Why is the Mexican police and military so passive in the Drug Wars? Hundreds of police officers and soldiers are being killed by the cartel thugs but there is rarely any situation where the police and troops actually win a shoot-out.
Cite, please, for the number of police officers and soldiers killed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_Drug_War
Incredibly enough some people are whining that we oughtn’t support the Mexican police due to a few alleged human rights violations!
Your cite shows 27,000 total killed and 120,000 cartel members captured, so they must be winning *some *shoot-outs.
The overwhelming majority of the dead are probably civilians.
Massive corruption is certainly a factor. The cartels have no fear of the police or other officials. Anyone they can’t pay off they just kill.
If that’s the case perhaps the United States needs to be given the right to operate police and troops in Mexico without molestation.
Have your ever heard of the term sovereignty?
Well, why are drugs so prevalent in the United States? What the hell’s the problem with U.S. law enforcement?
It’s often pointed out that marijuana is the top cash crop in the USA. Cocaine, heroin, and other narcotics are rampant. Crack dealing in most major urban centres is virtually unstopped. What’s going on there, anyway? Maybe Canada should be given the right to police the USA without molestation.
If there is money to be made, eliminating a drug cartel does no good. Another will quickly replace it. We are dealing with symptoms ,not causes.
And the 120,000 cartel members captured?
I think the astounding thing about Mexico is not ‘why is their government so passive’ but rather ‘Why are drugs still illegal there?’ I know if I were leading a country where drug traffic to my northern neighbor, who is not and never has been serious about stopping drugs really, was causing massive violence then I’d probably go fuck it, drugs are legal. We ain’t gonna die for those damned Americans anymore.
Drug use has decreased over the past few decades actually.
No, they’re not. Unless by “civilians” you include the gunslingers employed by the cartels, the overwhelming majority of victims of the shootouts are low-level gangsters fighting other peones or the police/military. Here in Oaxaca I haven’t heard of a single innocent bystander taken down, and there have been a lot of gunfights.
Yes, because our troops and police are totally incorruptable.
A lot of the problems early on were due to high-level infiltrations in law enforcement, army and political institutions.
It’s no coincidence that the Mexican Navy has been the principal actor in the recent busts. Also, Mexican intelligence agencies have learned not to share information or competencies with local law enforcement.
Agreed with the above that civilians are not typically targeted or caught in crossfire. Obviously if two drug gangs start a territorial shootout in a public area there may be some collateral damage, to call it that, much as you’d see in drive-by shootings that are ubiquitous in U.S. urban areas. But the harming of civilians to make a statement, like the sole event that happened a while back in Michoacan, is certainly not the norm. My guess is it was the work of a lone nut among nuts who was promptly denied fruit cup privileges for turning public opinion against the Family.
The flashpoints generally center around disputed territories and routes, so you see relatively high indices of violence in the border zone and certain ports. Inland, there are occasional skirmishes but it’s no bigger a deal than what you’d consider to be “normal” for a high-profit illegal activity anywhere in the world.
The conventional wisdom in Queretaro was that the previous state administration PAN had a protection racket deal with a certain cartel, which accounted for the relative peace especially considering the state’s strategic crossroads location to everywhere else in the country. Those who subscribed to such conventional wisdom believed that there would be outbreaks of violence when the new party took over last year. Almost a year in and it’s still quite peaceful here.
They are less corruptible which can be seen if you see how successful the police departments of America have been in curbing crime in recent years.
Yeah, I mean, boys will be boys, right?. Why should we whine about a few measly human rights violations when we’re talking about something as important as the war on drugs? And just when we’re on the cusp of winning! :rolleyes:
That’s as may be, but drug use is up:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jTk5T17CTJnewt3AsnnhDh7RFRuAD9I8O58G0
To rephrase your OP:
Why do we still have such a hard-on about drug use despite our complete inability to mitigate it significantly, or address demand?
I’m not a drug user, and probably never will be. I see them as harmful in the same way alcohol use can be. But I really can’t be bothered about people using in the same way I don’t care about people drinking, so long as they don’t puke on me. I suspect there are a lot of people who just hate the idea that somewhere, someone is enjoying themselves by smoking a joint.
I’m saying considering how bloody Mexico’s drug wars are getting, we need to support the police and military has much as possible and while human rights violations are unfortunate that doesn’t mean we should stop providing aid.
Curtis would love a police state. Suburban white people usually see the police as a force of justice. I wish they were.
Where are you getting your information? Most confrontations with the military go very poorly for the cartels so your information is either false or you have arrived at an erroneous conclusion due to incomplete information.