alt.hn

2/22/2026 at 9:55:45 PM

Mexican Forces Kill Nation's Most-Wanted Cartel Boss

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/22/world/americas/jalisco-new-generation-cartel-leader-killed.html

by downboots

2/23/2026 at 1:43:04 AM

Puerto Vallarta is on fire - seeing tons of videos on my timeline.

by joshcsimmons

2/23/2026 at 12:38:40 PM

How does this usually work - they just set some cars on fire to prove a point and demonstrate they are "doing something" and then just switch to the next boss that comes out of the secession fight ? Or is it more complicated or nuanced ?

by m4rtink

2/23/2026 at 4:52:27 AM

Apparently as "retaliation" from the cartel because their boss was killed. Where do you draw the line?

At what point do you decide to go full El Salvador / Bukele on violent cartel members who are willing to put cities on fire when they cannot human and drug traffic at will?

When is enough enough?

by TacticalCoder

2/23/2026 at 5:13:31 AM

Deciding is one thing, carrying out the decision is another. The Mexican government and security forces have been heavily compromised by the cartels for years. Some of the smaller law enforcement actions are a form of "kayfabe". Even if President Sheinbaum gives the order, there may not be enough honest and loyal personnel to carry it out.

Mexico is a failed state. We can argue about who bears responsibility but that is the reality today.

by nradov

2/23/2026 at 9:07:57 PM

> Part of Bukele’s truce is to allow gangs to run their networks within the prisons, while their wealth and power remain untouched. In exchange, they have to keep homicides and violent crimes down. The leader of Barrio 18, one of the country’s two most powerful gangs, also alleges that they helped Bukele rise to power directly.

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/bukele-trump-gangs/

by ZeroGravitas

2/23/2026 at 5:19:27 AM

I don't think that's possible in Mexico. There's too much power in the logistical networks that move things into the US. The demand is too great. Even if you kill every drug trafficker and gang member alive today and create huge prosperity the void will be filled by someone and they will be adversarial to the government and they will have to use extra judicial violence to enforce their position.

The cartel's presence in Mexico is extremely muted relative to their power.

by hattmall

2/23/2026 at 8:59:07 AM

Just purely as a hypothetical thought exercise I wonder how infiltrated the US gov is by cartels.

by rand846633

2/23/2026 at 9:41:12 AM

Probably none.

I grew up in Mexico--spending a few years in or near Puerto Vallarta, specifically, funnily enough--and the M.O. of the cartel is overwhelmingly geared towards keeping a VERY low profile. Their whole purpose is to be quiet and subtle.

For every "loud" cartel action in MX, there are twenty that you never see, and then ten that exist as different recyclings and exaggerations and attack ads in the US to (now) perpetuate the current administration's favorite scapegoat, or (then) to prevent people from emigrating from the US.

It's been like that since '07 or so: take a story from Ciudad Juárez or Tamaulipas, then magnify it and convince Americans that the entire country is like that, so that they don't pay attention to the fact that they could get cheaper healthcare, out of pocket, by driving across the border to an equally well-equipped hospital... than they would for the cost of a single ambulance ride in the States... while living in a house that cost 10-100 times more than a house of the same size and quality across the border. All the while, the cartel hums happily along, truly wanting absolutely nothing to do with you.

Fear sells, and fear controls. Just like whatever series of headlines got you wanting to believe that they've infiltrated the American govt. ;)

by morserer

2/23/2026 at 5:39:47 PM

> At what point do you decide to go full El Salvador / Bukele on violent cartel members who are willing to put cities on fire when they cannot human and drug traffic at will?

The point for doing that was some time ago. It's like Islamists. They're so sophisticated that it makes more sense for governments to treat them like foreign military threats than domestic police issues. Don't listen to the "human rights" people in developed countries that became safe and stable by doing these exact same tactics hundreds of years ago.

In Bangladesh in 2016, there was a terrorist attack in a cafe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_2016_Dhaka_attack. The government then went full Bukele on the Islamists. There hasn't been a significant terrorist attack in the country since then.

by rayiner

2/23/2026 at 11:18:31 PM

The "human rights" thing reminds me of El Chapo. They put him in jail, he escapes, and so on. Seeing how he's not even a US citizen, there's a very obvious solution here.

by roger110

2/23/2026 at 5:22:01 AM

They’re overdue. Sheinbaum and other administrators probably didn’t act until now because they’re serving at the cartel’s pleasure. Now with America pressuring them, they’ve finally acted. But if they can’t bring the country under control, it’s going to sink the country and its legitimacy. You can’t have criminals burning airports, school buses, and grocery stores (things I saw videos of earlier).

by SilverElfin

2/23/2026 at 8:20:17 AM

What if the destabilization of Mexico was the goal so that the US could justify military intervention?

by anal_reactor

2/23/2026 at 2:30:55 AM

Most-Wanted Cartel Boss so far

by foogazi

2/23/2026 at 4:24:09 AM

Honestly probably not even that. Past most-wanteds were probably more querido.

by NewJazz

2/23/2026 at 4:22:30 AM

Horror vacui

by downboots

2/23/2026 at 11:23:48 AM

As long as Mexico shares a border with the US the biggest consumer of such recreational drugs and poverty in Mexico there will always be drug cartels.

It is basically whack-a-mole killing or imprisoning cartel heads - there will be splinter factions and you will just get three just as nasty ones in it's place.

by tibbydudeza

2/23/2026 at 12:51:07 PM

Agreed, it’s a demand-side problem. The profit potential is so great that someone will smuggle drugs into the US, no matter the risk.

by quickthrowman

2/23/2026 at 9:13:35 PM

There's always huge demand for illegal things, doesn't mean a such a powerful market forms

by roger110

2/22/2026 at 11:16:29 PM

I imagine that if the U.S. assisted in any meaningful way ala the search for Escobar in Columbia we probably would have heard it by now.

by F7F7F7

2/22/2026 at 11:26:31 PM

From TFA:

The Mexican government said the United States had contributed intelligence that aided the operation against Mr. Oseguera.

by nsvd2

2/23/2026 at 5:53:11 AM

The US confirmed they’re involved. They provided intel, and there’s speculation the Mexican Army was also using american weapons.

by testfrequency

2/23/2026 at 1:06:47 AM

Colombia*

by Gualdrapo

2/23/2026 at 2:55:48 PM

[dead]

by truemex2026

2/23/2026 at 2:55:35 PM

[dead]

by truemex2026

2/22/2026 at 10:01:27 PM

[dead]

by cindyllm

2/23/2026 at 12:55:32 AM

[dead]

by NedF

2/23/2026 at 10:46:57 AM

And thousands more will die due to the fully predictable and justified retaliation that follows. This doesn't meaningfully weaken the cartels, but forces them to respond in order to not compromise future safety.

Prioritizing showy executions over actual progress, words that should describe the cartels, not the government.

by JasonADrury

2/23/2026 at 11:03:01 AM

> justified retaliation

I don’t see how it would be justified. Do you think the cartels are in the right here?

by echoangle

2/23/2026 at 11:59:00 AM

> Do you think the cartels are in the right here?

Of course not, none of the sides are at all in the right here. But from the cartels perspective, they're almost certainly in the right.

Drug cartels are entirely the result of poor policies, and the blame for all the harms caused by them rests primarily on the shoulders of those perpetuating those policies. Surely the politicians that vote for laws that directly enable drug cartels to exist in the first place must be worse than the leaders of any individual drug cartel?

Any kind of serious analysis of who's more right would end up being a work at the scale of Rising Up and Rising Down, that's probably best avoided.

If we oversimplify cartels into innocent businessmen just looking to sell drugs, with governments being the ones that introduced violence into the equation in their effort to stop them? Surely it must be the cartels

If we oversimplify cartels into evil criminals just looking to wield power over other human beings, with governments just trying to liberate people from cartel tyranny? Surely it must be the governments

by JasonADrury

2/23/2026 at 10:41:28 PM

> But from the cartels perspective, they're almost certainly in the right.

Sure, but so is basically everyone. ISIS is in the right and justified then, too.

by echoangle

2/23/2026 at 10:52:42 PM

Also, coalition didn't get rid of ISIS by negotiation or something. They used bombs and, in one advisor's words, entrenching tools.

by roger110

2/23/2026 at 9:10:00 PM

Drug cartels are entirely the result of poor policies, one of which is that the Mexican government has not been punishing the cartels. Maybe they're fixing that.

by roger110

2/23/2026 at 11:18:38 AM

He probably sees them as marginalised POC bravely feeding their families under the thumb of American imperialism.

by djohnston

2/23/2026 at 12:00:45 PM

[flagged]

by JasonADrury

2/23/2026 at 3:55:11 PM

Because it is absolutely ridiculous to absolve the cartels of their crimes. Only the weird American leftists do it.

by poulpy123

2/23/2026 at 8:35:24 PM

Who is absolving the cartels of their crimes?

by JasonADrury

2/23/2026 at 9:11:43 PM

You said something like "nobody is in the right here" and called the cartel response a "justified retaliation"

by roger110

2/23/2026 at 9:34:26 PM

Government obviously isn't in the right when it simultaneously continues perpetuating policies that ensure the continued existence of the cartels.

by JasonADrury

2/23/2026 at 11:11:18 PM

Ok, to everyone else this probably sounds like cartel apologia. They make an actual step towards destroying the cartels, and you complain.

by roger110

2/23/2026 at 12:18:00 PM

* Says Mexicans can't be POCs *

* Calls me a neo-nazi *

fantastic

by djohnston

2/23/2026 at 12:37:50 PM

[flagged]

by JasonADrury

2/23/2026 at 6:06:36 PM

JasonADrury: I mean fuck, the silly European me thought that Mexicans were mostly white. They sure as hell mostly look like Europeans to me.

djohnston: * Says Mexicans can't be POCs *

DJ really overstated it, but yes: you are a silly European. Most Mexicans have a substantial Native American heritage, and aren't considered "white" by most USians. The richer Mexicans you may have encountered traveling to Europe are more upperclass whitebre(a)d, mostly Spanish bloodlines.

djohnston: * Calls me a neo-nazi *

JasonADrury: > Is this some weird neo-Nazi trope you subscribe to?

You are guilty as charged.

DJ's reading comprehension is fine.

by IAmBroom