Mexico's Falling Apart

[Jon Lyrik]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/centralamericaandthecaribbean/mexico/4271720/Mexico-in-danger-of-collapse-says-US-army.html

[Cop No. 633]

While they're at it, maybe they should target the people who are buying these large quantities in the United States.

I always find it funny the news is quick to talk about the drug traffickers, but never ponder on who the traffickers are working for or taking the product to. They intercept them at various times around the border, but why not follow them to the actual buyer? Most likely because they only RICH people can afford such mass quantities of high end drugs and that would expose the hypocrisy of the war on drugs. It's easy to target the middle men than the big fish.

I'm not sympathetic at all to drug traffickers. I just think it's annoying that the news never focuses on the bigger picture of the drug trade. Do they actually think these people just smuggle drugs and then "hope" somebody on the other side will want to buy them. You don't smuggle in pounds of heroine unless you've got a buyer secured to begin with.

Military intervention won't do a damn thing in Mexico. It hasn't done anything for El Salvador. Nicaragua. Or Colombia, which still exports massive amounts of cocaine to this day.

This entire "war to end drugs" is a all a farce. They don't want it to end. It's that simple. They just want an excuse to make Mexico into a fascist state like a lot of smaller Latin American countries have become and still are due to "intervention." It's already corrupt as it is... but an intervention won't do anything to stop that corruption.

If this intervention does happen... I'm betting money they're going to say there's traffickers in Chiapas and that they have to use extreme "aggression."

[Vong]

If the U.S. military is considering invading Mexico to get rid of drugs, they should take a page from their invasion of Afghanistan: their occupying the country as we speak with a handful of other nations and Afghani's are still producing poppies.

[Homyrrh]

If the U.S. military is considering invading Mexico to get rid of drugs, they should take a page from their invasion of Afghanistan: their occupying the country as we speak with a handful of other nations and Afghani's are still producing poppies.
But aren't these two different theaters with two different objectives?

[outsyder]

If the U.S. military is considering invading Mexico to get rid of drugs, they should take a page from their invasion of Afghanistan: their occupying the country as we speak with a handful of other nations and Afghani's are still producing poppies.

Afghanistan is producing poppies because if they weren't, the Afghani economy (what little of it there is) would collapse and create even more chaos, as the drug trade is responsible for 52% of the GDP. Although official policy of the US and the ISAF is to help stop the drug trade in Afghanistan, at the moment, there are more pressing security concerns. It's not that the US and ISAF can't rid the country of it, but rather that it's the lesser evil that must be lived with for the time being.

Mexico is far less dependent on the drug trade to support its economy, and as a result, the US military taking out targets in connection to the drug trade would not cause the widespread chaos that doing so in Afghanistan would, or at least to a far smaller extent.

[jolanar]

Afghanistan is producing poppies because if they weren't, the Afghani economy (what little of it there is) would collapse and create even more chaos, as the drug trade is responsible for 52% of the GDP. Although official policy of the US and the ISAF is to help stop the drug trade in Afghanistan, at the moment, there are more pressing security concerns. It's not that the US and ISAF can't rid the country of it, but rather that it's the lesser evil that must be lived with for the time being.

Mexico is far less dependent on the drug trade to support its economy, and as a result, the US military taking out targets in connection to the drug trade would not cause the widespread chaos that doing so in Afghanistan would, or at least to a far smaller extent.

The ironic thing about Afghanistan and the opium drug trades is the fact that the Taliban had their own little war on drugs and almost completely eliminated the production of those hardcore drugs in their country.

[Vong]

But aren't these two different theaters with two different objectives?

The initial objective would be different, but there is a goal set among the occupying forces within Afghanistan to eliminate the poppies. And as CosmicPuppet already mentioned, there are plenty of other examples of military invasions accomplishing nothing in the "war on drugs". I just used Afghanistan as a recent example.

[outsyder]

The initial objective would be different, but there is a goal set among the occupying forces within Afghanistan to eliminate the poppies. And as CosmicPuppet already mentioned, there are plenty of other examples of military invasions accomplishing nothing in the "war on drugs". I just used Afghanistan as a recent example.

Except that the only reason military forces aren't accomplishing anything in Afghanistan is because they really haven't been cracking down on the opium trade to begin with.

[Scarface98.9]

*Hopes this doesn't lead to a Mexico bailout*

[Homyrrh]

Except that the only reason military forces aren't accomplishing anything in Afghanistan is because they really haven't been cracking down on the opium trade to begin with.
Just how enlightened can a declaration like this be?

[outsyder]

Just how enlightened can a declaration like this be?

"One point on which there is widespread agreement is that, with drug cultivation and trafficking now providing 60 percent of the nation's income, more extensive eradication next year would be counterproductive, even destabilizing, if it is carried out without providing farmers with alternative means of support."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/14/AR2005071401913_3.html

The US and the ISAF could, if they made it their main objective, mow down every poppy field they find.

By "accomplishing anything" I was referring to the drug trade if that wasn't clear. The point is, that without supporting farmers who are suddenly unable to grow their cash crop, the country could be destabilized even further which is directly oppositional to the goals of the US and ISAF.

[Jon Lyrik]

The situation with poppy in Afghanistan is fascinating, deserving of a thread and a slo-mo disaster unfolding in front of us, but can we flip back to Mexico?

[Potter82]

Mexico is indeed falling apart. The Drug Cartels essentially run the country. There was what, 4,000+ drug related murders in Mexico last year and they have assassinated high level government officials and police officers. I've heard that journalists are reluctant to investigate any murders and it's gotten to the point where most simply say so and so was found dead and that's the end of it. To dig any deeper is to put your life in danger.

I honestly have no idea how they can get rid of the cartels when there is so much damn money to be made. For instance, I've also heard there have been widespread defections from the Mexican police and army, many of whom are going to work to the cartels who no doubt pay much better. Sure they have plenty of guns and ammo but the cartel's biggest advantage is their money; it corrupts everything and everyone down there.

I often think there is only one sure way to end the bloodshed and drug war; legalize the drug trade. It would take it out of the shadows and bring it into the mainstream and would make much of the fighting unnecessary. It could also be subject to some degree of taxation. Of course, there are huge downsides associated with this strategy and it's just not politically feasible.

But I mean come on, people will always look for a way to get high on something be it legal or illegal. Some psychologists think that the urge to become intoxicated is a human drive along the lines of the food and sex drive.

The demand for drus is just so ridiculously strong and has been for as long as I can remember. As long as the demand exist and the illegality of the substance results in ridiculously high profit margins, people will always try to profit off it by supplying it. I mean when you look at it in economic terms, it's easy to understand why working for the drug trade in a relatively poor state offering little in the way of legitimate opportunities would be so attractive to people.

Outside of that, improving economic conditions and paying those individuals who may be susceptible to corruption (gov officila,s police, the army, etc.) more could make corruption less prevalent. Of course that's equally unfeasible given the world's current economic situation and Mexico's generally shitty economy.

[Homyrrh]

Mexico is indeed falling apart. The Drug Cartels essentially run the country. There was what, 4,000+ drug related murders in Mexico last year and they have assassinated high level government officials and police officers. I've heard that journalists are reluctant to investigate any murders and it's gotten to the point where most simply say so and so was found dead and that's the end of it. To dig any deeper is to put your life in danger.

I honestly have no idea how they can get rid of the cartels when there is so much damn money to be made. For instance, I've also heard there have been widespread defections from the Mexican police and army, many of whom are going to work to the cartels who no doubt pay much better. Sure they have plenty of guns and ammo but the cartel's biggest advantage is their money; it corrupts everything and everyone down there.

I often think there is only one sure way to end the bloodshed and drug war; legalize the drug trade. It would take it out of the shadows and bring it into the mainstream and would make much of the fighting unnecessary. It could also be subject to some degree of taxation. Of course, there are huge downsides associated with this strategy and it's just not politically feasible.

But I mean come on, people will always look for a way to get high on something be it legal or illegal. Some psychologists think that the urge to become intoxicated is a human drive along the lines of the food and sex drive.

The demand for drus is just so ridiculously strong and has been for as long as I can remember. As long as the demand exist and the illegality of the substance results in ridiculously high profit margins, people will always try to profit off it by supplying it. I mean when you look at it in economic terms, it's easy to understand why working for the drug trade in a relatively poor state offering little in the way of legitimate opportunities would be so attractive to people.

Outside of that, improving economic conditions and paying those individuals who may be susceptible to corruption (gov officila,s police, the army, etc.) more could make corruption less prevalent. Of course that's equally unfeasible given the world's current economic situation and Mexico's generally shitty economy.
I often think there is only one sure way to end the bloodshed and drug war; legalize the drug trade. It would take it out of the shadows and bring it into the mainstream and would make much of the fighting unnecessary. It could also be subject to some degree of taxation. Of course, there are huge downsides associated with this strategy and it's just not politically feasible.

To consider legalizing marijuana in America is an issue of legitimate debate; the drug definitely has long- and short-term health detriments, though there is an element of economic gain for the government to have.

Entertaining the thought of legalizing the substances prevalent in Mexico and/or the rest of South America, most specifically cocaine and related drugs like crack or heroin, is an insult to morality. Just because a populace wants something does not mean it should be handed to them.

Perhaps American intervention, and possibly to the degree of martial law, is the only feasible option. It would ultimately serve to clean the streets of America and Mexico, and quell a significant portion of the supplies from further south (with less demand from the US and Mexico, there will consequently be less supplied from the Colombias and Bolivias of the South).

Legalizing the trade offers no benefit to the world; the US would continue to keep drug use unlawful, and there would remain competition to supply that market. Additionally, it does nothing but try to aid Mexico, when the solution must engage the issue of the world narcotics trade.

[Potter82]

To consider legalizing marijuana in America is an issue of legitimate debate; the drug definitely has long- and short-term health detriments, though there is an element of economic gain for the government to have.

Entertaining the thought of legalizing the substances prevalent in Mexico and/or the rest of South America, most specifically cocaine and related drugs like crack or heroin, is an insult to morality. Just because a populace wants something does not mean it should be handed to them.

I also have a problem with the idea of legalizing substances like coke or heroin, they are indeed dangerous substances that are highly addictive and not at all like marijuana.

I'm not advocating this as the way to proceed, I just find it interesting to imagine what would happen if they were legalized. I think it would definitely solve some problems but would create/contribute to others.

Sure the amount of addictions, overdoses, and overall rates of drug use would increase but then again violence associated with the illegal drug trade would largely decline as would it's corrupting influence. Crimes such as theft would likely increase (as a greater number of addicts try to fund their habits) but Mexico and other governments could save a ton of money by not focusing resources on fighting drugs per se but on crimes committed by drug users which I think would involve far less resources.

Like I said, it's not a feasible option (for one, the US would also have to adopt similar policies for it to work, if Mexico legalized it but the US did not it would chaos) but it would definitely help with Mexico's problem with drug related violence - though while admittedly contributing to a health crisis.

Does anyone have a solution that doesn't involve military action or full scale legalization?

[Homyrrh]

I also have a problem with the idea of legalizing substances like coke or heroin, they are indeed dangerous substances that are highly addictive and not at all like marijuana.

I'm not advocating this as the way to proceed, I just find it interesting to imagine what would happen if they were legalized. I think it would definitely solve some problems but would create/contribute to others.

Sure the amount of addictions, overdoses, and overall rates of drug use would increase but then again violence associated with the illegal drug trade would largely decline as would it's corrupting influence. Crimes such as theft would likely increase (as a greater number of addicts try to fund their habits) but Mexico and other governments could save a ton of money by not focusing resources on fighting drugs per se but on crimes committed by drug users which I think would involve far less resources.

Like I said, it's not a feasible option (for one, the US would also have to adopt similar policies for it to work, if Mexico legalized it but the US did not it would chaos) but it would definitely help with Mexico's problem with drug related violence - though while admittedly contributing to a health crisis.

Does anyone have a solution that doesn't involve military action or full scale legalization?
I cannot foresee any solution that does not involve some type of martial intervention.

[Jon Lyrik]

Fighting the drug trade in Mexico would only go against our own interests. Ask the CIA.

[free]

Do you know when the mob got to be the strongest in the US? The 20's.

Do you know what caused them to become so big? Prohibition.

When's the last time you heard of a drive by shooting due to the illegal moonshine trade?

I would be willing to bet that drug related crimes would decrease more than 85% if we legalized most major drugs. The money we get from taxes on said drugs, along with the current budget for the "war on drugs", would be more than enough to deal with any crimes related to public intoxication or rehabilitation of criminals. The same could be said of the prostitution industry.

Bottom line is that as long as my actions are affecting only me (and those willing adult participants with me) the government has no right to interfere.

[jolanar]

I would be willing to bet that drug related crimes would decrease more than 85% if we legalized most major drugs.


Why would a druggie pay taxes for drugs when he can buy them illegally for cheaper? Or steal or murder for them? How is legalizing it going to stop any of that?

[Homyrrh]

What...the...heck...are...you...talking...about? I can hardly decipher and sense or continuity in your argument.

And jolanar...yes, exactly.

[The Postmaster General]

When's the last time you heard of a drive by shooting due to the illegal moonshine trade?

That's a really bad example because moonshine is still illegal and readily produced in a lot of areas. The reason it isn't wide-spread is because of law enforcement taking down distillers, not because alcohol is legal. It was booming in the 50s thru the 70s, and then resurged in the 90s. People still do it because it's cheap and not taxed - you can make tens of thousands a month producing and moving moonshine. I can't remember this guy's name, but in the 90s there was some dude who was the biggest moonshiner of all time, and was notorious for being able to evade arrest.

[Potter82]

Why would a druggie pay taxes for drugs when he can buy them illegally for cheaper? Or steal or murder for them? How is legalizing it going to stop any of that?

Actually, I think legalizing drugs would actually make them cheaper rather than making them more expensive, even when included the costs associated with taxation.

The reason being that the supply of drugs would increase dramatically once it can be sold openly, that and some drug dealers wouldn't be able to muscle out competitors - if they tried that if drugs were legalized, the injured party could simply take legal action against them. That and the overall supply of drugs would increase since drugs would no longer have to be grown/produced/made in the shadows, so by being able to do this openly, more drugs would result which would increase supply and bring down the price (I'm sure some sort of licensing process would be involved as with alcohol).

The greater number of sources and greater supply of drugs would lead to a competition among suppliers to win over customers (which would increase but I don't think it would increase dramatically - a lot of people will never try drugs, illegal or not - same thing with cigarettes) and one of the main ways to win over competitors is to produce a cheaper product or better product (which people may be willing to pay more for than illegal garbage)

Two other reasons besides decreased costs why I think the illegal drug trade would disappear if drugs were legalized.

One, if you could buy from a "brand" there would be a degree of quality control and uniformity. You know a product representing the brand in one location will be the same as the product representing the brand from another location. It's one of the secrets of McDonald's success - you know what to expect from a big mac no matter where you are. In the case of illegal drugs quality varies wildly, you can get shitty stuff from one guy on one occasion while you could get great stuff from the same guy on another occasion due to an unpredictable, uncertain supply. There is no certainty regarding quality with illegal drugs, not so with legalized drugs.

Secondly, availability. Many people would gladly pay a bit more for a product at a store down the street open throughout the day than having to deal with a sketchy drug dealer who may or may not have anything and who could be god knows where (in prison, dead, etc.)