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
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 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
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 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
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

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

          • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 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.

              • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                1 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@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  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
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    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
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 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”?

                    Is the collapsing fence that quite possibly goes into the Canadian border illegal? Is it an “international incident?”