The US should invade Mexico

I will start out by going down the flow of my opponents arguments. "dude shouldn't you be in school? " I am currently on a two week break ending on Tuesday. This is due to me being part of "year round schooling. " "I believe that my opponent has failed to understand the meaning to invade, for the Encarta English dictionary the 1st definition of invade is "transitive and intransitive verb to enter a country by force with or as an army, especially in order to conquer it" the Germans didn't invade France to chill out and say "hey French guys, were just gonna chill here" no they went to make it Germany. The Mexicans wouldn't be Mexicans because there would be no Mexico, jus about 20 more states for the US. " No, apparently you have failed to understand common United States foreign policy and history. I will use example for you that will clarify what will happen. For example, when the United States invaded Iraq, Iraq did not disappear off the map and become another state of the United States. In fact, there still are Iraqis in Iraq, therefore there would still me Mexicans in Mexico and the possibility of illegal immigration. "Yes we could take out the guys running down the street with shotguns, I recently went to Mexico on vacation and there were 2 pickups with mounted 50s on them, full of the swat teams, and standing on the deck of the ship I heard fire fights. And to eliminate the drug lords, find the marijuana fields, pack them with C4 or something like that and blow it into next week. " Sure this could help eliminate the guys running down the street with shotguns, but not all of the criminals located in Mexico. Not all criminals run down the street with shotguns. As well, his plan to eliminate the drug lords does not work. This is because a) it is impossible to find all the marijuana fields, and b) the drug lords themselves do not have to visit the drug fields, just their employees. For example, in Afghanistan the United States has taken control of many of the poppy seed fields used to grow Heroin. However, Afghanistan still does lead the world in Heroin production. Also, the idea of blowing the fields up, just wastes money and destroys the agricultural productivity of that land. "Yes we are spread across the globe, but remember, we still got tons of national guard, and since they helped in Afghanistan, why not aid in the Mexican invasion? " This in fact proves my point. The United States military is lacking so many soldiers and enrollement that Obama had to order the National Guard into Afghanistan and Iraq. Many of the National guard are still located there as well. Therefore, a lot of our National Guard are stationed oversees. In addition, the United States military enrollment has seen a sharp decline. Therefore, the United States military does not have the capability to invade and sustain troop presence in Mexico. The United States will sustain troop presence because they have done in previous wars such as Afghanistan, Iraq, and Vietnam. "I was not intending for this to be immediate, the economy will recover, and maybe in a year or two woe can all email our people and see what can be done. and I believe we can throw at least $2,000,000 more at this. " Even if we waited until the economy stabilized, it is still a wrong move. I have shown it is unnecessary by refuting all the points you have brought up. As well, it is detrimental because it would result in troop loss and unnecessary spending. Finally by saying it would cost only $2,000,000 is absolutely outrageous (see I didn't say absurd). "We have a right to bear arms, and last I checked we still had the right to have autos and semi-autos. Call me a absurd stereotyping person but I don't think you would know about about guns, you being a democrat. " I fail to see the impact this has on the debate. Thus I urge a negative ballot.