Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Failed drug wars

Posted 2 years ago on May 14, 2012, 9:20 a.m. EST by bklynsboy (834)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

The US has spent hundreds of billions in a failed attempt to stop the drug business, especially in Mexico and S. America over 30 years. Over 50,000 Mexicans are dead. But the 1% and military contractors reap windfalls on guns, vehicles, armour, drones, surveillance, fuel and everything else armies need. Both parties refuse to decriminalize drugs; they get big money from companies and lobbyists to continue the hopeless drug wars. Great Britain, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, Argentina, Czech Republic, and others have decriminalized and had major drops in crime and money spent on enforcement.

May 5, 2012 Mexico: 23 Bodies Discovered By KARLA ZABLUDOVSKY http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/05/world/americas/mexico-23-bodies-discovered.html?pagewanted=print

May 13, 2012 Police Find 49 Bodies by a Highway in Mexico By KARLA ZABLUDOVSKY

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/14/world/americas/police-find-49-bodies-by-a-highway-in-mexico.html?pagewanted=print

41 Comments

41 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19979) 2 years ago

An article by Noam Chomsky which speaks to the subject of your post :

e tenebris, lux ...

[-] 2 points by bklynsboy (834) 2 years ago

Excellent article. The US as usual acts according to pressures from MIC and private prison lobbyists for drug wars and incarceration for profit. Other first world countries like Portugal, Switzerland, Netherlands, Spain, Argentina legalized and had dramatic cost savings and violent crime reduction. Except US.

[-] 3 points by Nevada1 (3985) 2 years ago

Good post. And big financial institutions make money laundering drug cartel money.

[-] 3 points by bklynsboy (834) 2 years ago

The Top Five Special Interest Groups Lobbying to Keep Marijuana Illegal Wednesday, 02 May 2012 08:59 By Lee Fang, Republic Report | Report http://truth-out.org/news/item/8854-the-top-five-special-interest-groups-lobbying-to-keep-marijuana-illegal

police unions, alcohal and tobacco companies, private prison companies, drug companies, criminal justice employees

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by Spade2 (478) 2 years ago

What's your point?

[-] 2 points by bklynsboy (834) 2 years ago

Wasted lives, money.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by SteveKJR1 (8) 2 years ago

How about if the people of this country stop using drugs - then there wouldn't be the problems associated with drug use.

Stupid is as stupid does -90% of all drugs come into this country from Mexico. What does that tell you about the people of this country. They are druggies - and everyone wonders why this country is so screwed up.

The vast majority who use drugs could care less about the success of this country anyway so I could care less about who gets killed or who does drugs and ends up in jail or dead on the street.

[-] 5 points by bklynsboy (834) 2 years ago

This identical debate occurred during prohibition, 1920's. You can't stop the demand, but you can regulate supply, control it and make money.: see tobacco and booze.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[+] -4 points by SteveKJR1 (8) 2 years ago

Well, there is a big difference between people using tobacco and booze and a person doing drugs.

People don't kill other people to get their tobacco or booze. They do kill other people in order to get drugs or sell them.

[-] 4 points by bklynsboy (834) 2 years ago

EXACTLY what happened during prohibition! It was repealed, organized crime lost a fortune and crime plummeted for booze. Prohibition hasn't ended yet for drugs. Switzerland, Argentina, portugal, netherlands, Spain, UK and others decriminalized. They have dramatic cuts in drug crime and money spent on drug enforcement. 50,000 dead in Mexico. This is success?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Scuse me? Didn't kill for alcohol?

Google Prohibition.

You know that thing that tried to deal with stopping alcohol consumption?

[-] -2 points by SteveKJR1 (8) 2 years ago

We are talking about today - not during Prohibition.

Lets talk about todays druggies and how much violence and killing is done in the name of drugs.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

There is a parallel a connection a very real similarity if you will. The players have changed - the game is the same - a bit bloodier in this drug prohibition war ( catastrophically bloodier ) - but essentially the same - billions upon billions upon billions of dollars being made illegally supplying drugs to those who want them. Don't really see that trade being stopped with-out a scorched earth policy. Troops on the ground and another bloody war. Hhmmmmmmmmmmmm.

[-] -2 points by SteveKJR1 (8) 2 years ago

The only way it will stop is if people stop using drugs - otherwise you and I will have the same debate 10 - 20 - 30 years from now.

I will guarentee you that the people who post complaining about people dying, billions of dollars being made illegally supplying drugs know people who do drugs - but that's ok - blame someone else.

[-] 2 points by alexrai (851) 2 years ago

I don't think I've heard about anyone killing anyone get get a mushroom fix... not now, or 2000 years ago. Why are non-addictive readily available plants criminalized?

Government doesn't like people to think for themselves, that's why.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

You mean like those who will always do or want to do drugs?

Is that who I am blaming?

You mean blame those who are making obscene amounts of money in defiance of our laws?

Is that who I am blaming?

You mean blame those in government who are denying lessons of the past?

Is that who I am blaming?

I honestly did not think I was blaming anyone - I thought that I was just pointing out the obvious in a situation that has not been resolved ever - and likely never will - without some form of legalization and control like the alcohol and tobacco industries.

Are you blaming some one? Oopps - yes - I forgot - the people who want to do drugs - sorry.

[-] -1 points by SteveKJR1 (8) 2 years ago

What I am saying is that the drug problem is because of the user - that's where the problem is.

Until people stop doing it, millions upon millions of dollars won't stop it and blaming enforcement for not solving the problem is not the issue. The user is the issue.

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by alexrai (851) 2 years ago

You're so clueless its frightening.

Some of us druggies have careers and edumacation... actually lots of us do.

[-] 0 points by alexrai (851) 2 years ago

I get -2 points for stating the obvious... too bad some people have their heads shoved so far up their ass you'd swear they were the ones on drugs. :p

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

A lot of those "druggies" operate on WallStreet.

They're full of expensive booze too.

nice work they do, eh?

[-] 0 points by alexrai (851) 2 years ago

I think if the druggies on wall street were dropping acid instead of slamming back over priced scotch they'd be a bit more concerned with something other than the payments on their new Bentley... :p

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

They like their coke and DMT. They are psychopaths after all.

Don't forget the high priced whores either.

[-] 1 points by alexrai (851) 2 years ago

Coke defiantly... coke and booze go together, at risk of sounding like a nerd they actually combine into a new psychoactive metabolite different from both and gives a kind of "rock star" effect.

Disagree with the DMT though, I love that stuff. Nothing more peaceful in the world than a good DMT trip, feels like you've been hugged by god. :) Plus, entirely non-addictive, and every human being has one each night when they sleep, so how bad can it be...

[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

so,the problem is that people who enjoy smoking weed and frown upon alcohol drinkers need to be rehabilitated and made to capitulate to a bunch of totalitarian morality regulators. Spoken like a true megalomaniac. I guess you have your answer why I want to see big business regulated to the kilt. I guess it is just me sharing to you the love you bestow upon me. You want to regulate my morality by telling me what I can and cannot consume so I will ferociously fight to see what you enjoy, making obscene amounts of money, is regulated just as much. The problem is not drug users in general, marijuana smokers in particular. The problem is pretentious busy bodies trying to cram their moral code down the throats of everyone else. Damn, that is so Un American.

[-] 1 points by SteveKJR1 (8) 2 years ago

I never catagorized "drug users" into pot smokers, meth users, etc.

What I did say is that drug use is the problem. Now as far as regulation goes I have not said anything about regulating what you do or don't do when it comes to drugs. It's the government that does - so if you feel that pot needs to be "legalized" look to them to change the laws.

And BTW, cigarette smokers are regulated to the hilt by regulations imposed on them - and just who are the ones who demand that regulation - it's the legislatures - not the general public.

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

Legislators don't take a shit without first taking a poll. There is a base of people, those who make money off of legislation, who disseminate propaganda about adverse effects of certain legislation, then there are those who "way in." How we the people "way in" through polls determines the direction the nation goes.

Come on man, legislators need to get reelected they hardly think for themselves. Obama probably took a plethora of polls before he sent Biden on television to tell the people how the administration felt about gay marriage, IMO. I don't believe the people are powerless in our nation when they can AGREE on a course of action. The legalization of drugs is one of those water shed moments, though it was all based on bull shit. But hey, that seems to be the only way to get people to agree.

[-] 1 points by SteveKJR1 (8) 2 years ago

Look, we can disagree on if it's ok or not ok to take drugs. But I am sure you know as well as I that legislatures make decisions based on what they think the public wants.

Now, with that being said it may not be so but until you get the vast majority of people to decide on change, aren't going to change anytime soon.

[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

Yep, I agree. Now if we could just get people to come to their own conclusions, instead of jumping on a band wagon, then maybe we could move forward quickly, instead of always just limping along. It was nice conversating with you!

[+] -4 points by Rush123 (3) 2 years ago

The drug war can be stopped in Washington aren't a bunch of pussys about is. The answer is not to legalize drugs it is to be tough and put the National Gaurd on the border. Seeing an Abrams M1 tank will scare them enough not to smuggle drugs. This is for the drugs not the immigrants. We need to use force to stop the drugs. I'm not saying kill them all, we just need to show force and use force if attacked by cartels. It is a very simple answer.

[-] 2 points by bklynsboy (834) 2 years ago

Stiff jail time and EVERYThING in the US toolbox hasn't worked for 30 years. Billions of taxpayer $. Failure. You want more?

[-] 0 points by Rush123 (3) 2 years ago

We havent put the Nation Gaurd in the Border yet and that would work. Until politicians get some backbone we will contiue to have the border problem. If you put the NG there then the drugs and illegals will drastically decrease.

[-] 3 points by bklynsboy (834) 2 years ago

This is a no-win. You can't stop it. it's like booze and Prohibition. 40 yearsa of drug wars show it's a failure. Regulate it and decriminalize like Switzerland, Spain, Netherlands, and others.

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6287) from St Louis, MO 2 years ago

Apparently now, the Netherlands is backtracking on their position. They've recriminalized marijuana for foreigners, although there has been the expected backlash. Two steps forward, one step back.

[-] -2 points by Rush123 (3) 2 years ago

No that is absolutely not the answer. Do you really want people to easily get heroin. Do you really think it would be good to have people baked all the time. The answer is to put the military on the border, all other countries do it so why can't we.

[-] 3 points by bklynsboy (834) 2 years ago

What part of, "This has been tried for 40 years and failed" don't you understand? What part of "50,000 Mexicans dead" shows this is a failed policy? What part of "hundreds of billions of US taxpayer money wasted and drug wars not stopped" don't you understand?

[-] 0 points by occupybrains (30) 2 years ago

Do you have any idea the amount of national guardsmen it would take to effectively shut down all of our borders. Not to mention the devastation on importing goods timelines it would create.

you are asking for a logistical and financial diasaster.

[-] 3 points by gnomunny (6287) from St Louis, MO 2 years ago

Not to mention the fact that it would do absolutely zero as far as demand goes. It's extremely naive to think that if we stopped the flow, all users will just stop using. They'll either start growing their own weed, or meth labs will proliferate, or burglaries of drug stores and doctor's offices will skyrocket. Actually, all of the above. Where there's a will, there's a way.

Also, the price of illegal drugs will drastically increase. Which will increase the crime rates in many areas as users have a harder time paying the inflated prices.

[-] -1 points by Rush123 (3) 2 years ago

I never said to shut down our borders, we should just use the air national Gaurd and have ground forces interdict with BP agents. The more people you have on the ground the mor shrugs you can stop. If we are smart about it then it could be a huge success.

[-] 1 points by occupybrains (30) 2 years ago

You have no idea the amount of money and troops it would take to simply make a dent.

Guard ALL the ports, the borders, teh containers, the truckers, etc.

PS- Border partrol would be run by gov, and its usually the least motivated body to make progress and keep costs under control.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by occupybrains (30) 2 years ago

Another neo-con police state enthusiast. Wonderful (sigh)...

[-] 2 points by bklynsboy (834) 2 years ago

This shit has proven a failure.