• 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!

Should we stop burning the poppy fields in Afganistan

Should we stop burning the poppy fields


  • Total voters
    35
In Afghanistan, finding viable alternative crops for farmers now growing opium poppies would seem to be a first order of business.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/18/opinion/18sorley.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&sq=vietnam&st=cse&scp=2

A buddy of mine, a national guard officer, was selected for the newly formed "agricultural development teams".

He's an agronomist and does soil research for the GOVT as a civilian job.

He's mid-tour in Afghanistan right now. He claims that we are making a pretty concentrated effort to teach the farmers to grow something beside poppy. He said that they have to grow crops the old-school way, but it's actually going pretty well. He did say that we aren't burning poppies nor interdicting the business anymore b/c it angers too many of the farmers.
 
Three quarters of the world's opium comes from Afghanistan's poppy fields. Burning those fields may help in slowing down the flow of opium to the world.

While burning those fields may piss off the Afghans but it prevents the flow of drugs. I do not especially like the idea of taking the away the livelihood of Afghan citizens; however, if doing so stems the flow of opium to the world while preventing the taliban from reaping profits with which to purchase arms ... well ... maybe it has more positives than negatives.

Personally, I see a largely peaceful, and stable republic as more important than trying to stem the drug trade which will go on with or without the Taliban. Allowing the trade, even subtlely, will divert this source of revenue away from the Taliban. It will also piss off fewer Afghans. Pissing off the The people is the antithesis of what any good counter-insurgency commander would do.
 
Re: Should we stop burning the poppy fields in Afghanistan

Other.
We have no business in Iraq or Afghanistan other than searching for bin Laden and this thugs.
We have absolutely no business with their poppy fields.
What is the matter with us ?

Because part of the reason why Pakistan allowed you to use them as a staging base was to deal with the Opium problem
 
Three quarters of the world's opium comes from Afghanistan's poppy fields. Burning those fields may help in slowing down the flow of opium to the world.

While burning those fields may piss off the Afghans but it prevents the flow of drugs. I do not especially like the idea of taking the away the livelihood of Afghan citizens; however, if doing so stems the flow of opium to the world while preventing the taliban from reaping profits with which to purchase arms ... well ... maybe it has more positives than negatives.

Then you do what Thailand did - find something as easy to grow with the same or better return. Once you do that you have the farmers with you rather than against you.
 
Three quarters of the world's opium comes from Afghanistan's poppy fields. Burning those fields may help in slowing down the flow of opium to the world.

America's military is not an international police force to serve the best interests of the world. Using our tax dollars and man power to fight an international drug war is insane in my opinion. Since we went there to fight terrorism, I'm sure it would be best if we took care of that and left nature alone.
 
Three quarters of the world's opium comes from Afghanistan's poppy fields. Burning those fields may help in slowing down the flow of opium to the world.

Nope! Instead, it will force the price of illegal oppiates to increase, of which the end result is more criminal disputes over the increased profit potential. Drug fiends will have a greater incentive to increase the amount of money they spend on dope, via criminal activity, prostitution, etc....

While burning those fields may piss off the Afghans but it prevents the flow of drugs.

No it doesn't. Production will shift to Cambodia, Burma, Vietnam, etc.... Until that happens, expect it to create waves of violence in the US and abroad.

I do not especially like the idea of taking the away the livelihood of Afghan citizens; however, if doing so stems the flow of opium to the world while preventing the taliban from reaping profits with which to purchase arms ... well ... maybe it has more positives than negatives.

So should we invade oil countries to prevent the profits to be used to support the global terrorist threat? Iraq does not count, i am talking about Saudi Arabia and Iran. This option seems quite consistent with your logic.
 
Nope! Instead, it will force the price of illegal oppiates to increase, of which the end result is more criminal disputes over the increased profit potential. Drug fiends will have a greater incentive to increase the amount of money they spend on dope, via criminal activity, prostitution, etc....



No it doesn't. Production will shift to Cambodia, Burma, Vietnam, etc.... Until that happens, expect it to create waves of violence in the US and abroad.



So should we invade oil countries to prevent the profits to be used to support the global terrorist threat? Iraq does not count, i am talking about Saudi Arabia and Iran. This option seems quite consistent with your logic.[/
QUOTE]

When you put it that way, YES!......;)
 
Yes, we should stop burning croplands.

If the so-called civilized world doesn't want terrorists and criminals to make money selling opiates, eliminate the black market by making the stuff legal.

Governments have no business whatsoever dictating what people can and cannot put in their own bodies.
 
But isn't their economy then based on the illegal drug trade? I mean we can argue whether or not we should do it. Burning their crops definitely makes things harder on us and makes things well more unfriendly. But at the same accord....what they're doing is engaging in illegal drug trade. So it's not like we're burning corn or wheat.

Yes, of course. The farmers growing opium don't use the money they get from their crop to buy food. Those farmers never eat, in fact.

Just like the farmers in the US who grow corn never eat whole wheat bread.
 
Re: Should we stop burning the poppy fields in Afghanistan

Burning the poppy crop is about as futile and stupid as breaking alcohol barrels during the days of prohibition.
Have we learning nothing ?
If a problem truly exists, then, we must go to the root cause.
 
Governments have no business whatsoever dictating what people can and cannot put in their own bodies.

Those are the exact same words a junkie would use to defend his habit. Hmm...
 
Those are the exact same words a junkie would use to defend his habit. Hmm...

Are you an authoritarian by any chance?
 
Poppy tastes great inside pastry. OM NOM NOM.

Burning other peoples fields is bad. Even they're growing drugs.
I traveled far and wide, and there are many places in Asia and the Mid-East where farmers use drugs they grow as currencies.
 
Back
Top Bottom