Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 80

Thread: 'Hit teams' attack US consular staff, families in Mexico: US

  1. #41
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 'Hit teams' attack US consular staff, families in Mexico: US

    Quote Originally Posted by OxymoronP View Post
    A few easy solutions:

    1. Legalize all drugs

    2. For every American life, we take 100 of them start by bombing cartel leaders and their capos including family and friends.
    I can't agree with the first point.

    As for the second, however, I do agree. Make being a cartel leader a mark of misfortune. Anyone and anything tied to them becomes a target. Make association with a cartel leader the kiss of death, that being found in contact with one means that bombs will fall and bullets will start flying. The only question is not a matter of if but a matter of when.

  2. #42
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 'Hit teams' attack US consular staff, families in Mexico: US

    Quote Originally Posted by Binary_Digit View Post
    Yeah, because that worked so well with Pablo Escobar.
    Care to elaborate or are we just rolling our eyes today for the snarkiness of it?

  3. #43
    Professor
    OxymoronP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Heart in Brooklyn, body South of Dixie
    Last Seen
    08-23-10 @ 11:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,175

    Re: 'Hit teams' attack US consular staff, families in Mexico: US

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    I can't agree with the first point.

    As for the second, however, I do agree. Make being a cartel leader a mark of misfortune. Anyone and anything tied to them becomes a target. Make association with a cartel leader the kiss of death, that being found in contact with one means that bombs will fall and bullets will start flying. The only question is not a matter of if but a matter of when.
    Anti drug legislation is unconstitutional. I agree with fighting illegal drug distribution of both Narcotic and Medicenal substances, but the use of drugs is a personal choice the goverment should have no say what you do to your own body.


    THE GREATEST FREEDOM IS THE FREEDOM TO OPPRESS OTHERS

  4. #44
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: 'Hit teams' attack US consular staff, families in Mexico: US

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    I will agree we should do other things in conjunction with my approach, for sure. Take a holistic approach to the matter, so to speak. However, what needs to be understood is that we're not dealing with a country and its diplomats here. We are dealing with ruthless, cutthroat criminals and murderers. We can't be expected to use administrative policy changes alone to curb their activity. We have to speak their language.
    I guess what I'm trying to say is that without the Federal war on drug users (that's what I like to call it...), there wouldn't be such a large profit incentive for these cartels. Admittedly, my position is considered "extreme" and I'm sure many people roll their eyes when I mention drug legalization (incremental and pragmatic, of course) as a long-term solution to this problem, but I find it hard not to mention it given my position on the matter. I think, perhaps decades from now, Americans will recognize how truly damaging and ultimately counter-productive this Federal war on drug users is.

    I also like other approaches...attractive monetary bounties on their heads. Rely on their base human natures to cause division in their ranks. 10,000,000USD and asylum in our country in exchange for the head off a list of cartel bosses we want. Deliver it to any US embassy and once the kill is confirmed, you get the money and passage to the US.

    But I do think our first response to violence like this should be a smoking crater at one of their homes. Actually, all their homes just to make sure we got the right one.
    I have no problem with a swift military response in this specific instance, but as a long-term solution, it seems extremely costly and (in my opinion) fails to address the fundamental cause of black market violence.

  5. #45
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 'Hit teams' attack US consular staff, families in Mexico: US

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    I guess what I'm trying to say is that without the Federal war on drug users (that's what I like to call it...), there wouldn't be such a large profit incentive for these cartels. Admittedly, my position is considered "extreme" and I'm sure many people roll their eyes when I mention drug legalization (incremental and pragmatic, of course) as a long-term solution to this problem, but I find it hard not to mention it given my position on the matter. I think, perhaps decades from now, Americans will recognize how truly damaging and ultimately counter-productive this Federal war on drug users is.
    Simple possession and personal consumption, I can see dropping to a small fine of no more consequence than a speeding ticket. I can budge to that point on it. I think leaving drug use wide open legally is a bad idea so some barrier of penalty should be there to curb it. I agree we shouldn't be wasting resources and tax dollars prosecuting users as real criminals.

    I have no problem with a swift military response in this specific instance, but as a long-term solution, it seems extremely costly and (in my opinion) fails to address the fundamental cause of black market violence.
    My opinion on the matter is that it's a criminal organization. It is not discplined like a military, there is no ideal or noble cause to keep it cohesive, there is nothing more than profit holding it together. If you can damage the network often enough and badly enough to diminish the profitability of it along with making it high risk enough in terms of property and life that it is a useless pursuit, then it breaks down.

    If the goal of the cartel leader is to have massive amounts of money and a big mansion, cars, etc...and you keep destroying his mansion, cars, etc along with raiding his bank accounts through international courts and hackers, what reason is there for him to continue?

  6. #46
    don't panic
    marduc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    10-22-17 @ 04:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,301

    Re: 'Hit teams' attack US consular staff, families in Mexico: US

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    See, I don't believe that for one minute. I think that if we bring destructive force down on their networks, they require time to rebuild. We have to be able to find the plantations where they grow the plants to make the cocaine and heroine. Why aren't we napalming the hell out of those sites? I know we are capable finding their production centers. So why aren't we bombing these.

    I also like the idea of bombing the cartel leader's houses. The more time they spend on the run or fighting amongst one another for supremacy, the less time they are spending running their drugs and killing civilians and consulate workers.

    Sweeping, massive responses. That's what's needed. And leaving smoking craters everywhere we know to be a stronghold of the cartels.
    So how many countries are we to invade and napalm with a scorched earth policy? Lets see.. Bolivia, Peru, Columbia, Ecuador, Mexico, all those are certainly on the list (we have been undergoing extensive crop eradication programs in many ofthese countries for decades, and have a very strong presence, as well as substantial financial outlay invested), we also will need to Napalm a few of our national forests as well And this is just looking at the Americas and a few problem countries here.

    Of course we have the issue of many known smuggling routes getting closed down just to see new ones pop up. Once upon a time it was the Golden Triangle.. we cracked down on that, closed off many of the orient routes.. then it moved elsewhere.. enter Columbia for the 80's we got tough there.. lopped off the heads of many a cartel there, they wised up, consolidated, outsourced and then we saw various banana republics such as Panama, Haiti ect, get into the act. We closed much of that down and cracked down on the Miami/Florida pipeline.. then things started coming through Mexico, with the Columbians still there despite all the cartel heads we claimed, killed extradited, imprisoned, ect., only now going through new middle men in Mexico. WE take out various heads, we foment a war between Mexico and the Cartels, the Cartels in fight, heads of Cartels get replaced regularly, and soon a couple of cartels are now multiple cartels, all fighting one another, trying to kill each other off - with little success.

    And bombing a couple of houses and leaving craters is going to make a difference? There are people lined up waiting for the cartel heads to die, we are doing the traffickers favors when we take out the leaders, because that opens up a position for a new leader, or a few new cartels to get into the picture, take their slice of the pie, and start leaving their trail of bodies behind them. There is an endless chain of ruthless criminals that are well bloodied, and willing to risk death and to deal it out wantonly to get a slice of this multi billion dollar pie, we cannot kill enough to make a dent (and hell they are even doing the killing of their own for us). even if we do in one area, they just move somewhere else and continue business as usual.

    The only way to make a difference is to starve them, and to do that there must be a massive change of strategy, and a massive rethinking of whether the last 40 years have made any sort of difference at all, or if rather they have made things worse by facilitating an environment where these cartels are encouraged -yes encouraged- to thrive.
    Last edited by marduc; 03-19-10 at 03:55 PM.
    Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
    Drugs are bad, prohibition is worse

  7. #47
    Guru
    Binary_Digit's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 04:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,539

    Re: 'Hit teams' attack US consular staff, families in Mexico: US

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Care to elaborate or are we just rolling our eyes today for the snarkiness of it?
    It's obvious that taking him out accomplished very little in the overall scheme of things and that all we ended up with was several other cartels in his place.

  8. #48
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 'Hit teams' attack US consular staff, families in Mexico: US

    Quote Originally Posted by Binary_Digit View Post
    It's obvious that taking him out accomplished very little in the overall scheme of things and that all we ended up with was several other cartels in his place.
    Yes, but his fell apart shortly after. And if I recall correctly, he was killed in a manhunt using LEO. My suggestion is that we call out the war planes and troops to go to war with the cartels, not just hunt them down.

  9. #49
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 'Hit teams' attack US consular staff, families in Mexico: US

    Quote Originally Posted by marduc View Post
    So how many countries are we to invade and napalm with a scorched earth policy? Lets see.. Bolivia, Peru, Columbia, Ecuador, Mexico, all those are certainly on the list (we have been undergoing extensive crop eradication programs in many ofthese countries for decades, and have a very strong presence, as well as substantial financial outlay invested), we also will need to Napalm a few of our national forests as well And this is just looking at the Americas and a few problem countries here.

    Of course we have the issue of many known smuggling routes getting closed down just to see new ones pop up. Once upon a time it was the Golden Triangle.. we cracked down on that, closed off many of the orient routes.. then it moved elsewhere.. enter Columbia for the 80's we got tough there.. lopped off the heads of many a cartel there, they wised up, consolidated, outsourced and then we saw various banana republics such as Panama, Haiti ect, get into the act. We closed much of that down and cracked down on the Miami/Florida pipeline.. then things started coming through Mexico, with the Columbians still there despite all the cartel heads we claimed, killed extradited, imprisoned, ect., only now going through new middle men in Mexico. WE take out various heads, we foment a war between Mexico and the Cartels, the Cartels in fight, heads of Cartels get replaced regularly, and soon a couple of cartels are now multiple cartels, all fighting one another, trying to kill each other off - with little success.

    And bombing a couple of houses and leaving craters is going to make a difference? There are people lined up waiting for the cartel heads to die, we are doing the traffickers favors when we take out the leaders, because that opens up a position for a new leader, or a few new cartels to get into the picture, take their slice of the pie, and start leaving their trail of bodies behind them. There is an endless chain of ruthless criminals that are well bloodied, and willing to risk death and to deal it out wantonly to get a slice of this multi billion dollar pie, we cannot kill enough to make a dent (and hell they are even doing the killing of their own for us). even if we do in one area, they just move somewhere else and continue business as usual.

    The only way to make a difference is to starve them, and to do that there must be a massive change of strategy, and a massive rethinking of whether the last 40 years have made any sort of difference at all, or if rather they have made things worse by facilitating an environment where these cartels are encouraged -yes encouraged- to thrive.
    That's a very "we can't" attitude. You have your approach, which is to mollify them by legalizing their trade and I have mine which is to destroy every nest of them we find and make their trade unprofitable.

    I am not saying to bomb and stop. I am saying that we should respond with equal savagery and make joining a cartel synonymous with having a permanent bullseye on your back and the backs of everyone who has contact with you. Continual and relentless attacks on every known center of their activity.

    And no, we would not be attacking "countries". However, we could be working with them to attack specific targets. Mexico, though, is obviously incapable or unwilling to deal with their problem and as they are directly on our border, I don't think we should brook any disagreement from them when we go after northern border operations. Period.

  10. #50
    Sage
    Crosscheck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:55 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,477

    rolleyes Re: 'Hit teams' attack US consular staff, families in Mexico: US

    Quote Originally Posted by moe View Post
    All the blow up the bad guys stuff sounds good from the arm chair view but it needs to be remembered that these cartels have their own armies with personal on both sides of the borders. remember all the drug related court house bombings and assassinations in Columbia? Would not surprise me to see terrorists attacks by the cartels on American soil if the military goes in after them. These guys are underground fighters and dirty tactics are favorite tactics. Young old male female all legitimate targets to them. Like Mason said. They are not afraid of anybody and they are not just willing to kill they are eager to kill.

    Moe
    Very good post.
    Many of the John Waynes here want to get us into another guerrilla warfare. After all we have always done so well against guerrilla warfare.

    Going into Mexico would costs lives and another endless pit hole of money lost. Our enemy would be difficult to find as there is so much corruption among the supposed good guys that one could never trust anyone.

    A better approach would be to take the profit out of their product so it would akin to selling illegal Girl Scout cookies. Remove the profit out by making it legal. Or simply shut down their delivery route by bringing home our troops and planting them along the border and having a real border.

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •