Posted on 02/25/2009 9:19:03 AM PST by AuntB
Mexico’s attorney general said Tuesday he sees no need for U.S. troops to intervene in his country’s war on drug cartels, nor to gear up for a spillover of violence across the border.
U.S. officials view the violence as a potential national security threat, and last month the Bush administration’s homeland security chief, Michael Chertoff, said Washington has drawn up contingency plans for a “surge” of both civilian law enforcement and military assets along the border.
On Tuesday, Gov. Rick Perry demanded a tighter security net from Washington, saying he’s asked the Obama administration for more aircraft and “a thousand more troops” to the border.
“I don’t care whether they’re military troops, or they’re National Guard troops or whether they’re customs agents,” he said during a visit to El Paso with retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, the former U.S. drug czar who warned two months ago that Mexico could soon become a “narco state.”
“I’m concerned,” Perry said, calling the city across the border from El Paso, Ciudad Juárez, “one of the deadliest cities on the North American continent. … Darn tootin’ it concerns us.”
The drug violence has cost more than 6,000 lives in the past 13 months, as drug gangs fight for territory and trafficking routes and battle a Mexican army crackdown. Juárez, a city of 1.3 million, has had almost a third of the killings.
Beheadings of rival gang members have grown more common, and police corruption is widespread.
Medina-Mora said Mexicans remain frustrated with the flow of cash and guns from the U.S. drug trade — $10 billion a year and thousands of weapons, which are illegal in Mexico. He discussed that topic Monday with Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and on Tuesday with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.
(Excerpt) Read more at dallasnews.com ...
That’s hilarious. I’m looking at the posts and all the jokers who defended Rudy have been banned.
The reason that pot is illegal in the first place is because of the alcohol industry lobby.
Oh.. It was a great thread!
Over 18,000 replies.
You could spend days looking at the replies. Somewhere in that thread FReepers began a list of other FReepers who were zapped (banned).
Many were long time FReepers. Some were just newbies. It was fun in a way. But sorta sad.
And I repeat. I’ve even pinging the Big Kahuna - Jim Robinson should make a clear statement and declaration against Libertarians.
A straw man?
Do you deny the fact that our prisons are filled with inmates who are dug users and abusers? And that while they are in prison for crimes other than possession, they are still violent, dangerous and unproductive criminals non-the-less?
And their drug use is the catalyst that led them to prison. And you think that opening the door to millions of more Americans will NOT lead them to prison also?
You - sir - are stoned.
And then if you win and we legalize drugs. And we tax them. You actually want the state to profit on the misery and suffering of millions of addicts? If you are not stoned, then you have no heart - no conscience.
You say I “should trust the American people more”? Great. OK. And I suppose you too also trust the millions of Obamabots who elected Socialism in as opposed to Capitalism.
No Thanks. I do not trust these idiots. And nor do I trust the even bigger idiots in office. I shudder to think what a disaster our politicians would make out of the legalization of deadly drugs.
You state “You can’t legislate morality”. Great. Does that also include the moral beliefs and values of the millions of muslims who want to kill us? Are you advocating that in addition to surrendering on the WOD, we should also surrender in the WOT?
Bugger off. I’m done arguing with you liberals.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/022208dnintdrugs.3a98bb0.html
Medina-Mora was right when he said that there is little hope of eradicating the drug trade and ending the violence entirely as long as the demand for drugs persists. He says said the best they could hope to do was fragment and diminish “the power that these criminal groups have accumulated throughout the years, and transform it from a national security problem …to a police problem, to a public security problem.” He's right about that too. Just look at Colombia. The violence has diminished considerably. The threat to the government from drug cartels has diminished considerably, yet the cocaine still flows from Colombia just as it did before. All that has happened is that the Colombian cartels have allowed the Mexicans to take over distribution and let them fight over all of that. The Colombians focus on production in Colombia, Peru and Bolivia, and sell it to the Mexicans and let them sort out who makes the smuggling and distribution profits.
The USDOJ in their 2009 Drug Threat Assessment said that Mexicans produced about 15,500 metric tons of marijuana in 2007 and most of it came here. That is a staggering amount. It's 15.5 billion grams of marijuana and most of it came here. If you add up all the cocaine, meth and heroin they smuggle in, according to our government the total will be in the hundreds of metric tons, not thousands. It is their cash cow. In the article I linked you to above you will see where the head of the ONDCP, John Walters, said “marijuana, not heroin or cocaine, is the ‘bread and butter,’ ‘the center of gravity’ for Mexican drug cartels that every year smuggle tons of it through the porous U.S.-Mexico border.”
Americans consume more marijuana than all other illegal drugs combined. It is easily available everywhere in this country. We couldn't make it much more easily available. It is also cheap on a per use basis, cheaper than beer in most cases. Despite all our best efforts we can't make this stuff hard to find or too expensive to buy. We are stopping precious few from using it with our laws. All we are doing is blowing a fortune trying in vain to keep up the ban and enriching organized crime to the tune of many billions of dollars a year and causing lots of other problems along the way. It is time to regulate the production and sales of marijuana, take most of the money from these drug cartels and let law abiding tax paying Americans make it.
If we only legalize marijuana there will still be cartels and there will still be an illegal drug trade, no doubt about that. But the cartels will have far less money to work with and the black market for drugs will shrink down to something much more manageable since most of the black market for drugs is just a black market for marijuana. The cartels will lose most of their income and it will be hard for them to move their much more dangerous drugs because there won't be all the countless marijuana sellers at the bottom end up the distribution chains who will often sell the the hard stuff too. This will reduce the exposure of marijuana smokers to drugs like cocaine and meth and heroin because licensed marijuana retailers will be no more likely than liquor stores to offer these other drugs. Organized crime and the black market in general will be smaller and easier to contain. We should have done this a long time ago.
Here it is the admission to loss. Whenever you can't find a cogent argument to defend your position you revert to vulgarism. I'm not a liberal I'm a conservative, I won't call you a name because I have more respect than that. YOU LOSE, and you'll continue to lose as long as you defend the WOD and live in fear. I kinda feel sorry for you.
I agree this is a good option rather than prohibition and interdiction.
Change the ROE give the Border Patrol their own authority to make a decision on the spot instead of asking a supervisor.
I insult you. I call you names. All in an attempt to have you realize the heartlessness of your Godless positions.
But I should have known better. Reasoning with facts - wont work.
And getting hostile - wont work.
I guess just as America will learn the hard way that electing Obama and endorsing Socialism will lead to failure - and if you get your wish - and someday soon we will legalize drugs, I’ll be here to say “I told you so” when the SHTF.
So go ahead and feel sorry for me. OK by me. But for now... my sides winning. And while I’m sorry for the insults, I’m not sorry we’re still fighting the WOD.
Americans wanted a war on drugs. Now they have one. We have had US armed forces and various contractors conducting paramilitary operations throughout much of Latin America, including using chemical weapons (herbicides) in the Andes. Really, it is hypocritical for Americans to complain about the violence spilling over into the USA when we have brought this violence to the rest of the continent.
I think the US government expected the drug cartels to roll over when confronted by the majesty of the drug war. After all, back in the USA the citizenry has bowed down before the federal government in the name of the drug war: submitting to drug tests, profile searches, asset forfeiture, SWAT raids, the arrest of medical marijuana patients, and so forth. And in general, Americans bow down to every government agency, so matter how much those agencies outrage the Constitution: GATF, IRS, DEA, and the rest of the gangsters.
But it turns out that the rest of the Americas are made of sterner stuff. When Mexicans, Colombians, etc., are attacked by the US government, they take up arms in their defense. And why not? If a government declares war on you, do you not have the right to fight back?
Would that the sheeple up here in the USA had the guts to do the same!
____________________________________
Cures for Our Economic Disease [Ron Paul]
I don't like Ron Paul's stance on the war, but on this issue, and most issues regarding the constitution, limited government and liberty in general, he's usually right on.
15 posted on 02/02/2009 12:54:25 PM PST by Jim Robinson
Ping!
Un-Baracking-believable....
Great comment.
Got any more. Specifically, do you have a comment from JR that shows - he too - endorses and supports the surrendering on the WOD issue?
Maybe I’ve missed it. I’m sure Jim is a big States-Rights supporter. But I’ve NEVER seen him argue the WOD is a waste of time and that the Country should quit the WOD and legalize drugs.
Are they also our pushers and nannies when it comes to alcohol and tobacco?
I'm for the states deciding this for themselves and basically putting an end to the ALL the stuff the feds shouldn't be doing.
How do you decide what fedgov should and should not be doing, when you "don't know anything about the Commerce Clause", and don't care with respect to federal drug laws?
You have to drag out a strawman from a couple days ago? Aren’t there any comments I made today you can fashion a brand new one out of?
Yes, the government is working in conjunction with the pushers when it comes to alcohol and tobacco. So, yes they’re our pushers.
-snip-
A return to a strictly Constitutional form of federal government will automatically repeal and abolish all unconstitutional federal involvement in states issues such as: crime, health, education, welfare and the environment. The Tenth Amendment will again be in effect, which will bar all federal attempts at legislating social issues.
http://www.freerepublic.com/about.htm
That sounds very much against theWickard New Deal Commerce Clause, agreed?
Do you think Wickard is in keeping with the clause's original understanding?
If you know nothing about the Commerce Clause - which is what you said - then how do you decide what fedgov should regulate and what the states should regulate?
You realize many good FReepers left because of that incident? All because they had an opinion.
What happened to Freedom of Speech? You know, the same right that gives you the ability to say asinine things.
What I was saying is the commerce clause was irrelevant to my argument. Which was, if I can remember, that society would be harmed by drug legalization, nevertheless, such talk should be reserved for after reinstatement of state sovereignty.
I don’t what the feds involved in FDA approval of dope, agg department in charge of growing it, the EPA mandating what fertilizers can be used, the ATFE(N) enforcing licenses on who can sale it, the IRS taxing it, and congress providing earmarks for growers and sellers.
We’re not in any position to lift the federal ban as of now. A whole lot of things need to happen first.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.