America is actually pretty great at getting developing/third world countries to capitulate to their demands/desires.
Good on you for that! I bet you all feel pretty strong and mighty!
I wonder in what chapter of Art of the Deal we'd find strong arm tactics as a way to have leverage in negotiations.Can't read the full article due to the paywall, so I'm curious about the specifics.
Credit to Donald for not having to carry out his threat this time.
I wonder in what chapter of Art of the Deal we'd find strong arm tactics as a way to have leverage in negotiations.
I don't think 'capitulate' is the right word.
View attachment 257922
They have been resisting for how long? And now have ceased to resist an opponent
Sounds like the right word to me.
That is what I wondered.How long have they been resisting?
frankly i never got why other countries have to respect the us' borders when the us has never respected theirs.America is actually pretty great at getting developing/third world countries to capitulate to their demands/desires.
Good on you for that! I bet you all feel pretty strong and mighty!
frankly i never got why other countries have to respect the us' borders when the us has never respected theirs.
WASHINGTON — The deal to avert tariffs that President Trump announced with great fanfare on Friday night consists largely of actions that Mexico had already promised to take in prior discussions with the United States over the past several months, according to officials from both countries who are familiar with the negotiations.
Friday’s joint declaration says Mexico agreed to the “deployment of its National Guard throughout Mexico, giving priority to its southern border.” But the Mexican government had already pledged to do that in March during secret talks in Miami between Kirstjen Nielsen, then the secretary of homeland security, and Olga Sanchez, the Mexican secretary of the interior, the officials said.
The centerpiece of Mr. Trump’s deal was an expansion of a program to allow asylum-seekers to remain in Mexico while their legal cases proceed. But that arrangement was reached in December in a pair of painstakingly negotiated diplomatic notes that the two countries exchanged. Ms. Nielsen announced the Migrant Protection Protocols during a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee five days before Christmas.
And over the past week, negotiators failed to persuade Mexico to accept a “safe third country” treaty that would have given the United States the legal ability to reject asylum seekers if they had not sought refuge in Mexico first.
The violent tyranny and crime seen in those countries seems to be part of their DNA, for what's it's worth.
That is what I wondered.
Reduced trust in US agreements.
A move towards excluding the US in trade negotiations.
Other countries being willing to flex their economic muscle in areas that the US can't counter
Not to mention the likelihood of worsening the humanitarian crises in south America.
No, the last thing we want is Mexico to be part of the US. Part of the problem is the rights imposed in our laws. To stop refugees, we need a country that doesn't have the press looking over them demanding that people be treated humanely.
The US isn't alone in this. Europe has taken somewhat of the same approach, pressuring countries like Turkey and Libya to stop the flow.
I agree, however, that looking at the borders it should be a lot easier for Mexico than the US. But we need to find a way to improve conditions in places like Honduras. I'm aware that this is a hard problem.