Would you support drone strikes against drug cartels and MS 13 in Mexico and Central America? (generation, deaths)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I do not support the use of force upon anyone except in defense. Just because you or others "don't like" drugs does not mean that there aren't people in the US who do like drugs. The drug war is merely a war on peoples' choice. It is no different than the current seat belt war in the US. The government has started a war on peoples' choice to not wear a seat belt. No ones rights or property are harmed by the person making the choice, except maybe the person who is making the choice. I have no fundamental right to demand that another cannot harm themselves by their own choice. After all, who owns their body, if not they themselves. So by what right do I or does anyone else make a demand that another person cannot harm themselves if their action or inaction does not encroach upon the rights or property of another?
A war on choice to wear a seat belt?? Seriously? I guess I could support choice if you sign away your rights to medical care and actions of liability against other drivers should you be injured. Auto related injuries do cost society real dollars.
Sorry, somehow I interpreted your comments to mean you were for ramping up The War. Sometimes, this isn't the best communication method, if accuracy is valued.
Its interesting, when 9-11 happened, govts first reaction was to TARGET THE SOURCE (go into foreign countries with military)...but with the 'drug war', that is NOT something they would ever do.
I think this alone proves there is collusion at high levels, 10s of 1000s of lives have been lost or ruined by street drugs (many more than were lost in 9-11), and yet, they refuse to target the source?!
I don't agree. You're probably too young, but do you remember paraquat? The military started spraying it everywhere, including foreign countries, trying to eradicate marijuana. Regardless, multi-ton busts, which was only a small fraction of the total getting through, ruled the day back in the 70's.
In other words, they were targeting the source. Regardless, their efforts were quite unsuccessful, just as they are today, because it is the wrong way to fight the problem.
We're in the same boat because both of us detests that wasteful, deadly, money-pit known as The War On Drugs, but it seems our reasons why we believe it's a wasteful, deadly, money-pit seems to be quite different.
Its interesting, when 9-11 happened, govts first reaction was to TARGET THE SOURCE (go into foreign countries with military)...but with the 'drug war', that is NOT something they would ever do.
I think this alone proves there is collusion at high levels, 10s of 1000s of lives have been lost or ruined by street drugs (many more than were lost in 9-11), and yet, they refuse to target the source?!
Your post seems to assume that spending 6 Trillion (and still going) and countless American lives was a good strategy and that it actually worked.
Yet, as we speak, there are many more and vastly better organized "terrorists" most everywhere in the world. ISIS isn't gone...Al Queda isn't gone...and you can call them by whatever name you want, but the Saudi Spread ideals aren't gone...in fact, they have never been doing better. The Free Market and Orange Man (loves to sell weapons) will assure us of all that.
After decades of the drug war, pot is legal and opiates can be bought at lower prices than ever before. Does that tell you something?
Its interesting, when 9-11 happened, govts first reaction was to TARGET THE SOURCE (go into foreign countries with military)...but with the 'drug war', that is NOT something they would ever do.
I think this alone proves there is collusion at high levels, 10s of 1000s of lives have been lost or ruined by street drugs (many more than were lost in 9-11), and yet, they refuse to target the source?!
Iraq was not the source of 9/11.
What you are suggesting is taking an axe to something that requires a scalpel.
Collusion at high levels about what? To hook people on drugs--do you know what this costs the country? The collusion is between private pharmaceutical companies and a few shady doctors. That is even becoming impossible--physicians are under all kinds of controls regarding opiates--they cannot prescript the way they did before.
And I repeat--how will killing large groups of people in Mexico and Central America have any affect on the drugs that are pushing the epidemic from China and the US pharmaceutical industry?
I have to stand by my opinion that this is a bad idea.
fact is drugs and illegal immigrants are responsible for far more deaths in the US every year than Islamic terrorists. Drugs kill more people in America yearly than terrorists in Israel
Is anyone forcing these Americans to take drugs or are they doing drugs of their own free will?
Given the threat that MS 13 and the cartels pose, I personally would be in favor of flying drones over Mexico and Central America and directing targeting them.
That really would be a War on Drugs, and the first time you really had a War on Drugs, instead of a Skirmish on Drugs.
A war on choice to wear a seat belt?? Seriously? I guess I could support choice if you sign away your rights to medical care and actions of liability against other drivers should you be injured. Auto related injuries do cost society real dollars.
That is the reason I pay for insurance. It's none of your business whether or not I choose to put myself in harms way via not wearing a seat belt or via my own choice to do drugs or not to do drugs.
By what right do you think you should have ANY say in what I do or don't do if my action or inaction does not encroach upon the rights or property of another? Did GOD grant you that right? If so, then GOD granted you the authority to be my owner, my master and the I am somehow your slave. Do you approve of slavery?
Can I come and take your family members and lock them in a cage if they do something I "don't like"? The obvious answer is, "No. I cannot because that would be kidnapping." How is it any different if it is done by government?
Can I fly drones over your house, attempting to kill you and your family because you're doing something I "don't like"? Again, the obvious answer is, "No."
So WHY is an immoral act no longer immoral just because it is being done by government?
But then again, that's just MY opinion, for what it's worth.
The war on drugs has been a complete disaster and people are calling to ramp it up more than a few notches. Drug consumption and violence has increased despite the millions of people put in prison. And people are calling for bombings that will certainly end up with thousands of innocent people massacred and millions more refugees. What a level of stupidity, this forum never fail to surprise me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
