The problem why the cartels are basically untouchable is because the Mexican police force is so damned corrupt. I have a friend who lives in Mexico and he doesn't trust the police at all, and he said everyone in his neighbourhood shares the same sentiment. I think he even once said about some people going all "vigilante justice" on some areas rather than calling cops to the area. One HUGE improvement they could get is cops that actually do their job right.
Also...
Only the Jewish ones. ** spoiler omitted **
Only a Jewish person is allowed to joke about Jewish people. It's offensive in every other situation.
Sorry, but when Kyle placed a desert 40 miles west of Houston and said there was no good Indian food here (hint: we a HUGE South Asian population here, complete with awesome Indian restaurants), I decided he was a lousy writer (or, at least, a lousy researcher) and gave up on him.Even our British pubs have good Indian food!Well, Indians taught the Brits that food didn't have to be penance for whatever the Brits were doing penance for.
;-)
And that place ROCKS!
They serve Old speckled Hen and hobgoblin !!!!! Two of my favourite beers.
You are never going to affect the cartels by waiting for the obviously corrupt police forces to deal with them. If you expose the corrupt parts of the police, cut them out and cauterize the wound, you have a chance to introduce people that actually care about the situation, and who can make a difference against the cartels. Corruption is the only reason the cartels can work. Let's face it, there is organized crime everywhere, but not at the scale that there is in Mexico. Changing this situation IS possible, and not everything you do will result in competitors taking over.
As to using ANTHRAX to kill drug addicts, well... umm... I don't know what to say, really. It's absolutely monstrous, it will kill indiscriminately, it will infect entire regions with anthrax spores and keep killing people for decades, even people completely unrelated to the drug deals, such as people growing crops and harvesting them. It's... sorry to say it... it's so stupid it's mind-boggling.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Perhaps. It would be a relevant argument if you had some kind of suggestion as to what to do about the situation.
It's not relevant because it's NOT HELPING THE SITUATION. We can complain all we want about poor solutions to stopping pollution, but it will NOT help in dealing with the actual pollution itself...unless someone creates an actual solution that somehow crosses out the problems presented by the less viable options, which is unlikely at best.
Well, as long as you consider that the only change that can be reached is to replace one cartel with another, that's not very helpful either.
Anonymous has pulled off some pretty nifty things if you look at it. You're not giving them enough credit. Who knows? It may just work.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that some of you guys need to learn to discern between serious comments and jokes.
And that was probably the least offensive Jewish joke I've ever seen.
As I said - Anonymous are good at what they do. Certainly, there may be leaks they do not catch and people who manage to use them, but you will not be able to reach 100% in anything you do. I believe they will do far more harm than good to the cartels by exposing the data they have, otherwise I would not agree with this.
This is a chance at breaking up the corruption that exists in the police. The cartels are not omnipotent. Even if they leave Zeta alone, they still hurt them by reducing police corruption. It's not a zero sum game. Countries can change, and this can be a vehicle for that change.
Poking your eye is stupid and brings no benefits whatsoever. What is happening is not useless.
I think Anonymous has made it clear that they will do what they will do, damn the consequences.
I hope they can do some good here, but I don't see this ending well.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd rather they start trying to end the DEA. Then ALL the cartels would eventually stop.
What would happen is that the cartels would appear to go legal, but would fight each other to control the market. That fighting would not be restricted to the marketplace, but would involve a lot of criminal activity.
Yeah, I know, right? I get tired of having to duck for cover whenever Seagrams and Hiram Walker reps start shooting it out over territory...
Modern drug prohibition and Prohibition in the '20s are a 1:1 analogue. There were nearly ZERO problems in the drug trade until the "War on Drugs" was declared.
You do realize that if you legalize drugs, the Mexican cartels are completely removed from the equation, right? Cocaine doesn't have to come through Mexico any more, marijuana can be grown domestically, etc.
Sheesh, people have no idea how this really works.
[** spoiler omitted **
Hersheys?
|
|
To produce cocaine, you need coca. Guess who has a monopoly on large scale coca cultivation. Guess who isn't going to be willing to loose their monopoly.I'd rather they start trying to end the DEA. Then ALL the cartels would eventually stop.
What would happen is that the cartels would appear to go legal, but would fight each other to control the market. That fighting would not be restricted to the marketplace, but would involve a lot of criminal activity.
Yeah, I know, right? I get tired of having to dick for cover whenever Seagrams and Hiram Walker reps start shooting it out over territory...
Modern drug prohibition and Prohibition in the '20s are a 1:1 analogue. There were nearly ZERO problems in the drug trade until the "War on Drugs" was declared.
You do realize that if you legalize drugs, the Mexican cartels are completely removed from the equation, right? Cocaine doesn't have to come through Mexico any more, marijuana can be grown domestically, etc.
Sheesh, people have no idea how this really works.
That would be the FARC rebels in Colombia and the peasants in Bolivia. Mexico produces exactly ZERO coca leaf. The only reason the South Americans even deal with Mexicans is Andrews AFB (makes coming through South Florida very problematic) and the Coast Guard in the Gulf and Pacific coast. Mexico is the only convenient land route for dope into the U.S. of A. Legalize dope, and there is no need to involve Mexicans in importation.
Mexico wasn't even a major player in anything other than heroin until the late 80's, early '90s. Medellin and Cali didn't deal with them any more than to sell them some product until Miami was pretty much made too risky.
Here's the deal. The cartels can do NOTHING if drugs are legalized. Morales in Bolivia already doesn't suppress coca cultivation, and Colombia would gladly spend money on anything other than chasing coca farmers.
All that happens are the cartels go back to being petty thieves and thugs like they were pre-1970s.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...Columbia?And drug cartels such as MS 13 have significant influence on Columbian government officials.
That you call MS13 a "cartel" tells me you know nothing about how the drug trade works, or who the major players are.
Seriously, give it up. You have no idea what you're talking about on this topic.
@HD -- now you know how I feel when some well-meaning bystander starts spouting off about professional scientists.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@HD -- now you know how I feel when some well-meaning bystander starts spouting off about professional scientists.
Yeah, I know exactly how you feel now!
;-)
|
|
Yes, calling it a cartel was sloppy. I was thinking of the Sinoloa Cartel....Columbia?And drug cartels such as MS 13 have significant influence on Columbian government officials.That you call MS13 a "cartel" tells me you know nothing about how the drug trade works, or who the major players are.
Seriously, give it up. You have no idea what you're talking about on this topic.
Even Chapo would be powerless if drugs were legalized.
|
|
You were talking about legalizing drugs just a few posts ago. Now, have you changed your position to legalizing only dope?Um, you do realize that, on the street, dope can refer to all drugs, right?
Have you ever even seen an illegal drug, or been around the culture at all?
That's new to me. When I had any connection with drugs, "dope" referred to mj.
Is there a reason you're acting like an ass? I've made no claim to expertise on the drug trade.
Well, when someone who has no clue about what they're talking about argues with someone who has extremely personal, intimate, and very pertinent knowledge on the topic at hand, the person who knows what they're talking about tends to not be patient.
Internet 101.
Edit: And, no offense, you have no idea what you're talking about.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Arguing is a method of learning. Acting like an ass is just acting like an ass.You were talking about legalizing drugs just a few posts ago. Now, have you changed your position to legalizing only dope?Um, you do realize that, on the street, dope can refer to all drugs, right?
Have you ever even seen an illegal drug, or been around the culture at all?
That's new to me. When I had any connection with drugs, "dope" referred to mj.
Is there a reason you're acting like an ass? I've made no claim to expertise on the drug trade.
Well, when someone who has no clue about what they're talking about argues with someone who has extremely personal, intimate, and very pertinent knowledge on the topic at hand, the person who knows what they're talking about tends to not be patient.
Internet 101.
Edit: And, no offense, you have no idea what you're talking about.
Asking questions is a method of learning. Making declarative statements with zero basis in fact is arguing just to argue.
The cartels are killing people over what they say on the internet now.
Granted, I LOATHE anonymous, but I still hope they realize that they have no business getting involved in this and back down. I may hate them vehemently, but I don't want them dead.
|
|
I'm not entirely sure that being up on current street drug culture really is necessary for discussing the international effects of legalization.You were talking about legalizing drugs just a few posts ago. Now, have you changed your position to legalizing only dope?Um, you do realize that, on the street, dope can refer to all drugs, right?
Have you ever even seen an illegal drug, or been around the culture at all?
That's new to me. When I had any connection with drugs, "dope" referred to mj.
Is there a reason you're acting like an ass? I've made no claim to expertise on the drug trade.
Well, when someone who has no clue about what they're talking about argues with someone who has extremely personal, intimate, and very pertinent knowledge on the topic at hand, the person who knows what they're talking about tends to not be patient.
Internet 101.
Edit: And, no offense, you have no idea what you're talking about.
No, but understanding how the drug trade works, and why the violence exists really helps.
If you think I'm basing my statements on having taken a few bong rips, you're quite mistaken.