Candidates in Mexico Signal a New Tack in the Drug War

New York Times ^ | June 10, 2012 | By RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD and DAMIEN CAVE

[Brad from Tennessee]

MEXICO CITY — The top three contenders for Mexico’s presidency have all promised a major shift in the country’s drug war strategy, placing a higher priority on reducing the violence in Mexico than on using arrests and seizures to block the flow of drugs to the United States.

____________________________snip___________________________

“Results will be measured not by how many criminals are captured, but by how stable and secure the communities are,” Ms. Vázquez Mota wrote on her campaign Web site.

Mr. López Obrador — whose security strategy is called “Abrazos, no balazos,” or “Hugs, not bullets” — has criticized how United States officials have approached securing Mexico. “They should send us cheap credit, not military helicopters,” he said. . .

[freedumb2003]

If Obrador wins then Mexico has gotten a stupid as us when we immaculated obozo.

He will immediately cut PRI-level deals with the narcos and will claim “success.”

[Kellis91789]

Wow. So ... they plan on turning a blind eye as long as the violence shifts north of the border. Corrupt, backstabbing, lying, criminal conspirators running for President of Mexico. Must be a Monday.

[Venturer]

That’s what it souns like to me./

It would appear they will make a deal with drug lords to leave them alone if they stop the killing.

[Carriage Hill]

“Hugs, not bullets”

Yeah, that’ll go over like a fart in church, when the AK47s are in full-auto at the fawning, unsuspecting crowds.

Didn’t we try something stupid like that once? “Hugs, Not Drugs”? How’d that work out for us here?

[bill1952]

running up the surrender flag on public media...

[uncbob]

Legalize the damn stuff and end this insanity

[bcsco]

This is a ping list promoting Immigration Enforcement and Congressional Reform.
If you wish to be added or removed from this ping list, please contact me.

Holder's Fast and Furious lies exposed by DOJ document leak

Jury sentences man (illegal alien) to 55 years for drunk driving crash that killed cop

Fireworks Over Fast and Furious

FLORIDA THUMBS NOSE AT DOJ; CLEANS VOTER ROLLS OF FELONS, ILLEGALS

Bobby Pulido, [famous Mexican-American] speaks out / goes against Obama (over gay marriage)

Critics of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s ‘Tent City’ Announce Protest, Then Chicken Out of Meeting

Holder Caught in More Lies About Fast and Furious

Issa on Fox News: What's Next For Fast & Furious?

Cops: Burned bodies found in Arizona SUV likely murder suicide, not drug violence

Illegal alien dies in desert, widow (also illegal) to sue Border Patrol

An immigrant in limbo between two Americas (BARF ALERT!)

(from 2008) Illegal Immigrants Are Voting in American Elections

Florida Halts Its Search for Violations of Voter Law

Texas GOP Oks more-lenient immigration platform

Aliens Don't Have to Live in State to Buy A Gun

Gun advocate: AG Holder has 'great deal to hide'

Eric Holder has become a litmus test for democrats

Where Police Don't Ask, and Immigrants Don't Tell

Democratic chairman tries to contain immigration scandal

Fast and Furious stonewall is working

ATF Death Watch 161: Attorney General Eric Holder Knows Nothing. WaPo and NYT Also(murdergate)

Rubio’s effort to reach Hispanics could backfire on Senate floor

Federal Project Seeks More for Immigrant Integration

Suspect in Seattle fatal hit and run of bicyclist is illegal alien

Axelrod, Holder give conflicting tales on whether Axelrod gave political advice to Holder

Attorney General Explains “Fast & Furious” Memos

2 Border Patrol Agents Accused Of Engaging In Sex Act During Cirque Du Soleil Show

New Law Requires Photo ID To Buy Some Drain Cleaners

Eric Holder is Either Clueless or Dishonest. Take Your Pick. (lib groups ask for ID!)

[exPBRrat]

Sounds to me like the pols have agreed among themselves to sell out to the highest bidder. And I can’t say I blame them because life has become so dangerous down there.

[JustSayNoToNannies]

Didn’t we try something stupid like that once? “Hugs, Not Drugs”?

Hugs Not Drugs is about parents educating their children against drugs (http://www.hugsnotdrugs.com/index.php/history); please explain the resemblance you see.

[JustSayNoToNannies]

placing a higher priority on reducing the violence in Mexico than on using arrests and seizures to block the flow of drugs to the United States.

Why should Mexico endanger the lives of its citizens so that Americans can be hampered from ingesting substances of which other Americans disapprove? Would you support a policy of endangering the lives of U.S. citizens so that Mexicans could be hampered from ingesting substances of which other Mexicans disapprove?

[Carriage Hill]

“Hugs, Not Drugs”
and
“Hugs, Not Bullets”

Resemblance? Pretty obvious idiocy, isn’t it? Or am I just *cynical*, after all those feel-good/do-nothing/spend-a-billion-$/no-results worthless programs?

The “Drugs” idiocy sure didn’t work, and the “Bullets” stupidity probably won’t, either. Someone forgot to tell the addicted kids and the drug dealers about the “Drugs” ad campaign, and they’ll forget to tell the narco-terrorists about the “Bullets” idiocy campaign, too. $10 says we can count on it.

Maybe I’m just jaded with liberal, feel-good stuff like that. My bad, I guess, JSNTN.

[webheart]

It is stupid because it implies that parents have a choice between hugging their kids and giving them drugs. Not that many parents are inclined to give their kids drugs, and some of the best-loved kids end up on drugs. Kids really need discipline more than namby-pamby touchy-feely “be nice to them and they will do whatever you want.” That doesn’t work worth a damn.

[JustSayNoToNannies]

Didn’t we try something stupid like that once? “Hugs, Not Drugs”?

Hugs Not Drugs is about parents educating their children against drugs (http://www.hugsnotdrugs.com/index.php/history); please explain the resemblance you see.

“Hugs, Not Drugs”
and
“Hugs, Not Bullets”

Resemblance? Pretty obvious idiocy, isn’t it?

So that's all the resemblance you were implying?

Or am I just *cynical*, after all those feel-good/do-nothing/spend-a-billion-$/no-results worthless programs?

Please provide evidence that billions were spent on “Hugs, Not Drugs.” Based on the link I provided it appears to be a fully voluntary and privately-funded initiative.

The “Drugs” idiocy sure didn’t work

Not even among those who chose to participate?

[JustSayNoToNannies]

It is stupid because it implies that parents have a choice between hugging their kids and giving them drugs.

No, it implies that some kids turn to drugs to blot the pain of having had too little parental love - and that more of the latter can lead to less likelihood of the former. I don't know why any conservative would object to that (so long as its not presented as the silver bullet to end all drug use, which it never was as far as I know).

[Venturer]

The two things are tied inexorably to each other.

The Mexicans cannot stop the killing without stopping the drugs.

There are Billions of dollars going into Mexico from drug sales. I doubt seriously they really want to stop the drugs, and as long as there are rival dealers there will be killing.

Their Police Departments are a joke and their Military isn’t much better.

[Carriage Hill]

Add-up the “fully voluntary and privately-funded initiative costs”, if you can get a true accounting of it. Doubt you can. I’d bet the cost per ‘hugged’ child is astronomical. Not saying they weren’t worth it.

Read first 3 paragraphs of this article; then multiply by 1,000s:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1291&dat=19871006&id=PJszAAAAIBAJ&sjid=kY0DAAAAIBAJ&pg=4752,1136910

Next, get some true, accurate drug-use stats - not just gov’t-doctored numbers to look good for public consumption - and it’ll be clear that drug-alcohol use is up. Way up.

[JustSayNoToNannies]

then multiply by 1,000s

Why?

drug-alcohol use is up. Way up.

I don't see where this program ever claimed it'd help anyone other than participants.

[JustSayNoToNannies]

The Mexicans cannot stop the killing without stopping the drugs.

Says who? The USA stopped the alcohol-related killings of Prohibition exactly by recognizing that we couldn't stop the drug alcohol.

[Venturer]

So: Your point is that drugs should be legal. Don’t stop them , just make them legal.

Not a bad point it would solve the problem of those who are claen and sober having to look for a job, They could just get the jobs of the addicts.