"Gun battle on Mexican ranch leaves at least 42 cartel..." Topic

… members dead in THREE HOUR bloody siege against federal troops

"* Forty-two suspected drug gang gunmen and one officer killed at Rancho del Sol in Michoacan state
* Authorities would not name gang involved, though area next to Jalisco state dominated by New Generation
* Police helicopter called in for deadly battle, after which authorities found a grenade launcher that had been fired and dozens of other high-powered cartel weapons

At least 43 people died Friday in what authorities described as a fierce, three-hour gunbattle between federal forces and suspected drug gang gunmen on a ranch in western Mexico, the deadliest such confrontation in recent memory.

All the dead were suspected criminals except for one federal police officer, National Security Commissioner Monte Alejandro Rubido said.

He said the officer died trying to help a colleague wounded in the shootout.

Photographs from the scene showed bodies, some with semi-automatic rifles and others without weapons, lying in fields, near farm equipment and on a blood-stained patio strewn with clothes, mattresses and sleeping bags…"
Full article here
link

Amicalement
Armand

I'm at a loss as to how this is related to gaming….

More loss fell myself when I never saw this kind of your comments in other posts like "Do you kill Hitler if you travel in time?". For example.

And if you want, you can wargame police vs bad guys.

Amicalement
Armand

Well answered Tango!

Copplestone Castings' Future Wars 28mm line is good for scenarios like this, BTW….

In reply to coastal2. I have gamed drug gangsters v federal officers many more than once in the past and will probable do so again.

The Mexican Federal v New Generation conflict has generated quite a few scenarios worth gaming.

x42

What I don't get is that there seems to be no wounded discussed. Just 40 some dead. These drug cartels must be good shots.

Well they weren't shooting at themselves surely?

If the cartel gunmen are such goood shots, there wouldnt be 42 of them dead.

Yes, the Federales dont seem to take many prisoners in these battles, but this isnt a simple drug arrest, this is an anti-insurgency campaign against very well armed narco terrorists.

Mexico is using Army and Marine elements to fight, which US troops can be used for miniatures.

I'd use modern African fighters or civilian Contractors minis for the Narcos.

Heck, you could probably use some US figs for US advisors. I'm curious if any were there.

What I don't get is that there seems to be no wounded discussed. Just 40 some dead. These drug cartels must be good shots.
-------------------
As said such a disparity in casualties and no mention of wounded either means that the Mexican military and police are exceptionally skilful or that after a time the narcotraficantes surrendered and were then shot en masse. Shooting people out of hand is still wrong even if its of people as ruthless as Mexican drug gang members.

Something similar happened (albeit that they would have been less well armed) in the Carandiru Prison massacre in Brasil in 1992 where 111 prisoners were killed in retaking the prison by the Sao Paulo Military Police. Actually that had an unfortunate outcome for everyone as 63 police officers (probably low ranking) received sentences of between 48 and 624 years each for doing what the state probably wanted them to do (at trials some 21 years later in 2013)

The alternative explanation is that the number of wounded hasn't been reported..

Though I agree it's more likely the Mexican forces didn't take prisoners. Their record on human rights is grim, even by local standards.

Worth noting that bad as they are however, the drug cartels are a lot, lot worse.

In reply to coastal2. I have gamed drug gangsters v federal officers many more than once in the past and will probable do so again.

Can't see it. But then I have several friends in LE involved in drug enforcement (just a bit too close for my taste. But, YMMV).

This wouldn't have happened if the cartel boss paid them enough…

Heck, you could probably use some US figs for US advisors. I'm curious if any were there.

Google Joint Task Force 6

Worth noting that bad as they are however, the drug cartels are a lot, lot worse.

How do outsiders know that? Yes the cartels are bad guys. But this sort of "insurgency" does not grow out of a vacuum. It is a reaction to extreme corruption and practices. So the Mexican Fed can be a lot more like than unalike the cartels. It seems almost more like a slowly growing civil war to me, with grievances on the side of the cartels, but they are no "merry men" of modern "Robin Hoods", they are criminals and vicious ones at that….

What kind of 'grievances' could a drug cartel possibly have? They exist to grow, sell, and distribute illegal drugs. This isn't a group of peasants rising up against the, admittedly. corrupt Mexican government.

Worth noting that bad as they are however, the drug cartels are a lot, lot worse.

How do outsiders know that? Yes the cartels are bad guys.

I'm going to assume you haven't seen all the videos and photos that came out of Mexico circa 2011-13? Bestgore.com was flush with posts detailing the latest atrocities, mostly from "Los Zetas". Drug cartels have cut people's heads off with chainsaws, used human intestines to scrawl messages in front of karaoke bars, burnt people's faces off with blowtorches…

Their bloodlust and savagery puts even ISIS to shame, IMO. As for how outsiders know, there's been tons of grassroots journalism in Mexico, with some bloggers executed by narco-sicarios in retaliation. I'm confident that if the government were equally evil (and not just corrupt), there would be more exposure and outrage.

@ScoutJock – Thanks. Looks like it's JTF North now.

Anyone getting in their way, DJ.

I forget which cartel leader was recently busted, and put under intense pressure of late, but it did help spawn a new group in Jalisco (and nearby), apparently.

All of the cartels are well armed, well connected, and ruthless.

As mentioned, it appears this one didn't contribute enough to the local re-election campaigns/"retirement funds" of various politicians, and others in power.

Just a few weeks ago some drug dealers' pickups, armed with machineguns in their beds, shot down a police helo that was pursuing them (IIRC, the craft was able to crashland, instead of being destroyed).

Here's the problem I have with all of this "evil cartel" stuff: chicken and egg or "you dirty rat you killed my brother", etc. If a gov't is corrupt to the point of crime gangs spawning all over the landscape something has gone seriously "south". Yes, the gangs can be even more ruthless than the corrupt gov't that preyed or exploited them. But that doesn't excuse the gov't. In a way it focuses even more blame on it. Once a momentum builds of rival gangs, one of their tactics to cow their rivals is to become the biggest bad asses in the neighborhood. What else do they have to become the most feared? Terror and intimidation work, or at least they seem to work in the short term. These excesses also breed callousness in the perpetrators. They lose control of themselves.

So would the cartels, if one of them beat the rest and took over the gov't, continue to perpetrate atrocities? Or would it tone down its excesses and govern? Or are none of them after total control of the country? Is crime all they are interested in?…

The cartels are interested in profit from their drug (and other illicit) trade. The intimidation and terror tactics are to that end and that end alone. They have no desire to become a defacto government (with all that entails); it would only deflect them from their primary goal.

Re: The corruption of the local governments. A widely known saying is that cartels offer 'plata o plomo', silver or lead. You either accept their money (and be corrupted) or die. Simple formula for getting your way….

@Great War Ace: Coastal2 pretty much said it all.