortified to hell.
I’d question what every other country south of the US would do. Not active participant but proxy to ship arms from Russia, China, North Korea, Iran to Mexico now that international sanctions would not matter to Mexico. I doubt Brazil would be happy. I wouldn’t be surprised if this was the opportunity to grow their domestic arms industry and see their missiles in action and gain data. See a huge return of Brazil to the international arms market. Progressively send out their old stockpile to make way for their ongoing modernization efforts.
US economic and stockpile disaster in a time when one of the largest concerns is how bad the acquisition and production levels are for militaries in the US and western europe. How old and regularly in maintenance and need for replacement large naval ships. How expensive the missiles shot out of missile defense systems are. The maintenance needs that will be needed from the stress placed on actively fought against naval vessels and aircraft
Just as problematic is what this would mean for US military acquisition and development. It would shift back to ground forces when the US wants to focus on Navy and air. Disaster for the US and allies in the Pacific. Attacking Mexico would long term make the cost of maintaining the ground and air army just domestically much more expensive. It’d have to be larger now with a strong enemy with a huge shared land and maritime border. Plus how Brazil can benefit from a US-Mexico war. Alliances that can form in defense against a crazy US that’s gone back to cold war and earlier meddling in Latin America.
What would happen is early US war effort makes huge gains. Stockpile of missiles drop to levels where legal mandates of required stockpile levels near or are breached. Military ends up in a legal and logistical back and forth of can they fire more and why can’t we build missiles as fast as Russia and China. US populace unrest would make anti-Vietnam war protest look small. Riots would make post-MLK assassination look small. Mexico rapidly develops production for small cheap explosives and drones and develops international strategies to have international arms make it to Mexico. Brazil quickly ascends back to being a major international arms dealer. The US eventually has to withdraw from Mexico because of the cost of war and occupation of Mexico and domestic unrest
US military now has to primarily focus on the Americas rather than the Pacific, eastern Europe, and the Middle East because Mexico and Brazil are now hypercharged more than anytime in history to compete with the US. Their populations motivated. Mexico eventually joins BRICS. Major implications all over the world as the US just post-WW2 France and UK’ed themselves where those two trying to reassert their international empires without the US and failed by the 60s and took positions as US vassals. US wouldn’t become a vassal of any, but it’d have to pull back internationally majorly
Even a short attack and retreat like Iran would force a shift to domestic army instead of overseas. Mexico would instantly bump up their military expenses up to higher single digit percentages of the countries GDP and go on an acquisition spree while building up domestic arms industry
Americans would face high inflation, austerity, possibly high unemployment as hostility to American products and services increases. Another major decline in tourism. Huge cost of military benefits pay for anyone that was deployed to the active war zone, injured, survivor benefits, or just recruited to shore up needs domestically while maintaining overseas personnel. The US conservatives would have a marketing win but the whole of the US an international strength and influence loss. American people lose.
I think this is an evaluation based on wars of the past.
Without 1) autonomous combat drones, 2) new fascism in the USA allowing it to kill any amounts of foreign and its own civilians, 3) surveillance that wasn’t possible before our time, 4) computers making many decisions in real time.
With those present they can launch a swarm of AI killbots, possibly with tactical nukes, and be done before the general population even realizes well enough what happened (that’s a slow thing). No conscription\mobilization\losses - much smaller problems with Vietnam-like protests, morale, fragging.
This is an extreme fantasy, of course. Strongly inspired by Soviet post-WWII doctrine for a nuclear war plus new tools.
Dictatorships fall when they can’t keep promises to pay and feed their military anything of worth. Any attack on Mexico would be another major hit to US financing ability like the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were. The US has had to deprioritize development of a distinct navy 6th gen fighter jet to financially support the air force program. They scrapped plans for Zumwault destroyers for a new cheaper design. E7 AEW&C is on the chopping block which anything AEW&C is important for drones
Russia and Ukraine right now display the problems in difference in personnel numbers. For the amount of drones being manufacturered for Russia and Ukraine, on the front lines Ukraines lack of soldiers on the ground leaves gaps for Russian forces to push forward and create opportunities for encirclement. Mass production drones are not yet a replacement for human soldiers. Mass production drones don’t go very fast and far and they can’t Cary that heavy of munitions. Ground drones are far behind air based in terrain traversal. Large drones are expensive, use expensive munitions, and the US is slow to build things. The US unmanned systems are not good enough yet to replace a ground army and because of the Ukraine Russia war, drone counter technologies and strategies are being learned across the world like how the first Gulf War taught the world the importance of AEW&C
What swarm of AI killlbots does the US have that can take out the military of a country of 130 million people and successfully occupy and control this populace? With what money? How do they finance that with a worsening debt to GDP ratio? How well will US bonds sell to international buyers after going nuclear on Mexico? Go nuclear on Mexico and the wind. Managing the fallout drifting towards the US. There is no avoiding conscription. There is a reason the military is currently trying very hard with recruitment advertising in gaming tournaments and what not. War has not progressed in any country where machines can replace people
For the technological advantage of the US and Israel over Iran and Yemen, the US had to expend a large percentage of their THAAD stockpile to fend off missiles. Southern Mexico is the heart of the Mexican population. The US would need to defend its air assets across distances pushing well past a thousand of miles. It would have to expend a substantial amount of missiles to destroy other missiles that target US missiles and US infrastructure and sea vessels. A lot of expensive equipment. A lot of money. It would not be a quick war.
People thought Ukriane would fall within a month. Then people thought the Russian economy would collapse within a year and Putin deposed. It became a lot more murky. Current US (not previous US and not even Trump 1st era advisors thought Iran was quick work) and Israel thought it would be quick work to disable Iran and Iranian missiles wouldn’t be an issue for Israeli and American missile defenses. Pretty high percentage but enough makes it through to be an issue. So Iran and Israel, unsettled and the Houthis are back to shooting ships in the red sea and Israel beven after years of US, Israeli, and Saudi technological superiority. Probably a restart of the war in the near future as Iran replenishes it’s missile stockpile and defense systems through regional suppliers and domestic.
War with Mexico would not be quick. It would not be cheap. It would not be without major human ground forces. It would be the perfect opportunity for war in the pacific and middle east as the US just had to commit major resources to dealing with Mexico and suppress domestic unrest. All incredibly expensive for a country whose finances are built on the expectations and faith of international treasury buyers for American debt. The major international credit agencies would undoubtedly downgrade the US credit rating again complicating feeding the active American military and benefits for the retired
People concerned about the billions in recent years to Ukraine and Israel. Mexico and the international complications from opportunities made by the huge American blunder would mean trillions from the US to try to manage major wars at the southern border war, the war in Europe, the war in the middle east, and likely war in the pacific
Yes, but there are people in the USA who have made systems solving very complex tasks. Suppose people who’ve built Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Google - suppose they build the robotized system that is going to fight such a war. (Which is also similar to what Russia and Ukraine did, their new military development is all around local analogs of those companies.)
They have a whole new MIC emerging, with Palantir and more general companies developing new weapons. Mostly, like I said, autonomous drones (meaning far longer range, smaller vulnerability to jamming and miniaturization - what can you do against a killer bird the size of your fist?).
Russia and Ukraine are mostly fighting using drones and artillery now, with very small suicide groups of people used to find openings, infiltrate lines and take pieces of territory.
Suppose a military fighting just like today’s Russian or Ukrainian one attacks an unprepared old one, with very expensive and big AD batteries, artillery, tanks, infantry transports and so on, unprotected from swarms of cheap drones immediately killing anything detected. They might be able to wipe it all out like a week before the world around will realize that such a blitzkrieg has happened.
Also not only swarms themselves, but modern tools of operational control. Lots of blunders are due to living humans panicking or making emotional decisions and shows, or just not being able to process information quickly enough. Due to struggle for power, or crime. A swarm of drones doesn’t have those problems.
In any case, for the purpose of this fear it only makes sense to explore the possibility of it not making a blunder. What if yes - if yes, then either the general west supports such a war and Mexico is done, just slowly, like Gaza, or it doesn’t and then, I guess, the US is going to slowly drift out of relevance.
EDIT: And that fantasy of mine is connected to a situation where US leadership goes almost Khmer Rouge. So - a clearly suicidal, but murderous scenario. So - control over millions in such a model is done by killing many.
But you are right in there not being anything resembling such amount of equipment available now to use. So I’d expect all this to be at least a decade away even if it can happen.