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.

  • @PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    -41 year ago

    Building a fence has nothing to do with that. If Texas had setup a federal border crossing, that would be illegal. If Texas had that fence constructed in such a way that a federal border crossing were blocked off, that would be illegal. A natural land border augmented with a fence isn’t an international incident and you don’t need permission from the federal government to do that.

    • @SterlingVapor@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      121 year ago

      You sure as hell do when you put 80% of it outside your borders, outside US borders no less

      This kind of thing could spark a war in different circumstances - imagine the Mexican army goes to dismantle the buoys in their borders, and one of several possible groups from Texas confronts them and it leads to a skirmish

      Mexico would be entirely within their rights - it’s on their property and it’s suspected to be leading to deaths

      • @PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        -71 year ago

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

        • some_guy
          link
          fedilink
          5
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          But

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

          • @PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            -41 year ago

            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.

            • some_guy
              link
              fedilink
              11 year ago

              That would literally be an international incident, no?

              • @PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                -21 year ago

                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.

                • some_guy
                  link
                  fedilink
                  3
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  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?

                  • @nxdefiant@startrek.website
                    link
                    fedilink
                    1
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    There’s a reason the government started calling unidentified flying objects “Unidentified Aerial Phenomena”.

                    Would that definitely be an occurrence between two countries? Yes.

                    Would that be an “international incident”? Maybe.

                  • @PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    -31 year ago

                    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”?