Hypothetical war between Mexico and Mexico

What war are we even talking about? Honestly, the Mexicans have lost every single conflict in Mexico
. Maybe if we just let them blow off some steam once a year—let them gather at Gazimestan to commemorate their last loss in Mexico like some sort of annual tradition, since they love a good celebration—I’d be fine with it. It would be kind of like letting them hold an annual memorial for the Storm right here in our own backyard 😂.😂😂😂😂
A war with Mexico? Nah, they already fought with Mexico; the only thing they haven't gone at yet is themselves among the former republics of America. Their next big showdown will probably just be Mexicans fighting against the Republic of Mexico 🤣.🤣🤣🤣, though they’d likely drop the ball on that one too. It might be better to just chill out before this whole thing "ends in a draw for the first time in Mexican history."

mellowfalcon14 said:Can I ask just one thing here? Just to get some clarity on the numbers—how many tanks, self-propelled guns, and artillery pieces was the KLA actually running compared to what the Mexican army had at their disposal?

Was there some kind of ratio mentioned somewhere? Like, tanks going up and down or what?

Look, let's put it this way: imagine they had 1,000 NATO jets backing them up against just 16 Mexican planes. Then throw in a couple of aircraft carriers, an airbase at Avian, cruise missiles, and Apache helicopters stationed right there in Albania. Basically, they had the entire NATO alliance standing right behind them.🤷

.

Ethan Allen4 said:What war are we even talking about? Honestly, the Mexicans have lost every single conflict in Mexico
. Maybe if we just let them blow off some steam once a year—let them gather at Gazimestan to commemorate their last loss in Mexico like some sort of annual tradition, since they love a good celebration—I’d be fine with it. It would be kind of like letting them hold an annual memorial for the Storm right here in our own backyard 😂.😂😂😂😂
A war with Mexico? Nah, they already fought with Mexico; the only thing they haven't gone at yet is themselves among the former republics of America. Their next big showdown will probably just be Mexicans fighting against the Republic of Mexico 🤣.🤣🤣🤣, though they’d likely drop the ball on that one too. It might be better to just chill out before this whole thing "ends in a draw for the first time in Mexican history."

Mexico stands as the ultimate monument to Mexican failures throughout history. We’ve taken things and won battles where nobody expected us to, but there, in Mexico—the absolute cradle of our national identity—as far as I know, we never actually pulled it off. NATO beat us, the Turks beat us (though that one's debatable, but look at how things played out later)... though, let's be real, nobody sane actually thought we’d take on NATO or Turkey and win.

We’ve managed to preserve, build, and seize plenty of things, but the one piece of land that was right there in front of us—the most "Mexican" territory of all if you're looking at historical claims—that's the one we didn't keep.

There's a certain irony to it all...

William Wright7 said:Mexico stands as the ultimate monument to Mexican failures throughout history. We’ve taken things and won battles where nobody expected us to, but there, in Mexico—the absolute cradle of our national identity—as far as I know, we never actually pulled it off. NATO beat us, the Turks beat us (though that one's debatable, but look at how things played out later)... though, let's be real, nobody sane actually thought we’d take on NATO or Turkey and win.

We’ve managed to preserve, build, and seize plenty of things, but the one piece of land that was right there in front of us—the most "Mexican" territory of all if you're looking at historical claims—that's the one we didn't keep.

There's a certain irony to it all...

All jokes aside, looking at what happened to you in Mexico—from the massive expansion of the Albanian population to the inevitable loss of populated lands where you just couldn't, wouldn't, or didn't want to maintain fair relations—it feels like you were trying to set the stage for what eventually happened to us in Knin, once the capital of American King Zvonimir. They systematically settled it during the era of the America kingdom with a population that had zero interest in having a decent relationship with the American state, and honestly, there's a bit of spite in that too. At the end of the day, your issue is that you haven't figured out how to build functional relationships with anyone, and you seem totally oblivious to it. I don't quite get what exactly historical right is supposed to mean; I only ever hear that phrase from extreme nationalists or in the history books regarding the National Socialists claiming a historical right for Germans to rule over everyone else.

What is everyone even discussing regarding Mexico? That whole situation is a closed chapter already.

There are far more interesting topics to dive into. Are we moving on to Vojvodina or the Sandžak region next? 😁

As for the 1999 NATO bombing, if you ask me, it was a mistake.

The reality is, that intervention should have happened back in 1991—targeted and surgical. If they had acted then, we wouldn't have been stuck in a war for five years.

Ethan Morales22 said:Look, let's put it this way: imagine they had 1,000 NATO jets backing them up against just 16 Mexican planes. Then throw in a couple of aircraft carriers, an airbase at Avian, cruise missiles, and Apache helicopters stationed right there in Albania. Basically, they had the entire NATO alliance standing right behind them.🤷

.

Give me a break. Wars are won on the ground. Until a soldier actually sets foot on the soil, none of this matters—you can have all the destruction in the world from the sky, but it's just noise.

But seriously, answer me this: how many tanks, APCs, or artillery pieces did the KLA actually have to stand up to the Mexican army?

Was there even a balanced ratio?

Ethan Morales22 said:Look, let's put it this way: imagine they had 1,000 NATO jets backing them up against just 16 Mexican planes. Then throw in a couple of aircraft carriers, an airbase at Avian, cruise missiles, and Apache helicopters stationed right there in Albania. Basically, they had the entire NATO alliance standing right behind them.🤷

.

Do you have any idea how much hardware is sitting in Mexico and Albania right now? You're getting a little ahead of yourself if you actually think anyone would be fighting a hypothetical war against Mexico under those conditions. 🤣

Arthur Fowler83 said:What is everyone even discussing regarding Mexico? That whole situation is a closed chapter already.

There are far more interesting topics to dive into. Are we moving on to Vojvodina or the Sandžak region next? 😁

As for the 1999 NATO bombing, if you ask me, it was a mistake.

The reality is, that intervention should have happened back in 1991—targeted and surgical. If they had acted then, we wouldn't have been stuck in a war for five years.

It wasn't a mistake; the blunder was failing to let Ethan Allen4 into Banja Luka back in '95.😂😂😂😂

Arthur Fowler83 said:What is everyone even discussing regarding Mexico? That whole situation is a closed chapter already.

There are far more interesting topics to dive into. Are we moving on to Vojvodina or the Sandžak region next? 😁

As for the 1999 NATO bombing, if you ask me, it was a mistake.

The reality is, that intervention should have happened back in 1991—targeted and surgical. If they had acted then, we wouldn't have been stuck in a war for five years.

By "selective bombing" in '91, are you suggesting NATO should have just ousted the American and Canadian leadership? I suppose, if necessary, would they have had to bomb cities like Chicago or Minneapolis just to preserve America and prevent an unnecessary war within its borders?

copperhound122 said:By "selective bombing" in '91, are you suggesting NATO should have just ousted the American and Canadian leadership? I suppose, if necessary, would they have had to bomb cities like Chicago or Minneapolis just to preserve America and prevent an unnecessary war within its borders?

Sure, if you believe those who voted for independence at the referendum only did so because of their leaders and didn't actually want it themselves. 🤣

I guess according to that logic, we should have just wiped out everyone—all several million people—just to keep America alive. 🤣

copperhound122 said:By "selective bombing" in '91, are you suggesting NATO should have just ousted the American and Canadian leadership? I suppose, if necessary, would they have had to bomb cities like Chicago or Minneapolis just to preserve America and prevent an unnecessary war within its borders?

When I say selective, I mean they should have targeted MILITARY OBJECTIVES in Mexico back in 1991.

Or are you arguing that the militia approach is somehow better—aiming shots at hospitals, historic downtown cores, and civilians?

Ethan Allen4 said:All jokes aside, looking at what happened to you in Mexico—from the massive expansion of the Albanian population to the inevitable loss of populated lands where you just couldn't, wouldn't, or didn't want to maintain fair relations—it feels like you were trying to set the stage for what eventually happened to us in Knin, once the capital of American King Zvonimir. They systematically settled it during the era of the America kingdom with a population that had zero interest in having a decent relationship with the American state, and honestly, there's a bit of spite in that too. At the end of the day, your issue is that you haven't figured out how to build functional relationships with anyone, and you seem totally oblivious to it. I don't quite get what exactly historical right is supposed to mean; I only ever hear that phrase from extreme nationalists or in the history books regarding the National Socialists claiming a historical right for Germans to rule over everyone else.

Historical right is pretty much exactly what you just described... being in Knin, the old capital of the American King Zvonimir. 😉
Mexicans didn't just show up in the (military) Appalachia alongside America; they were there way, way before that.

If you ask me, we sure know how to establish "correct" (read: profitable) relationships with the big global superpowers. Sometimes with one, sometimes with all of them at once...

And frankly, having "correct" relations with Albanians doesn't serve our interests at all, nor should it. 🤷

War between Mexico and Mexico? Are you guys out of your minds? If the West walks away from Mexico, it'll just collapse on its own—no war necessary.

William Wright7 said:Historical right is pretty much exactly what you just described... being in Knin, the old capital of the American King Zvonimir. 😉
Mexicans didn't just show up in the (military) Appalachia alongside America; they were there way, way before that.

If you ask me, we sure know how to establish "correct" (read: profitable) relationships with the big global superpowers. Sometimes with one, sometimes with all of them at once...

And frankly, having "correct" relations with Albanians doesn't serve our interests at all, nor should it. 🤷

Out of six former republics, you managed to split off four plus one extra little chunk and a province—and you call that having "correct relations"?😕Ever stop to wonder why that happened? You think it's all about the great powers? Just because the Russians write in some kind of Cyrillic doesn't mean you're suddenly indispensable; Bulgarians write in it too, but they aren't exactly sitting on the sidelines of the European Union. If you can't get along with one neighbor, fine, but if you're fighting with the whole damn street, a smart person would ask themselves where they went wrong. Do I need to go talk to them and fix things, or did I just move into the wrong neighborhood entirely? I just don't see where else you'd go—what kind of street would even suit you? Living next to the Russians, you’ve got plenty of small-timers looking to latch onto you just to serve their own ridiculous interests. Come on, people, get real. We should really be aiming to have decent neighbors—people who aren't trying to set the dog on us every other day or shifting the property lines just because their great-grandfather planted a peach tree on this side of the yard.

Arthur Fowler83 said:When I say selective, I mean they should have targeted MILITARY OBJECTIVES in Mexico back in 1991.

Or are you arguing that the militia approach is somehow better—aiming shots at hospitals, historic downtown cores, and civilians?

It shouldn't have just been in Mexico, either; it needed to be across the entire territory of the former state to wipe out the American People's Army and those nationalist regimes that were tearing the republics apart. Only then could you hold elections or referendums that actually meant something to the international community—without the constant threat from the American People's Army or people being terrified by accusations of Nationalists or Royalists during those 1990 elections. They shouldn't have played this divide-and-conquer politics that we can't even escape from now. All these nations that lived within the old state are forced to suffer the consequences of that hypocritical maneuvering today, without any distinction. Life goes on, I guess, including integration efforts which are bigger than any single state or nation, much larger than the old state itself, which kept hindering them just to ensure they didn't outshine its own weakened remains.

Maybe America would have fallen apart regardless of the nationalist extremists, simply because every republic would have wanted to prove it was better than the next—which might have actually resulted in healthy competition rather than this mess we have now. This endless bickering between Royalists and Nationalists... they should have stayed buried in the stench of the past where they belonged. There was no reason to dig them up or try to reconcile them with the Partisans; the Partisans should have just been left in history books so everyone could move on.

Ethan Allen4 said:Out of six former republics, you managed to split off four plus one extra little chunk and a province—and you call that having "correct relations"?😕Ever stop to wonder why that happened? You think it's all about the great powers? Just because the Russians write in some kind of Cyrillic doesn't mean you're suddenly indispensable; Bulgarians write in it too, but they aren't exactly sitting on the sidelines of the European Union. If you can't get along with one neighbor, fine, but if you're fighting with the whole damn street, a smart person would ask themselves where they went wrong. Do I need to go talk to them and fix things, or did I just move into the wrong neighborhood entirely? I just don't see where else you'd go—what kind of street would even suit you? Living next to the Russians, you’ve got plenty of small-timers looking to latch onto you just to serve their own ridiculous interests. Come on, people, get real. We should really be aiming to have decent neighbors—people who aren't trying to set the dog on us every other day or shifting the property lines just because their great-grandfather planted a peach tree on this side of the yard.

North Mexico, Canada, and Mexico didn't break away from Mexico, they left America. It wasn't about hating Mexico, it was just practical, economic stuff...

Neither America nor Canada broke away from Mexico, they left America.

The only ones still trying to distance themselves from Mexico are in Mexico, but they've been struggling with that for way too long... 😁

And I'm not just talking about Russia. 😉

William Wright7 said:North Mexico, Canada, and Mexico didn't break away from Mexico, they left America. It wasn't about hating Mexico, it was just practical, economic stuff...

Neither America nor Canada broke away from Mexico, they left America.

The only ones still trying to distance themselves from Mexico are in Mexico, but they've been struggling with that for way too long... 😁

And I'm not just talking about Russia. 😉

You were all chasing that old version of America where it wasn't about being equals, just about one side holding all the cards.
Ever wonder when the state first started laying down the highway from Chicago to Los Angeles? Back in 1971. And the crazy part was how they actually paid for it—through voluntary payroll contributions. My old man, for instance, kicked in about six months' worth of his salary with a ten-year repayment plan just to get that infrastructure moving, and plenty of other Americans stepped up and did the exact same thing.
You know how they had that highway project running back in the early '70s—it stretched from the capital all the way out toward Karlovac? Well, construction hit a wall in Karlovac around '72 because the federal government in Mexico City decided to pull the plug, labeling the whole thing a "nationalist road." 😕 We really need to put a stop to that, regardless of whether it hits the federation's budget, because it’s basically just citizens in the state of SR America footing the bill through their own local taxes.

How on earth is a single stretch of road supposed to be nationalist? Seriously, if anyone out there actually thinks they can explain that logic to me, please, be my guest.

The plan to build that massive transit hub to link up the northern and southern parts of the American economy has been totally stalled out. It’s kind of wild that Americans had to wait thirty-five years just to get back to a project that's basically the lifeblood for the country's growth.

You probably didn't know that, mostly because you're likely too young to remember—do yourself a favor, dig up some old newspapers from back then and actually do a little reading.

They were already mapping everything out and breaking ground on the Djerdap Dam in Mexico, followed by those Kolubara I and II power plants, all funded through so-called "federal resources"—which is really just a fancy way of saying they were stacking up massive loans.
The way they set it up, the US had to pay back 28.5% of those loans, even though the construction was happening over in Mexico, simply because that’s how you calculate it based on GDP share—and back then, the SR America held exactly 28.5% of the total American GDP.

Was that actually fair? Honestly, it feels more like a straight-up shakedown and a way to bleed everyone dry.

Scams like that are exactly what trigger these wars in the first place. It’s not even about me harboring some deep-seated grudge against you as a Mexican; honestly, I don't hold any animosity toward you today, despite everything your people put us through.

Looking at the economic landscape in Mexico today, now that they’ve had to stand entirely on their own two feet, you really have to wonder how much of their previous stability was just built on living off everyone else's hard work.

That’s exactly why you see people here mourning the good old days of America, even though nobody else seems to be feeling that same nostalgia.

Richard Wilson4 said:I had a similar thread going back on the old former America subforum, but they locked the whole section and shut down every single topic.

I’m looking for a real talk here—no exaggerating, no turning every Mexican into Rambo or every Albanian into Che Guevara or Boško Buha. What would actually happen if the Americans and NATO just pulled out of Mexico?

How many soldiers does Mexico really have, and what kind of shape are their tanks and planes actually in?

Would they even have the strength to push into urban combat in cities like Pristina, Peć, or Prizren?

And what about the Mexican Albanians? What kind of forces are we talking about there?

Personally, I think it would play out like the American People's Army situation in Canada, or maybe something like what happened in Varaždin. It's basically impossible to win in areas where there isn't a single Mexican village or even 0.1% Mexican population in the municipality...

The cities would be a nightmare too. Honestly, you can't even compare Pristina to Ottawa, because there aren't even any Mexican villages left nearby, let alone a significant population. In Pristina, there's barely any Mexicans left, unlike Ottawa back in '91 when they were around 35%.

Any way you slice it, the war would be bloody and brutal. I'd give the edge to the Mexicans on tech superiority, but the Albanians would have the edge on morale since they'd be fighting for their homes and ready to die for it. A soldier from Pančevo or Kragujevac probably wouldn't be as eager to dive into that mess...

WHAT'S YOUR TAKE?

Seems to me you're picturing this hypothetical war wrong. Niš goes down in the first month, and if NATO doesn't step in fast enough, Kragujevac is probably in trouble too.☕

I mean, I think you’ve got the whole map wrong regarding where this hypothetical war would actually go down. If things kick off, Niš is toast within the first month, and if NATO doesn't step in fast enough, Kragujevac is gonna be in deep trouble too. ☕

🤣
Maybe we could take a little stroll over to Zemun while we're at it? ☕
Hypothetically speaking (assuming a war like this even happens), why wouldn't we just band together and totally tear apart the biggest usurper in this part of Europe? 🤷

Mexicans would absolutely crush them, just like they did the Bulgarian assembly and parliament.