Follow us on social

google cta
10,000 US troops begin arriving at Mexico border

10,000 US troops begin arriving at Mexico border

Locals: this place is becoming a “military zone”

Reporting | QiOSK
google cta
google cta

The 10,000 troops deployed by the Trump administration have begun arriving at America’s southern border.

Despite border crossings dropping, President Trump is continuing with his plan to militarize the U.S. border with Mexico. However, the soldiers will not be arresting illegal crossers but are instead focused on providing support and additional eyes and ears for the Border Patrol agents who are already on the ground.

We will not be actively on patrols," said Maj. Jaren Stafani at a press conference. "We'll be at detection and monitoring sites to provide that information to [the] Border Patrol to then go out and do their law enforcement function." Stefani is leading the Big Bend deployment area. This policy is consistent with the Posse Comitatus Act, which is meant to stop the military from participating in civilian law enforcement, with a few exceptions.

Regardless of this, some locals still feel as though their communities are being militarized. Local resident of Presidio, Texas, Anibal Galindo says, “I feel like they're basically turning this place into a military zone, or a wanna-be conflict zone when in reality it isn't.”

Indeed, the military is placing equipment at the border often seen in conflicts overseas, including Stryker vehicles and Navy destroyers. Additionally, the CIA has ramped up drone flights in Mexico, something that began under the Biden administration. The drones are not on mission to kill any fentanyl dealers but to provide information to the Mexican government.

While tensions may rise between the Mexican and American governments over this militarization, some experts worry that the real problem may exist in how the United States handles its fight against the Cartels.

The Trump administration slapped several major cartels with a “Foreign Terrorist Organization” designation earlier this year, granting the federal government broad law enforcement and immigration authorities against them.

“By designating drug cartels as FTOs, the Trump administration unlocks new powers for itself, creates a new media narrative that could fool many, and reinforces the rest of its anti-immigration and border enforcement agenda,” comments Alex Nowrasteh, Vice President for Economic and Social Policy Studies at the Cato Institute. According to Nowrasteh, this designation will enable the president to economically punish Latin American states that do not adequately cooperate with Trump’s immigration plan and push his narrative that America is being invaded through its southern border.

Congressman Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) has supported the United States sending weapons of war into Mexico. “We need to somehow figure out diplomatically how to make this Mexico’s idea. That they’re asking for our military support, such as close air support, such as an AC-130 gunship overhead while they’re prosecuting a target and surrounded by sicarios… If I was in that situation as a Navy SEAL, we would just call in close air support, all those guys would be gone, and we’d move along our merry way.”

Cato’s Justin Logan has explained the faulty reasoning behind this policy. He explains that “despite seeing its homicide rate more than triple in less than two decades, Mexico is still nowhere near Colombia’s levels of violence during the Narcos era of the late 1980s and early 1990s, when the country reached the alarming rate of 85 homicides per 100,000 inhabitants. Comparing Mexico’s violence in 2023 to that of Colombia in 1993 borders on the preposterous.”

When the Mexican government militarized its anti-Cartel effort in the mid-2000s, homicide rates there tripled.

For now, locals like Anibal Galindo must ready themselves for what comes next as the Trump Administration sends thousands of troops to border towns.


Top Photo: El Paso, TX USA December 21, 2022 National Guard troops and Texas State Troopers deployed to the border to deter migrants from crossing. Access via Shutterstock
google cta
Reporting | QiOSK
Mbs-mbz-scaled
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan receives Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Presidential Airport in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates November 27, 2019. WAM/Handout via REUTERS

Is the US goading Arab states to join war against Iran?

QiOSK

On Sunday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz told ABC News that Arab Gulf states may soon step up their involvement in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. “I expect that you'll see additional diplomatic and possibly military action from them in the coming days and weeks,” Waltz said.

Then, on Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) slammed Saudi Arabia for staying out of the war even as “Americans are dying and the U.S. is spending billions” of dollars to conduct regime change in Iran. “If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it?” Graham asked. “Hopefully this changes soon. If not, consequences will follow.”

keep readingShow less
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

keep readingShow less
Will Democrats pop Trump's $50 billion trial balloon for war?
Top image credit: Sens. Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) and Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) sit look on during a congressional hearing in January, 2025. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Sipa USA)

Will Democrats pop Trump's $50 billion trial balloon for war?

Washington Politics

On Wednesday, Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) told CNN that he would support new funding for the U.S. war with Iran — but only if Israel and Arab Gulf states help pay for it.

“We’re using our taxpayer money to protect those countries,” Gallego said. “We’re using our men to protect these countries. They need to throw in and have skin in the game too.”

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.