Quantcast
Our Drug War Next Door

Forums - General Discussion - Our Drug War Next Door

I wouldn't have as much problem with a full scale war on drugs if we had the money to pay for it, but we are dead broke as a country. There are far more important things for us to worry about it. And frankly, I think our military can serve people better than as drug police.

Furthermore, fighting against the drug trade makes the drug trade even more lucrative as it limits supply. This would make drug cartels that survive even stronger. What you are suggesting is like fighting a hydra with a sword and no torch. The drugs are going to get where they need to be one way or another, and those who can get them there will profit immensely. The war on drugs has been a miserable failure and a phenomenal waste of resources.

You want to talk about inefficient government spending, this is a prime example. We might as well throw the money down a well. Legalizing marijuana would be the most effective way to cause direct harm and disruption to the drug cartels, organized crime, and even local crime. Its just like the underground alcohol trade during Prohibition which fostered unprecedented levels of organized crime in America. If you can't beat them, just join them. Everyone will be better off.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Around the Network
Comrade Tovya said:In principal, I agree with you.  I'd rather be riding with a "high" driver than a "drunk" driver any day of the week.

But from experience, I know that smoking a little bud is a lot more intoxicating per se than drinking a few beers.

So, what I am saying is, then in both of their worst states, being "high" is better.  But assuming that both are used in moderation, I feel much better about alcohol.

As for the cartels, I have always advocated violent opposition.  I don't think the US government should sit back idly and wait for foreign governments to crack down on the cartels.  I think the US armed forces should go to defcon 1 against them.  We've jacked with the cartels long enough.  The Mexican and Columbian governments have had problems fighting them because of corruption.  More often than not, these governments armed forces are being bought of by the cartels.  And the CIA is almost as bad as them.  The CIA is the most corrupt and disgusting agency in the United States.

That's why I say we try something completely new.  Treat the war on drugs like the war on terror.  Send in the armed forces, full force and annihilate the cartels.

The cartels are not in hiding by any means.  The drug lords have mansions/compounds whose locations are well known.  In the past we've just respected the sovereignty of the nations that host the cartels.  I say forget that, and literally invade the cartels' safe zones, clean them out, and then leave.

You sincerely advocate the use of military force against drug cartels as a means to end the propagation of illegal drugs? Not only would that be impossible (we would have to violate the sovereignty of nearly every Central and South American state), it would be ineffective. It would be similar to Hercules attempting to defeat the Lernaean Hydra; you eliminate one head, two more replace it. The most effective solution is to legalize drugs. Here is a summary of an interview Milton Friedman gave advocating the decriminalization of drugs; he makes a compelling and convincing argument.

 



akuma587 said:
I wouldn't have as much problem with a full scale war on drugs if we had the money to pay for it, but we are dead broke as a country. There are far more important things for us to worry about it. And frankly, I think our military can serve people better than as drug police.

Furthermore, fighting against the drug trade makes the drug trade even more lucrative as it limits supply. This would make drug cartels that survive even stronger. What you are suggesting is like fighting a hydra with a sword and no torch. The drugs are going to get where they need to be one way or another, and those who can get them there will profit immensely. The war on drugs has been a miserable failure and a phenomenal waste of resources.

You want to talk about inefficient government spending, this is a prime example. We might as well throw the money down a well. Legalizing marijuana would be the most effective way to cause direct harm and disruption to the drug cartels, organized crime, and even local crime. Its just like the underground alcohol trade during Prohibition which fostered unprecedented levels of organized crime in America. If you can't beat them, just join them. Everyone will be better off.

 

You and I are pretty close on this issue really...

You are right in your assertion that the drug war is a waste of money (just like the war in Iraq is valiant in principal, but has been severly mismanaged). 

The problem is not that either war is bad, but really that they not being managed properly.  I think we have jacked around in both wars... I say, either go to war to win it, and go at it full blast, or don't go at all.

Go into Iraq and wreak terror into the hearts of the terrorist, and strike fear into the soul of the cartel, or just don't bother at all.

I think it's similar to the UN distribution of food and medicine to AIDS striken African nations.  I love the concept, it's absolutely valiant and beautiful.  But corruption and pussy-footing around makes .90$ out of every dollar a waste.  So what's the point?  If our goal is not to actually solve problems where they exist, what's the point?  It's a waste of money and resources.



MarioKart:

Wii Code:

2278-0348-4368

1697-4391-7093-9431

XBOX LIVE: Comrade Tovya 2
PSN ID:

Comrade_Tovya

I'm not talking about anyone in this thread, but its hilarious how some of the most staunch opponents of marijuana are the strongest supporters of free markets.

While I don't advocate legalizing ALL drugs, Jackson and Libertarians like Friedman have the right idea. We rely on the market for everything else, why not marijuana? Not to mention when a drug becomes legal the amount of scientific research on the drug is generally much higher. People will be given better information so that they can make more informed choices.

Young people didn't stop smoking tobacco because it was illegal to do so. A lot of them stopped smoking because of the vast amount of information out there about how dangerous tobacco was as well as the public campaigns against tobacco. Most people are horribly misinformed about marijuana and can't make a smart decision since they don't have adequate information. Information is power, and a lack of information only causes more problems.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Comrade Tovya said:

 

You and I are pretty close on this issue really...

You are right in your assertion that the drug war is a waste of money (just like the war in Iraq is valiant in principal, but has been severly mismanaged). 

The problem is not that either war is bad, but really that they not being managed properly.  I think we have jacked around in both wars... I say, either go to war to win it, and go at it full blast, or don't go at all.

Go into Iraq and wreak terror into the hearts of the terrorist, and strike fear into the soul of the cartel, or just don't bother at all.

I think it's similar to the UN distribution of food and medicine to AIDS striken African nations.  I love the concept, it's absolutely valiant and beautiful.  But corruption and pussy-footing around makes .90$ out of every dollar a waste.  So what's the point?  If our goal is not to actually solve problems where they exist, what's the point?  It's a waste of money and resources.

I'd much rather send my money towards feeding starving people than fighting a war in any form, especially one as ill-executed and self-lacerating as the war on drugs.

I don't even really think the war on drugs is valiant in principle.  I think the war on drugs is rooted in xenophobia at its core.  You don't see a war against prescription medication, alcohol, or tobacco.  All of those things have done enormous harm to our society, arguably more than all the illegal drugs combined.  Alcohol and tobacco have certainly killed far more people.

In all honesty, the war on drugs is kind of an insult to Americans that we can't educate people about how to make informed choices.  Its the difference between being afraid to kill someone because you will get punished and choosing not to kill someone because you know it is wrong.  Its the right choice, but is it for the right reason?



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Around the Network
akuma587 said:
Comrade Tovya said:

 

You and I are pretty close on this issue really...

You are right in your assertion that the drug war is a waste of money (just like the war in Iraq is valiant in principal, but has been severly mismanaged). 

The problem is not that either war is bad, but really that they not being managed properly.  I think we have jacked around in both wars... I say, either go to war to win it, and go at it full blast, or don't go at all.

Go into Iraq and wreak terror into the hearts of the terrorist, and strike fear into the soul of the cartel, or just don't bother at all.

I think it's similar to the UN distribution of food and medicine to AIDS striken African nations.  I love the concept, it's absolutely valiant and beautiful.  But corruption and pussy-footing around makes .90$ out of every dollar a waste.  So what's the point?  If our goal is not to actually solve problems where they exist, what's the point?  It's a waste of money and resources.

I'd much rather send my money towards feeding starving people than fighting a war in any form, especially one as ill-executed and self-lacerating as the war on drugs.

I don't even really think the war on drugs is valiant in principle.  I think the war on drugs is rooted in xenophobia at its core.  You don't see a war against prescription medication, alcohol, or tobacco.  All of those things have done enormous harm to our society, arguably more than all the illegal drugs combined.  Alcohol and tobacco have certainly killed far more people.

In all honesty, the war on drugs is kind of an insult to Americans that we can't educate people about how to make informed choices.  Its the difference between being afraid to kill someone because you will get punished and choosing not to kill someone because you know it is wrong.  Its the right choice, but is it for the right reason?

 

Please, do not mistake me for someone who wants to use military force against weed-pushers... LOL

I honestly don't give two craps about bud... I'm no fan of it, but it's not a social concern of mine.  In all seriousness, I know at least 3 people on my street alone who I can get it from if I really wanted it.. and honestly, I only know 2 different people who smoke cigarettes on my block.  So, the moral of the story is, it's almost easier to get weed and than cigarettes (and really, ounce for ounce, weed is really a better bargain. :)  Hell, there were at least 20 people I went to high school with who grew it at home...

Seriously though, the cartels big money maker is cocaine... I despise coke.  I would never advocate legalizing it.  I stand by my statement of making war against the cartels to erradicate the cocaine trade.  Legalizing coke would be horrendous for the United States.

And Jackson50, God bless you, really, but I don't give a crap about the hegemony of other nations... well, I do, but I hold the security of the United States much higher.  If Mexico and Columbia can't keep their cartels under control because of corruption, and those drug war failures spill onto US soil (and they do) then it's in the interest of the United States to use military intervention to prevent this.

Both of these nations wouldn't object as much as you might think either... it has nothing to do with them not wanting us to--it has everything to do with us not wanting to.

And like I've stated before, my grandfather is Mexican, so I've always had a deep love for Mexico.... I want to see the cartels wiped out for their good as much as our own.  And less corruption is not only good for Mexico, but good for us as well.



MarioKart:

Wii Code:

2278-0348-4368

1697-4391-7093-9431

XBOX LIVE: Comrade Tovya 2
PSN ID:

Comrade_Tovya

Comrade Tovya said:

 

Please, do not mistake me for someone who wants to use military force against weed-pushers... LOL

I honestly don't give two craps about bud... I'm no fan of it, but it's not a social concern of mine.  In all seriousness, I know at least 3 people on my street alone who I can get it from if I really wanted it.. and honestly, I only know 2 different people who smoke cigarettes on my block.  So, the moral of the story is, it's almost easier to get weed and than cigarettes (and really, ounce for ounce, weed is really a better bargain. :)  Hell, there were at least 20 people I went to high school with who grew it at home...

Seriously though, the cartels big money maker is cocaine... I despise coke.  I would never advocate legalizing it.  I stand by my statement of making war against the cartels to erradicate the cocaine trade.  Legalizing coke would be horrendous for the United States.

And Jackson50, God bless you, really, but I don't give a crap about the hegemony of other nations... well, I do, but I hold the security of the United States much higher.  If Mexico and Columbia can't keep their cartels under control because of corruption, and those drug war failures spill onto US soil (and they do) then it's in the interest of the United States to use military intervention to prevent this.

Both of these nations wouldn't object as much as you might think either... it has nothing to do with them not wanting us to--it has everything to do with us not wanting to.

And like I've stated before, my grandfather is Mexican, so I've always had a deep love for Mexico.... I want to see the cartels wiped out for their good as much as our own.  And less corruption is not only good for Mexico, but good for us as well.

I agree with most everything you say, although the problem is much wider than just drug cartels.  And marijuana is by far the drug that is trafficked the most across the board, and it is the steadiest stream of revenue.

But you are claiming we are justified in using military intervention to fix this problem?  That is just plain ludicrous.  Would you allow another country to come into the U.S. and do that for a similar reason? 

The necessity for the war on drugs is completely blown out of proportion.  Alcohol alone causes more social harm and socially detrimental crime than all the illegal drugs combined.  Drug addicts are dangerous, but only a small percentage of the population would be true drug addicts even if some of the harder core narcotics were illegal.  Its really not that hard to get access to drugs, and most people who would be willing to try hardcore narcotics would do so whether or not it was legal.  Not to mention the government could extensively regulate these things if they were legal.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Its frankly disgusting that the US media doesn't report about this issue, its their neighbours. Maybe if they did congress would pay attention.

Yes they should legalise it, irrelevent of its potential social effects, because it would stop the violence which is the key issue here. If you didn't know you would swear that theres actually a war going on.

It would stop corruption of police and government officials who cover up for the dealers too. It would cut tax payer expenses for the 70% of prisoners who have possession or dealing charges without murder, robbery issues.
It would actually free up all that US funding that should have gone towards terrorism instead of fighting a war that cannot be won.



“When we make some new announcement and if there is no positive initial reaction from the market, I try to think of it as a good sign because that can be interpreted as people reacting to something groundbreaking. ...if the employees were always minding themselves to do whatever the market is requiring at any moment, and if they were always focusing on something we can sell right now for the short term, it would be very limiting. We are trying to think outside the box.” - Satoru Iwata - This is why corporate multinationals will never truly understand, or risk doing, what Nintendo does.

Lernaean Hydra... huh.

I thought it was the Mycenean Hydra.

Go figure.

Guess i had it based off the King and not where the thing actually was.



megaman79 said:
Its frankly disgusting that the US media doesn't report about this issue, its their neighbours. Maybe if they did congress would pay attention.

Yes they should legalise it, irrelevent of its potential social effects, because it would stop the violence which is the key issue here. If you didn't know you would swear that theres actually a war going on.

It would stop corruption of police and government officials who cover up for the dealers too. It would cut tax payer expenses for the 70% of prisoners who have possession or dealing charges without murder, robbery issues.
It would actually free up all that US funding that should have gone towards terrorism instead of fighting a war that cannot be won.

The US media does report this issue.  I just saw something about it today... on CNN.

It's just between puff pieces on Obama so you gotta sit through Obamas harrowing addiction to ciggarettes and how the strong willed couple was back when they were first dating.

Of course you need to do that to get news on Israel/Gaza and everything else too...

America is too caught up in Obama to really care about the rest of the world right now.

Check back next month.