The War on Drugs: Can it be won? If so, how?

I don’t ever seeing it happen. The flow of drugs could be dramatically reduced, but never stamped out completely. The only way I can imagine a dramatic reduction happening is with a combination of the rebirth of Centac or an organization that does the same thing (Read The Underground Empire, by James Mills), and something like Nixon’s stance with Turkey’s heroin-production in the 70’s.

Centac was a government organization that had a highly successful track record with not taking out the low-level pushers, but the entire organization. Out of the 13 cases Centac took, they only lost 1, and that was because the informant vanished after playing both ends against the middle (It’s possible that the informant, Robert Yang, went down in a hail of M-16 bullets, but I would think they would have found out about that unless the Asians did something with the body).

Centac’s approach worked beautifully. It didn’t require all the excessive man-power the war on drugs has now. When Reagan was elected, he messed everything up. While Centac would only have 5 big cases going at once, the new FBI-controlled group had 400-something, and none of them were very notable.

Another enemy of the war on drugs is diplomacy. Look at what Nixon did with Turkey in the 70’s. He leaned on them to knock off the heroin production, of else, and they did. If we did that to other countries, with the threat of cutting off their foreign aid, I’m sure some would comply.

Another step that could be taken (I’m sure the potheads of the board will love this one) is legalisation of the less hard drugs, like pot. I think it’s well-established that smoking pot isn’t going to ruin your life nearly as much as say, cocaine or heroin. The fact that the softer drugs would be legal would, I’m sure, cause a few people to stop doing them, since some people seem to think they’re badasses just for smoking a joint.

I think with the legalisation of the less dangerous stuff, with a relentless crusade by a Centac-like organization and with a President who has the balls to lean on “problem countries,” drug production would plummet. Just look at how effective Reagan’s approach was. Cocaine prices fell all throughout the 80’s, because the Medellin and Cali cartels were smuggling larger and larger loads into the U.S. Before the 80’s, a couple of kilos was considered a big deal. By the early 80’s, 300-500 kilo deals were common. Cocaine didn’t go out of style because of anything the government did. It went out of style because famous people died of overdoses.

Now, let’s see what kind of monster I’ve created this time…

The only way to WIN the war on drugs would be to get rid of every single drug user and seller in the entire world. Not exactly what I see as a possibility. :slight_smile:

If you put the entire organization behind bringing those drugs into the country in jail under conspiracy charges, you’ve made a serious dent in the flow of drugs. If Centac had been around long enough to target the Medellin cartel in its prime, they would have easily eliminated a large portion of the cocaine flown into the States (Mark Bowden says in Killing Pablo that the Medellin cartel accounted for over 50% of all the cocaine produced, while George Jung says in Blow that they accounted for roughly 85%).

But yeah, you’re right. I don’t see that as a possibility, either.

(Damn, the edit button’s apparently disabled).

I’m seeing phrases like “made a serious dent” and “eliminated a large portion of…” :slight_smile:

I’m not saying that we can’t make progress, but I don’t think we’ll ever GET RID of drugs.

Yeah, that’s what I said at the beginning of my original post.

The U.S. government has the power to wipe out most of the drug trade, but as soon as they take out one organization, another one will rise to take it’s place, before it gets sunk and another one comes up.

:slight_smile: I know, there was just nothing else I was interested in posting a reply to. I was just backing you up. :slight_smile:

(I like smilies.)

I was never too fond of using smilies, myself.

To keep this on topic: I highly recommend The Underground Empire, by James Mills. Some of the facts presented blew my mind (Such as the fact that roughly half the money in Swiss bank accounts is drug money, and the interest on that money is $3.5 million per hour, or that gay Cuban drug bosses based in Mexico have cars with built-in automatic shotguns).

Winning the war on drugs would violate the law of supply and demand.

There will always be demand for drugs whether they are legal or not. Everything mentioned above that causes a ‘dent’ in the drug supply only pushes the price up.

If it was possible to eliminate the cartels supplying from Columbia et al. you’d simply replace the coke supply with E or meth or something home grown.

Sorry, JiggstheCapo the war on drugs will never be won. It’s time to start negotiating surrender.

Or you could make the definition of “war on drugs” as narrow as you possibly can.

Yeah, that’s true. They can fight it, but it’s all a big game. Someone will always be willing to take the risk to earn the money from it. They could maybe seriously reduce the amount of drugs available with heavy reform to the “war,” but like you said, people would just find a way around it.

It’s kind of like the U.S. currency released to prevent counterfeiting back in the late 90’s. It took some Russian gangsters a week to figure out how to counterfeit those bills (That was taken from Russian Mafiya, by Robert Friedman).

And I’m not even going to get into software piracy, which, according to some of the pages of The Dragon Syndicates by Martin Booth, could be the next big illegal money-maker.

I recommend **Why Our Drug Laws Have Failed and What We Can Do About It: A Judicial Indictment of the War on Drugs **

Should the war on drugs be “won”? Should it even continue?

I think that the disinformation and blatant lies about drugs and drug users contrasted with an underground/black market created by prohibition have led to users being all tarred with the same brush, and drugs being seen as a great evil.

We have gone so insane with our “war” on drugs that we are stopping cancer patients in Oregon and California(where medical marijuana is legal) from being able to use medical marijuana.

This is insane.

The first rule of war is to do whatever your enemy least wants you to do.

If the enemy is the organised drug dealer, what do they fear most?

Jail? No. The way they think, imprisonment of one dealer is seen as an opportunity for another, as in any business with a high turnover rate of the head management (like sport, for example.)

What do they really fear?

An end to prohibition.

I suppose it Could be won, however, the solution might be to execute all drug dealers.
Then, there would be no one left to buy from.
And, no one would dare try selling anymore, obviously.
This won’t happen, of course.
But you asked.

Summertime, the death penalty for drug trafficking exists in many countries. Drug trafficking still continues in those countries.

If fewer dare to sell, their rewards are all the greater. Kill one and an equally ambitious and ruthless underling will replace them.

But why?
Is it **that ** profitable?
Wouldn’t the solution then be to legalize and destroy the black market?

Summertime,
Yes, it is that profitable. The budget of the various “drug lords” far exceeds the US budget to counter it.

None of this would effect homegrowers of marijuanna.

The supply and demand can co-exist in the same house.

The war on drugs cannot be won. It violates human rights. It violates common sense. There is always paint thinner.

Just read the second strip, it’s all that really needs to be said:

Get Your War On

It seems to me that the longer this “war” goes on, the less likely it is that our government actually wants to win it. Think about all of the prison officials employed to keep “druggies” locked up. Think about all the police enforcement that is required to try to keep up with all of the criminals using and selling drugs. Think about all of the treatment centers and the employees that are dependent on court ordered treatment.

The list goes on and on. The “War on Drugs” is a self defeating thing.

I’m not sure our economy could stand to win this supposed war and I believe a lot of politicians know this. Let alone all of the pet projects that our tax dollars are spent on such and DARE, stupid prime time commercials that show that smoking pot causes pregnancy. Too much money at stake.

Of course legalizing drugs and taxing them may be an answer, but no, that makes way too much sense.