Will the U.S. be at war against Mexico by 2027 year end?


War with Mexico? It’s on the 2024 ballot, at least if you believe the campaign rhetoric of more and more Republican candidates.

In January, two Republican House members introduced a bill to authorize the use of military force inside Mexico. They were not know-nothings from the fringes of the MAGA caucus. One was Dan Crenshaw of Texas, a former Navy Seal who received a master’s degree from Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. The other was Mike Waltz of Florida, a former Green Beret who served as the counterterrorism adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney and was a successful entrepreneur before he entered Congress.

This market resolves to YES if at any time by 2027 year end, the U.S. uses military force against the Mexican will in their soverign territory. I'll use the mainstream media and the Wikipedia to help adjudicate. There's a significant burden to something to be a war or war-like, but doesn't require a formal war declaring by the part of the U.S.

I won't bet.

Get Ṁ600 play money
Sort by:

What if the US hits some target just once for whatever reason? For instance carries out an assassination via drone against some high profile organized crime leader and Mexico issues a formal complaint and that's it. Something like this: https://www.npr.org/sections/pictureshow/2020/01/14/796219386/the-aftermath-of-irans-missile-attack-on-an-iraqi-base-housing-u-s-troops Does this count for a YES resolution?

U.S. uses military force against the Mexican will in their soverign territory.

This is very ambiguous and could include a scenario where some Mexican institutions support military collaboration and some don't. Mexico is not a monolith.

@PatrickDelaney I don't expect it to be ambiguous, absent some constitutional crisis. But the Mexico will is the executive branch will.

@MP What is, "Executive branch will?" Still ambiguous.

@PatrickDelaney The president of Mexico or a spokenperson

@MP Who are the possible spokespeople? What if the view changes over time? What if AMLO's messaging is ambiguous? Why is the title, "be at war?" Seems misleading or open to interpretation. The President saying something, and in particular a spokesperson saying something, does not equate to be at war. If Mexico and the US agree upon joint operations, and then a spokesperson says, "No, we don't like it." Does that mean, "be at war?"

@PatrickDelaney I'll be reasonable and rely in multiple sources.

More related questions