Feral Jundi

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Strategy: Mexico Implements Fortified Town Or ‘Burgward’ Strategy In Tamaulipas

Filed under: Mexico,Strategy — Tags: , , , , — Matt @ 11:00 PM

Grand Strategic Analysis: In essence, fortified towns (garrison towns) are being established by means of recolonizing (and stabilizing existing populations) in a region of Mexico lost to the de facto rule of the criminal insurgents. This is pretty much an unheard of development with regard to mature, stable, and modern states. Rather, it is characteristic of centralized states expanding into frontier areas (those expanding territorially) and such states losing control over expanses of their lands (those being overrun by raiders and barbarians). This is very much reminiscent of Roman, and later Holy Roman, Empire frontier towns (burgwards et.al.) in Europe during the late imperial and post-Western empire eras. The raiders of those eras, however, were early on based on the Germanic tribes and Huns (Magyars) as opposed to today’s cartel (2nd/3rd phase) and gang (3GEN) groupings [6]. Modern parallels to US firebases in Vietnam may be made but the context and type of insurgency (criminal vs Maoist-inspired) make such contentions highly problematic. The historical parallels to the criminal-soldier threats of the late Roman Empire and Dark Ages appear even more viable in light of the multitude of atrocities committed (torture, mutilations, and beheadings), although in this instance with a post-modern contextual overlay.

Thanks to Dr. Bunker for pointing this one out in his Strategic Note #10. This is very cool stuff and reminiscent of a sort of ink blot counter-insurgency strategy. But Dr. Bunker classified it as Burgward Strategy based off of the Roman method of setting up frontier posts to deal with raiders and barbarians. To basically take back and bring under control the land within the empire.

It is also shocking to know that towns like the one described exist. Here is the quote that perked me up:

In late 2010, nearly all of the town’s 6,300 inhabitants fled to neighboring municipalities and across the border into the United States due to fear of drug-related violence.
Many of them had relocated to a shelter in the nearby city of Ciudad Miguel Aleman.

This is crazy. That would make the illegal immigrants that cross into the US into more of a class of war refugee. So yes, any strategy that includes taking back these towns is mutually beneficial to Mexico and the US.

The other thing I was wondering is how many other towns are like this one? And, for setting up these mobile military bases, I wonder who they are contracting with if any, to help support these operations?  I imagine if there are quite a few of these towns that need to be taken back, then I could see the potential for a Mexican type LOGCAP program emerging to support those operations. Although I have not heard of anything like that yet, and I will keep an eye out as Mexico continues to implement this strategy. (I do not know if the Merida Initiative is helping to support this or not?). Interesting stuff. –Matt

 

Mexico Inaugurates Military Barracks in Violence-Plagued Town
December 10, 2011
Mexican President Felipe Calderon formally inaugurated a military barracks in the violence-racked northeastern town of Ciudad Mier, where he reiterated that the deployment of army soldiers to battle drug-trafficking gangs is a necessary but temporary measure.
He said the new army base will allow time for authorities to recruit and form their own police forces in that town and other areas of Tamaulipas state, saying that the weakness, vulnerability and, in some cases, complicity, of law enforcement had put people “at the mercy of criminals.”
Calderon said Ciudad Mier, a colonial community in Tamaulipas state near the U.S.-Mexico border that was once known as the “Magic Town,” should be a tourist destination but instead was abandoned by its citizens last year because of the presence of criminal gangs.
In late 2010, nearly all of the town’s 6,300 inhabitants fled to neighboring municipalities and across the border into the United States due to fear of drug-related violence.
Many of them had relocated to a shelter in the nearby city of Ciudad Miguel Aleman.
Ciudad Mier, which is located in the “Frontera Chica” region of Tamaulipas, and many other towns in northeastern Mexico found themselves caught up in the war sparked by the March 2010 rupture of the alliance between the Gulf drug cartel and Los Zetas, the cartel’s former armed wing.

(more…)

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Law Enforcement: SWAT Teams Versus Cartel ‘Infantry’ On The Border?

Filed under: Law Enforcement,Mexico — Tags: , , , , — Matt @ 4:06 PM

For the responding US SWAT teams, this incident poses a potentially dangerous situation. It is more of a military operation on a “movement to contact” than a conventional SWAT operation in the US. SWAT teams are trained and equipped to contend with criminals in barricade and hostage type situations and are accustomed to stacked (bunched together) movement and entry tactics. Typically the criminals encountered are found in small numbers— usually one or maybe two— and may or may not have a shotgun, semi-automatic rifle, and some form of body armor. It is the intent of such criminals to flee from responding police forces and only put up a fight if corned out of desperation—even then such criminals typically surrender to responding SWAT units. A group of 15 cartel/drug gang gunmen represents an entirely different threat—it essentially contains a reinforced squad of opposing force personnel. These cartel/gang foot soldiers will be proactive in their actions—not reactive like most criminals encountered— and therefore represent an opposing (enemy) force the US SWAT teams are unaccustomed to. Besides the potentials for ambushes and fires and movement being conducted by the cartel/gang gunmen, their semi-automatic (and full auto) assault weapons and the great likelihood of the presence of grenade-launchers and fragmentation grenades makes for a military-like engagement scenario that is beyond present SWAT capabilities to effectively respond. Under these circumstances, standard SWAT operating procedures—such as the use of stacked movement tactics— could be disastrous in their implementation. -from Dr. Bunker’s assessment about this incident.

This is very interesting and a hat tip to Dr. Bunker and SWJ for putting this up as tactical note #6. Basically what we have here is the cartels are battling it out along the grey areas of the border between the US and Mexico. Meaning if they are pursued by Mexican authorities, they cross over the border, and now that is a blocking action to stop the pursuit. Then of course the pursuit is picked up by the US authorities, but that is only if they are on the same sheet of music and included in the call. As you can see, the border is a strategic tool of the cartels to do what they gotta do. It is very similar to how the Taliban play the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, and it makes for a complex problem for authorities.

Now this would be complex for law enforcement to deal with one or two armed criminals playing the border like this, but in this particular incident, it got very complex and dangerous.  A squad sized element of cartels, all armed with military grade weapons, crossed the border in pursuit of a target.  The SWAT team on the US side was called out to deal with this ‘cartel infantry unit’. That is quite a scenario, and like Dr. Bunker mentioned, a SWAT team would have to rethink how they approach such a thing. This is movement to contact stuff here, and the police would have to be geared more like a infantry unit in order to compete. So will SWAT teams have to roll with M-240’s, grenade launchers, and mortars in their possession?

I could also see using drones for these kinds of call outs, just so law enforcement can get an eye on exactly what they are dealing with. Especially SUAV’s that could be carried in patrol cars and launched by one officer or border patrol agent. Anything to get eyes on the situation and see exactly what they have to deal with until a helicopter gets on scene. Because an officer coming up against a cartel infantry unit would not be a good day.  They could also canvass the area and look for RIP crews that might further add violence and complexity to the situation.

This also poses a very interesting question. Should the defense of the border be a military job or a border patrol/law enforcement job? Or should the the police or border patrol continue to be modified and enhanced to look and act more like military units than police units? –Matt

 

SWAT teams dispatched as gun battle unfolds near Escobares
Ildefonso Ortiz and Jared Taylor
2011-11-08
ESCOBARES — Gunmen crossed the Rio Grande into the United States near a shootout between where the Mexican military and a group of gunmen was taking place.
Several area SWAT teams responded about 1:30 p.m. Tuesday to a ranch near Escobares, just across the U.S.-Mexico border, where a shootout broke out south of the Rio Grande.
The shootout reportedly began shortly after noon but details were not immediately available. Residents on the U.S. side reported seeing members of the U.S. Border Patrol and Starr County Sheriff’s Office securing the area near the border.
Border Patrol spokeswoman Rosalinda Huey said agents had been tracking a suspected drug load near La Rosita and pushed it back to Mexico.
Border Patrol alerted Mexican authorities of the suspected load and then found an injured Mexican national on the U.S. side of the Rio Grande, Huey said. Emergency crews rushed the man to an area hospital. His condition remains unknown.

(more…)

Monday, September 26, 2011

Quotes: Mexican Cartels Are Now Operating In Over 1,000 US Cities; Up From 195 Cities

This is a startling revelation, and this just came out in the National Drug Threat Assessment for 2011 I posted earlier.  A big hat tip to Small Wars Journal and Dr. Bunker for pointing out this fact and definitely follow the discussion over there if you are following this war.

I also wanted to mention that this weekend Borderland Beat posted a video and story that showed the execution of two men by a cartel execution squad. They cut one guy’s head off with a chainsaw, and the other guy’s head was cut off using a knife. The video was brutal to watch, and I will not post a link to it on this blog, but the imagery is left to your imagination. I have also seen this imagery and type of video elsewhere in the world, and that was in Iraq. Extremists cut off the heads of their captives and filmed it as well.

With both examples, the desired outcome of filming these executions was to send a message of horror and terror.  And believe me, I see no difference between how the cartels or terrorists deliver that message.

But the interesting point here that I wanted to make is that Iraq and Afghanistan are ‘over there’, and the war in Mexico is in our backyard.  Hell, with this report, the Mexican cartels are on now on the doorstep and seeping through the floor boards of the house. This is the war to be concerned about, and yet there is very little reaction to this in America.

It is like it is too awful to look at or acknowledge, much like the video of the chainsaw execution. But it happened, and the war in Mexico is happening, and we need to come to grips with that reality. Especially as these criminals infiltrate and turn Americans into traitors with their money and product.

Another example is the reaction the US has to a terror cell that is found and arrested on our soil. Politicians and the media get all riled up about such a thing, and terrorism is front and center on everyone’s minds.  Visions of 9/11 and a fear of a second attack just freaks people out.  That is terrorism.

But how are the cartels any different? They don’t just have one cell, but thousands of cells or groups throughout the US, and they sell drugs that have led to the deaths of thousands of Americans. Those same drugs have created addicts that go on to commit crimes and destroy families, all with a drive to get even more drugs. This addiction cycle has a profoundly negative impact on society, and this drug threat analysis clearly identified those issues.

The cartels profit off of American addiction, and they are infiltrating into this country in order to help create addicts, and then sell to those individuals for the lifetime of their addiction. These cartels find those who will help facilitate that process, and in war, you could actually view these individuals as traitors to this country. To provide a terrorism metaphor, it is a lot like how Al Qaeda looks for individuals that they can turn or convert into human weapons. Al Qaeda uses religion as the drug to make those individuals members of their cause, and the Cartels use drugs to make individuals ‘members of their cause’. The problem though is that it is far easier for a cartel to achieve their goals, compared to groups like Al Qaeda. That is the war, and that should trouble anyone that cares about the safety of their country. –Matt

 

 

Mexican Cartel Strategic Note
by Robert Bunker
September 25, 2011
Mexican Cartels (Transnational Criminal Organizations) Now Operating in Over 1,000 US Cities; Up From 195 US Cities
The recent publication of the US Department of Justice National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC), National Drug Threat Assessment 2011 (http://www.justice.gov/ndic/topics/ndtas.htm#y2011) (August 2011) provides an important strategic insight into Mexican cartel penetration into the United States. On p. 8 of the document, a single sentence states:
Mexican-based TCOs were operating in more than a thousand U.S. cities during 2009-2010, spanning all nine OCDETF regions.
The corresponding note (g) is as follows:
Included are traffickers who purchase illicit drugs from TCO associates and distribute them on their own, cells that function as an extension of the TCO to traffic illicit drugs in the United States, and cells that provide warehousing, security, and/or transportation services for the TCO.

(more…)

Powered by WordPress