Why doesn't the US government solve the Mexican immigrantion problem by annexing Mexico?

Question

The US annexed the Louisiana purchase, Texas, the west, Alaska, Hawaii. That eliminated borders. So the simple solution is not to make fences but to annex Mexico in the same fashion.

Answer 1

Mexico is a Turd World County.
We don't need anything from Mexico including its citizens.

The Power Brokers and their sneaky North American Union shi are the ones who want no borders so there's NO US Middle Class. Just a Super-Rich US Class and a Dirt-Poor-Slave Class.

Answer 2

However, all of the examples you gave were either bought or taken as a result of war.

Texas and the west were a result of the Mexican- American War. However, America was nice and still paid for the lands that it could've just taken. Texas was the only instance of annexation because, after it seceded from Mexico, it was a sovereign gvernment. It asked the to become part of the US.

Alaska was bought from Russia while the Louisiana Territory was sold to the US by Napolean Bonaparte.

The US can't just annex Mexico because it is a sovereign nation that has never asked to become part of the US. Although it would, in a sense, solve the immigration problem, the Americans would still fear losing their jobs, Mexicans would be forced to learn english, and the entire culture and infastructure would change. Not to mention, this could possibly increase the national debt for the US. Although at times it does seem like a plausible idea, it is simply won't happen due to logistical, cultural, economic and linguistic nightmares.

Answer 3

Great question. Theoretically, there are a number of compelling reasons for the US to annex the rest of Mexico. 1. Southern Mexico has a much smaller border. Even the mexicans can patrol it. 2. Every time the US has acquired a chunk of Mexico in the past it has made money on the deal. 3. US law would mean minimum wages, which would pretty much gut the whole reason behind the current invasion. Why would Pedro freeze his chihuahua off in Chicago when he can make the same money in Tijuana? 4. US law, would in theory, clean up governmental corruption south of the Rio Grande... in theory. 5. Lotsa natural resources and cheap labor, even at minimum wages. 6. The American South is experiencing a huge real estate boom. What if you added over a million more square acres of even warmer land? 7. At Mexico's narrowest point, and with modern technology and endless cheap labor, the Tehuantepec Canal project could finally be realized. This would put a major, modern, transcontinental canal on American soil which would bring in billions of dollars each year. Well, these are the theories. In reality, annexation would cost us billions of dollars, thousands of lives, and destroy the American way of life.

Answer 4

Can your tax dollars support annexing a poor country that has corrupted politicians and law enforcement people? There is a reason people are trying to leave their country.
I, for one, can not take on another responsibility let alone have my tax dollars increased to support another country (or a few extra states) because the US government sat on their collective a$$es so long without enforcing a law they put into place. Now its a problem because there are too many people involved that have started lives, raised children and consider themselves Americans.
And to extend your question even further, should we annex every parcel of land that borders ours because we can't control traffic in an out of the US. It's just total nonsense and shows how our government has not been doing what they are elected and paid to do.

Answer 5

Bad idea. But instead of allowing corporations to do whatever the hell they want in search for cheaper labor and better corporate gains, why not have them provide more jobs across the border. Most corporations have not only relocated outside the U.S. in search for cheaper labor but now consider Mexico's labor force too expensive and go as far as Malaysia. If Bush will be giving incentives to corporations to do business elsewhere why not have those businesses move across the border where they can help provide jobs and keep the people in their own homeland.

Answer 6

Uh, because the Southwest used to be part of Mexico, so obviously annexing them doesn't work, does it?

Answer 7

To start your facts are all wrong.

US PURCHASED the Louisiana territory from France, Texas applied for inclusion to the Union, Alaska was purchased from Russia...Hawaii was the only one on your list that was annexed.


The reason we do not do that is because it would be a horribly bad action that would end in both sides being much worse off

Answer 8

Or, allowing Texas and parts of California to be part of Mexico!

Answer 9

It would bankrupt us.

Imagine an additional 100+ million poor, uneducated, unskilled instant Americans.

It would be the end of our school system, our medical facilities, our social programs and our culture.

In essence, it would be the end of this country.

Answer 10

As an outsider it seems to me that the only solution many Americans seem to have for any problem is "shoot it or invade it" (see Iran, Iraq, Chile, Nicaragua, Guatamala, Indonesia, Venezuela, Sudan...). Is this just my imagination?

Surely a better way to solve the immigration "problem" (and as these immigrants hold up may agricultural and service industries, how much of a problem are they really?) would be to end the vast inequalities of wealth between those in the US and those in Mexico?