There are meth labs all over your country. And how much domestic marijuana is being grown in the US? Even if you argue that production is too risky, explain why so many people are selling the stuff on the streets all day, everyday of the year. Apparently the reward is worth the risk on your side of the border also.
Given the choice, would you choose to keep your mouth shut or be murdered, possibly along with all your family?
I have been to the USA and I have been to Japan numerous times. The Japanese have a far more polite society and I’m sure you know how they view guns.
Are you fucking high?
Have you heard about the high-tech submarine vessels that are becoming increasingly common?
Who is going to raise this “large civilian ex-military volunteer militia” and who is going to “send them down there to clean them out”? Also, who is going to arm and finance this endeavor? How do you guarantee your militia will not accept bribes? Just by signing up, they have proven their willingness to kill for money.
Any suggestions as to how to finance this wall you think is such a panacea? Without increasing the deficit, that is, which apparently is now the most important thing of all.
I’m not sure that this has ever really been established. I suppose it depends on your definition of most/many/majority.
No I don’t like Diaz at all. I dislike corrupt dictators utterly.
How do they view the Yakuza?(Sp?) The idea of private weapons in Japan hasn’t been viable for a very long time; they don’t think in those terms. Are you familiar with cultural differences? Even though I dislike Texas, mostly because of the politicians the place vomits forth, certain ideas such as the right to keep and bear arms have stuck with me since birth. We were supposedly discussing a situation involving Mexico and the USA. What Japan has to do with it escapes me unless you believe the Japanese are somehow involved in the problem. If so, educate me as to how that involvement came about and in what it consists.
You stated your opinion that an armed society is a polite society. In my experience as a Mexican visiting the US, I didn’t find the people very polite. When people asked me where I was from, more times than not I would hear something extremely negative or racist about México.
Japan has strict gun control and a very polite society. People showed a great deal of polite curiosity about my country. Not one insulting statement.
Therefore my opinion differs from yours.
You know, if you send a private army to “clean up” Mexico, who runs that private army? What you really mean is you want a coup. Except history has shown again and again that the kind of guy who overthrows the government by force and establishes his own brand of justice is probably not going to be a terribly nice guy.
It’s possible that the warlord who conquers Mexico would turn out to be our best buddy. But don’t count on it.
After all, the reason there is so much more violence now is that the government is trying to fight the cartels. Back when they turned a blind eye to the cartels, there wasn’t any violence. So what policy do you think the new dictator of Mexico is going to follow? Is he going to fight the cartels? Or is he going to to demand his cut in return for letting them alone? If you were the ruthless asshole dictator if Mexico, which would you do?
It is pretty funny to see the people who loudly advocate freedom and liberty for the United States turn around declare that what Mexico really needs is Fascism. Funny but not exactly shocking.
Maybe some of the brave boys who formed the death squads to root out street children in Columbia could be persuaded out of retirement.
I take your point. I posted in haste and in the heat of the moment without considering the Forum; I withdraw the statement.
What is that definition? I see nothing but utter failure. A huge waste of money. A huge waste of lives. Contributing to violence among our neighbors to the south. The Drug War has been one of the most damaging policies of the last 2 or 3 decades. By what definition is this a win? I’m curious.
It’s worth noting that South and Central America were colonized well before the US was, and it was a long time after the US was colonized/became independent, etc., before it was able to exert influence, undue or otherwise, outside its borders. Mexico and the other central American nations are what they are because of their culture, not the US. They will have to learn to stop complaining about that big bully to the north and, well, grow up as nations on their own if they ever want to be counted among the more civilized nations.
The US GDP is 14.1T, not 1.41T.
While I understand your point, you are overlooking the glaring flaws of your argument. First, that Canada also shares a border with the US, and is the source of many illegal drugs to the US; most notably marijuana. There no where near the level of violence or corruption associated with trafficking near the US-Canada border. If it were simply an economics argument, where prohibition leads to the level of violence we are currently seeing in Mexico, you would see that in Canada among other places. Even if you grant that the income disparity is an aggravating factor in the case of Mexico and the US, it still doesn’t explain where we don’t see this level of violence anywhere that I am aware of. That’s not even considering the larger question of why Mexico is so poor relative to the US.
Second, drug prohibition exists all around the world. There isn’t really a developed country that has no drug prohibition or control laws, Mexico included. Wishing that we become more permissive isn’t likely, nor is it the crux of the issue. Drugs have been illegal here for a long time. The US “war on drugs” has been going on for decades. The violence on the border has been really bad for for only a few years. The proximate cause for the recent violence in Mexico was the attempted crackdown by Felipe Calderon’s government, and high level arrests/deaths which created a power vacuum.
More here:
And here:
Another cite:
Your argument, that it is the fault of the US, just doesn’t hold water according to nearly every expert account I have ever read. I know we are a convenient scapegoat, but it’s not as if US demand spiked so much in recent years that it would explain why 28k people have been killed in the last 4 years. That number is far greater than any estimate I have ever heard in any similar time span prior to '06. You also fail to give us credit for the fact that much of the money your government is using to fight these guys is coming from the US government.
The vast majority of what we are seeing is a result of institutional failure in Mexico, slightly exacerbated by US demand. Yes, we are complicit, but not nearly to the extent you seem to think. The reason you don’t see much crime happening on the US side of the border is because the risks and punishments are much greater over here. Your justice system is (largely) a joke to these guys. Take this recent example:
Really Mexico? A fugitive gets elected, sneaks into a federal building while on the run, gets sworn into office, then rejoices after gaining immunity. Really? Can you even imagine something like that happening in the US (or any developed country)?. I should note that his immunity has since been stripped, but the fact that that even happened highlights why Mexico has many of the problems it has.
I agree that a variety of factors make it easy for the average American to ignore the issue. I understand that, and I agree that it is shameful. However, the larger problem is that your government has chosen to fight an impossible battle. It was incredible stupid to even think that it was likely to succeed. More importantly, you decry our destructive drug laws while ignoring that your own country has many similar laws. If it were such an easy political/legislative fix, all Mexico has to do is legalize drugs across the board. Then the gangs wouldn’t need to resort bribing/killing police to maintain supply lines. You’d also get the added benefit of sky high price due to continued US prohibition. Why don’t they do that? Probably for many of the same reasons we don’t. Not that I necessary agree with those reasons, just that it isn’t a black and white case of the US being short sighted and indifferent to human suffering.
Someone like Hugo Chavez, perhaps?
How can you assume this? Mexican society (and someone please correct me if I’m misinformed) consists of a large very poor class, a small middle class, and a very small upper/super-rich class. Ordinary people working ordinary jobs, including cops, receive very little for their trouble in the form of wages and salaries. (For an example, see this article.) It may be cheaper to live south of the border but it isn’t so cheap that the average worker can afford decent housing or the other things workers want for themselves and their children.
By what logic would the violence stop if there were no demand for illegal drugs? Drug running is merely the opportunity of the moment. If they weren’t the issue there would still be corruption, extortion and kidnapping, and there would still be violence, unless steps are taken to correct the iniquities of the Mexican economy.
I absolutely positively cannot ever read anything about Mexico without getting hungry for Mexican food.
A lot of us here, myself included, favor total legalization. But we also are very aware it could lead to an even worse fate.
There are already many rumors about US military intervention in our country. Your government is actively promoting the involvement of US intelligence officers and military advisors in México. What do you think the consequences of us unilaterally legalizing drugs would be? Everyone one in the world is aware of how the USA watches out for its “national interests”. You invaded Panamá under the phony pretext of arresting a drug dealer and killed over 3000 innocent Panamanians. So please spare me the lecture on moral superiority.
"Poverty, injustice, over breeding, overpopulation, suffering, oppression, military rule, squalor, torture, terror, massacre: these ancient evils feed and breed on one another in synergistic symbiosis. To break the cycles of pain at least two new forces are required: social equity-and birth control. Population control. Our Hispanic neighbors are groping toward this discovery. If we truly wish to help them we must stop meddling in their domestic troubles and permit them to carry out the social, political, and moral revolution which is both necessary and inevitable.
Or if we must meddle, as we have always done, let us meddle for a change in a constructive way. Stop every campesino at our southern border, give him a handgun, a good rifle, and a case of ammunition, and send him home. He will know what to do with our gifts and good wishes. The people know who their enemies are."*