• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

"It's a War": Mexico Under Siege

apdst said:
Obviously, there haven't been enough killed. We need to kill more. Sooner, ot later, people won't want to be drug runners because it's too dangerous. It's called, "deterrence".
Click to expand...

There's a certain point at which you have to acknowledge that killing more people is doing more harm than the problem which you are killing them to solve. There are only so many people in society, and if you start killing them all you start missing the point of protecting the society from them.
 
apdst said:
The demand is going to go down because drugs are legal? I'm doubting that.
Click to expand...

This is not about demand, but about control... ;)

If the government has control of the product, if the government opens the product up to Capitalism and controls the taxing and distribution as they do with other legal orginizations that produce and sell prescription drugs, then the Cartels lose their money, and hence their power and control and most importantly, their ability to disrupt the goverment of Mexico or Columbia.
 
apdst said:
The demand is going to go down because drugs are legal? I'm doubting that.


When you factor in how much the cartels have penetrated the Mexican government, I'm betting that Mexico wouldn't exactly follow suit.
Click to expand...

I did not claim the demand would go down; however if drugs were legal we would NOT be attaining our supply from the cartels.

The cartels power and profit motive would be gone, their game would be up. Mexico only has a drug problem by proxy because it is feeding ours.
 
apdst said:
Because there hasn't been enough interdiction. We need to take the gloves off and start scoring some kills.
Click to expand...

How many heads do we need to cut off only to see this hydra sprout 2 in replacement to realize this does not work?


EDIT: after reading further down the thread I saw your post celticlord, I was not plagiarizing you with the hydra reference honestly!!
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
Depends on the goal. You are not going to destroy the whole of Mexican drug cartels, so you make it as painful and expensive as possible. You cannot stop any crime entirely, but that does not mean you should legalize everything.
Click to expand...
The problem is the strategy is making interdiction more painful and more expensive for us. What was the total number of homicides in I believe it was Guadalajara last year? 4,500 or something? And this year it will be worse?

Who's feeling the pain here? And who's going to feel the pain if we just ramp up more interdiction?

The interdiction strategy does not seem to be working. It may very well destroy the Mexican government--and if that happens, if Calderon loses all control over northern Mexico, what interdiction strategy do we propose then? Invade Mexico?
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
There's a certain point at which you have to acknowledge that killing more people is doing more harm than the problem which you are killing them to solve. There are only so many people in society, and if you start killing them all you start missing the point of protecting the society from them.
Click to expand...

Well, let's try it and if doesn't work, we can do something else. One thing's for sure, getting captured by the Coast Gaurd, then deported back to your home country isn't much of a deterrent for drug runners.



Bodhisattva said:
This is not about demand, but about control... ;)

If the government has control of the product, if the government opens the product up to Capitalism and controls the taxing and distribution as they do with other legal orginizations that produce and sell prescription drugs, then the Cartels lose their money, and hence their power and control and most importantly, their ability to disrupt the goverment of Mexico or Columbia.
Click to expand...

How do control something that can be produced in your bathroom, with everyday house hold chemicals? Or grown in a box, in your closet?

To do that, you would have to make the possession of the ingedients illegal, thereby putting yourself back to square one.

Illegal alcohol and cigarettes are multi-million dollar industries in the United States. The cartels aren't going to give up all that money and power just because their product is legal.

Countries around the world have made drugs illegal. There's a good reason for that. They've all figured out that legalized dope isn't a good idea.




marduc said:
I did not claim the demand would go down; however if drugs were legal we would NOT be attaining our supply from the cartels.
Click to expand...

Yes we would! They're the ones with the product!...LOL!!!
 
celticlord said:
The problem is the strategy is making interdiction more painful and more expensive for us. What was the total number of homicides in I believe it was Guadalajara last year? 4,500 or something? And this year it will be worse?

Who's feeling the pain here? And who's going to feel the pain if we just ramp up more interdiction?

The interdiction strategy does not seem to be working. It may very well destroy the Mexican government--and if that happens, if Calderon loses all control over northern Mexico, what interdiction strategy do we propose then? Invade Mexico?
Click to expand...

But there are limited options as to what to do. Legalizing drugs is a nonstarter, won't happen this decade, probably not next. Throwing up our hands and doing nothing isn't going to work either. Giving Calderon what support we can is about all we can do.
 
celticlord said:
The problem is the strategy is making interdiction more painful and more expensive for us. What was the total number of homicides in I believe it was Guadalajara last year? 4,500 or something? And this year it will be worse?

Who's feeling the pain here? And who's going to feel the pain if we just ramp up more interdiction?

The interdiction strategy does not seem to be working. It may very well destroy the Mexican government--and if that happens, if Calderon loses all control over northern Mexico, what interdiction strategy do we propose then? Invade Mexico?
Click to expand...

Those deaths were caused by the cartels, not by interdiction. If were to interdict more product flow and kill more cartel operators, the deaths would go down dramatically. The cartels operate with impunity and that's why the death rate is so high.
 
apdst said:
Well, let's try it and if doesn't work, we can do something else. One thing's for sure, getting captured by the Coast Gaurd, then deported back to your home country isn't much of a deterrent for drug runners.
Click to expand...

Nothing is, they are willing to die for their cash. Why if they are not afraid of getting killed in wars with each other do you think they would be afraid of getting killed by us? How many thousands have been killed?? yet there are plnety still there, still killing.


How do control something that can be produced in your bathroom, with everyday house hold chemicals? Or grown in a box, in your closet?

To do that, you would have to make the possession of the ingedients illegal, thereby putting yourself back to square one.

Illegal alcohol and cigarettes are multi-million dollar industries in the United States. The cartels aren't going to give up all that money and power just because their product is legal.
Click to expand...

multi million versus multi billion HUGE difference. One of scale, on this scale it is more readily tackled and dealt with.

How rampant is bootleg moonshine? is it sold in every middle school in this country?

Countries around the world have made drugs illegal. There's a good reason for that. They've all figured out that legalized dope isn't a good idea.
Click to expand...

No, WE (the U.S) decided this and shoved it down the rest of the worlds throat. We can also decide that prohibition is a horrible and untenable proposition as well.






Yes we would! They're the ones with the product!...LOL!!!
Click to expand...

This was true with Organized crime during prohibition, how long did their control and supply chain last afterwards?

You make it sound like it is impossible to produce without them.
 
apdst said:
Those deaths were caused by the cartels, not by interdiction. If were to interdict more product flow and kill more cartel operators, the deaths would go down dramatically. The cartels operate with impunity and that's why the death rate is so high.
Click to expand...

We have been spending billions annually in interdiction for 40 years+ now.. it does not work!

But hey the key to winning a game of whack a mole is a bigger club i suppose, maybe 400 billion a year instead of 40 billion??

There will still be demand, it will still get in, it will still be a problem, only now the risk V. reward is even more skewed, meaning that the most ruthless, most shrewd, and most violent will rise to the top of this new dogpile.
 
apdst said:
Those deaths were caused by the cartels, not by interdiction. If were to interdict more product flow and kill more cartel operators, the deaths would go down dramatically. The cartels operate with impunity and that's why the death rate is so high.
Click to expand...
The French and then the US attempted a similar strategy in Southeast Asia. It did not work out so well then either.
 
apdst said:
Countries around the world have made drugs illegal. There's a good reason for that. They've all figured out that legalized dope isn't a good idea.
Click to expand...

Actually... they've made drugs illegal mostly because we've applied tremendous economic and diplomatic pressure upon them to do so. In other words, their failed drug policies were adopted mostly in response to ours. Mexico recently tried legalization and was coerced out of it by our State Department.

It's bad policy. After all, I can make gin and beer in my bathtub, too.
 
celticlord said:
The French and then the US attempted a similar strategy in Southeast Asia. It did not work out so well then either.
Click to expand...

Apples and oranges and vests have no sleeves. However, the US did succeed in beating down the enemy in Vietnam. Worked well there, probably will work well here.

Korimyr the Rat said:
Actually... they've made drugs illegal mostly because we've applied tremendous economic and diplomatic pressure upon them to do so. In other words, their failed drug policies were adopted mostly in response to ours. Mexico recently tried legalization and was coerced out of it by our State Department.
Click to expand...

In some cases that true, but not all. Even the Netherlands is starting to tighten drug laws, because they're seeing the toll it's taking on the system.
 
apdst said:
Apples and oranges and vests have no sleeves. However, the US did succeed in beating down the enemy in Vietnam. Worked well there, probably will work well here.
Click to expand...

Some of my friends who fought in Vietnam might disagree with you to some degree.


In some cases that true, but not all. Even the Netherlands is starting to tighten drug laws, because they're seeing the toll it's taking on the system.
Click to expand...

The netherlands is a poor example, because they've decriminalized possession and use, but haven't legalized production and sales. They left the black market in place.

Also, legalization would work better as part of a generally more libertarian approach to government... let people make their choices and then live with the consequences (or die with them)...don't subsidize taking care of them after they've ruined themselves with drug abuse. In other words, cut most or all the social programs that help enable people to lay around doing drugs instead of working (ie welfare), and stop curing them for "free" (at taxpayer expense) when they ruin their health with meth (socialized medicine).
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
In some cases that true, but not all. Even the Netherlands is starting to tighten drug laws, because they're seeing the toll it's taking on the system.
Click to expand...

The laws on the books in the Netherlands have not changed (local ordinances excluded). It has always been illegal to possess marijuana, and coffeshops are technically running illegal operations.

The Dutch have stated a shift in policy and they are making life harder on coffeeshop owners, but this is not because they are seeing the toll it is taking on their system, but rather as a result from pressures from the EU and the U.S. regarding their policy, and a more conservative government being in control.
 
Goshin said:
Some of my friends who fought in Vietnam might disagree with you to some degree.
Click to expand...

I bet they wouldn't disagree that we defeated the North Vietnamese on the battlefield.


The netherlands is a poor example, because they've decriminalized possession and use, but haven't legalized production and sales. They left the black market in place.
Click to expand...

Mushrooms have been outlawed in the Netherlands, so that's not entirely accurate.


marduc said:
The laws on the books in the Netherlands have not changed (local ordinances excluded). It has always been illegal to possess marijuana, and coffeshops are technically running illegal operations.

The Dutch have stated a shift in policy and they are making life harder on coffeeshop owners, but this is not because they are seeing the toll it is taking on their system, but rather as a result from pressures from the EU and the U.S. regarding their policy, and a more conservative government being in control.
Click to expand...


Whether it's legal, or illegal but not enforced is irrelevant. It's becoming more and more obvious to the Dutch the open drug use isn't a good idea.
 
apdst said:
Mushrooms have been outlawed in the Netherlands, so that's not entirely accurate.
Click to expand...

Pressure from the French after a French kid killed himself.. That is a couple of years ago.


Whether it's legal, or illegal but not enforced is irrelevant. It's becoming more and more obvious to the Dutch the open drug use isn't a good idea.
Click to expand...

I don't see it as that. It is becoming more obvious to the Dutch that in order to be a player in the EU they have to make concessions and token gestures.

If it were not for the Single Convention it would be legalized.. international pressures have shaped their drug policy, although they bent towards leniency as far as they could under those pressures.
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
How do control something that can be produced in your bathroom, with everyday house hold chemicals? Or grown in a box, in your closet?

To do that, you would have to make the possession of the ingedients illegal, thereby putting yourself back to square one.

Illegal alcohol and cigarettes are multi-million dollar industries in the United States. The cartels aren't going to give up all that money and power just because their product is legal.

Countries around the world have made drugs illegal. There's a good reason for that. They've all figured out that legalized dope isn't a good idea.
Click to expand...

Interesting comparison... alcohol. Have you actually thought this one over though? Were are the Al Capones today... the ones running and gunning their way around?

Is there money to be made on things that are legal? Sure, so what? But this is really all about economics. About, again, the CONTROL of the Supply. Toyota makes a safer and better car than my neighbor Jim, who has illegal after market parts on his car drag machine in the garage with many missing safety features, and this not street legal. Toyota makes their cars better and sells them for less money too...

There are illegal rip-off products all over, but what impact do they make? Almost none... almost every person engages in legal buying and selling for almost all of their purchases.

What power would a Cartel have if they lost billions of dollars? Who would these guys employ as gaurds or chemists? All the best chemists would most likely work for a legit company where they would not have to worry about being killed or arrested.

Is pot going to be grown by some people around... sure. So what? It is still a fine or whatever, and there will still be some enforcement, as there is with boot-leggers, but is it even in the same ball park as a Cartel? Hell, is it even the same sport any longer? ;)
 
apdst said:
I bet they wouldn't disagree that we defeated the North Vietnamese on the battlefield.
Click to expand...

You think that they take that as some kind of concession? "Gee... we won every major battle!" Naw, I bet they would rather have not lost 58,000 people and won the war instead...
 
Bodhisattva said:
Interesting comparison... alcohol. Have you actually thought this one over though? Were are the Al Capones today... the ones running and gunning their way around?

Is there money to be made on things that are legal? Sure, so what? But this is really all about economics. About, again, the CONTROL of the Supply. Toyota makes a safer and better car than my neighbor Jim, who has illegal after market parts on his car drag machine in the garage with many missing safety features, and this not street legal. Toyota makes their cars better and sells them for less money too...

There are illegal rip-off products all over, but what impact do they make? Almost none... almost every person engages in legal buying and selling for almost all of their purchases.

What power would a Cartel have if they lost billions of dollars? Who would these guys employ as gaurds or chemists? All the best chemists would most likely work for a legit company where they would not have to worry about being killed or arrested.

Is pot going to be grown by some people around... sure. So what? It is still a fine or whatever, and there will still be some enforcement, as there is with boot-leggers, but is it even in the same ball park as a Cartel? Hell, is it even the same sport any longer? ;)
Click to expand...

Legalizing alcohol put the Mafia out of business? Legalizing alcohol put an end the illegal liquir business? The answer is a resounding, no.
 
Bodhisattva said:
You think that they take that as some kind of concession? "Gee... we won every major battle!" Naw, I bet they would rather have not lost 58,000 people and won the war instead...
Click to expand...

Did I say they would take it as some kind of ****ing concession? No, I didn't.
 
The world's first cocaine bar | World news | The Guardian

"Tonight we have two types of cocaine; normal for 100 Bolivianos a gram, and strong cocaine for 150 [Bolivianos] a gram." The waiter has just finished taking our drink order of two rum-and-Cokes here in La Paz, Bolivia, and as everybody in this bar knows, he is now offering the main course. The bottled water is on the house.
Click to expand...
Anyone who thinks a "War on Drugs" is winnable should read this article. Demand for drugs may be greatest in America, but it is a global demand. All of the very potent arguments against drug use fail in light of one compelling fact--drugs are desired.
 
celticlord said:
The world's first cocaine bar | World news | The Guardian

Anyone who thinks a "War on Drugs" is winnable should read this article. Demand for drugs may be greatest in America, but it is a global demand. All of the very potent arguments against drug use fail in light of one compelling fact--drugs are desired.
Click to expand...
I'm glad you read the Guardian, my paper of choice for 40yrs.

Ps the web site has been iffy for the last week so your link may not work.
 
celticlord said:
The world's first cocaine bar | World news | The Guardian

Anyone who thinks a "War on Drugs" is winnable should read this article. Demand for drugs may be greatest in America, but it is a global demand. All of the very potent arguments against drug use fail in light of one compelling fact--drugs are desired.
Click to expand...


And the funny thing is, cocaine is illegal in Bolivia, too! You see how well that's working. But by all means let's keep the status quo.
 
B L Zeebub said:
I'm glad you read the Guardian, my paper of choice for 40yrs.

Ps the web site has been iffy for the last week so your link may not work.
Click to expand...
I don't hit every article on the site, but I browse the Guardian, the Independent, the Telegraph, and the Times at least every other day. It's helpful to have more than one perspective on things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom