this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2026
50 points (100.0% liked)

Chapotraphouse

14306 readers
585 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In an effort to quell concerns that US bombs would soon be falling on Mexico, President Claudia Sheinbaum said she received assurance from Washington that there would be no military flights over Mexico.

On Monday, Sheinbaum explained she had received “written” assurance from the US that no military flights would take place over Mexico. She added that Washington pledged to inform Mexico City of any military operations before they take place.

Sheinbaum’s remarks followed warnings from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to civilian aircraft to watch for military flights over Mexico and parts of Central and South America. The FAA issued a similar advisory before the US attacked Venezuela and kidnapped President Nicolas Maduro.

President Donald Trump has pressed Sheinbaul to allow the US to conduct military operations against cartels in Mexico. She has repeatedly refused to permit any foreign ministry actions inside Mexico.

Multiple outlets have reported that the US is preparing to conduct military operations inside of Mexico, including strikes on suspected drug labs and raids targeting cartels.

Under Trump, the US has designated several Mexican cartels as foreign terrorist organizations. The White House justified its strikes on suspected drug boats in the Caribbean by arguing the vessels were operated by cartels designated as a narco-terrorist group.

top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] thefunkycomitatus@hexbear.net 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

At least she did the True Anon rule: always get it in writing. Now the second, maybe more important part she must carry out: never put it in writing. She shouldn't sign anything or give equal written response. Just verbal.

[–] Trying2KnowMyself@hexbear.net 5 points 1 month ago

Written on a napkin? Or White House stationary?

[–] ElChapoDeChapo@hexbear.net 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

doomer we cannot vote against war in this cursed bloodsoaked country but we can gamble on whether war happens

[–] Trying2KnowMyself@hexbear.net 6 points 1 month ago

Yes you can! obama-drone

vote for 10 wars instead of 11.

[–] MarmiteLover123@hexbear.net 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

That would've probably been earlier this year when the US was using deportations as an opportunity to fly military aircraft overn central and South America and test the waters on that. The US didn't fly over Mexico. How relevant this is now, I don't know

[–] Trying2KnowMyself@hexbear.net 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

On Monday, Sheinbaum explained she had received “written” assurance from the US that no military flights would take place over Mexico

Article is from January 19th, so I’m assuming that’s the Monday in question. Can’t bet on past events, Polymarket needs to get on this.

[–] MarmiteLover123@hexbear.net 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah, but I'm thinking that she received the written assurance before, and is only commenting now.

[–] Trying2KnowMyself@hexbear.net 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

From a different article:

On Friday, the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration urged U.S. aircraft operators to “exercise caution” when flying over the eastern Pacific Ocean near Mexico, Central America and parts of South America, citing “military activities.”

The president said her administration waited a couple hours until the U.S. government provided “written” assurance that there would not be any U.S. military flights over Mexican territory.

That makes the assurance sound relatively recent.

[–] MarmiteLover123@hexbear.net 2 points 1 month ago

Ahh that's different then. Thanks for that source.

[–] tactical_trans_karen@hexbear.net 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

over Mexico... Nobody said anything about into Mexico. And once it's annexed as South New Mexico, their won't be any military flights over a country that no longer exists. twisted

[–] Trying2KnowMyself@hexbear.net 2 points 1 month ago

9/11 <- apply cinematic sepia-yellow Mexico filter here

[–] BobDole@hexbear.net 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Would be kinda funny to see the Delta and SEAL war criminals go toe to toe with the cartels, unfortunately I don’t think either party cares about civilians so this isn’t me wanting this to happen.

[–] Carl@hexbear.net 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)
[–] Trying2KnowMyself@hexbear.net 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Not compelling enough. Need it for military flights separate from an invasion. Sorry, Polymarket, gotta try harder than that to fleece me.

[–] Carl@hexbear.net 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

yeah the weasely language stuck out to me too. They technically claimed that the invasion and kidnapping of Venezuela's President was a "law enforcement" action, so if any invasion happens I would be willing to bet that they'd say the exact same shit. "We're going after the cartels, and Sheinbaum is the most notorious cartel leader since el Chapo", etc.

[–] Trying2KnowMyself@hexbear.net 2 points 1 month ago

Right - the headline isn’t even about taking any action in Mexico, it covers military action elsewhere that uses the sky above them. I’m not interested in some bet that even requires attacking cartels in Mexico, just a straight-up “fell for it” against the headline.

[–] Evilsandwichman@hexbear.net 2 points 1 month ago

let me bet on when the "fell for it again" award drops

Hey, Trump was right! I AM tired of winning!