This is well reasoned, thoughtful, and well argued.
But it misses the point of the proposed policy. The conservative desire to use military force on cartels is not rooted in a desire for outcome, but a desire for effort. Addressing most of the underlying issues behind the drug trade would be expensive, slow, hard to understand, and involve doing things that are unpopular (there isn’t really a long term solution that doesn’t involve tamping down on demand).
But killing bad people is easy to understand and makes the electorate feel good.
Right now the cartels are driven by concrete, secular stuff that can be addressed. I fear an American assault could lead to formation of some transcendent ideology that once evolved is damn near impossible to shake off like we see with Islamism. There's a lot of potential parallels here with Afghanistan/Pakistan. The cartels currently utilize terror tactics so there's no aversion to the dirty work if an ideology can be built around it.
Well thought article. Surprised that the other side of the equation is not mentioned, and I think, would be more effective.
1) Wouldn't it be better to curtail consumption on the US side? Reducing demand is way more effective than decapitating cartels.
2) What about disrupting the distribution network within the US, where the drugs end up on street corners, night clubs, and high schols?
3) Why not target the flow of weapons and cash south? When do you hear shipments of cash and/or weapons being confiscated on the US side? Just like drugs flow north, weapons and cash flow south.
If we addressed the drug problem effectively police departments would lose A LOT of funding, not to mention the ripple effect of all the businesses/consultancies that feed out of the trough, too
Same way the US would not want to see Putin, Xi, or Khameini go away, what would we need to MIC for anymore?
Decapitation necessary. Not to stop drugs, but the cartel organizations themselves (which aren’t primarily funded by drug trade anymore). Let someone else pick up blow demand, this time very far away from the border. Break up Mexican organized crime’s near-monopsony on coca. They should also pick successor drug lords personally…like in Operation Paper. New guys chosen to dominate drugs market share should be vetted to ensure they are temperamentally averse to cutting wares with wildnil and other such. This is very important.
They literally did sicario on Pablo Escobar, Noriaga, El Chapo and hundreds of others.. do you get the feeling we are winning anon?
This is well reasoned, thoughtful, and well argued.
But it misses the point of the proposed policy. The conservative desire to use military force on cartels is not rooted in a desire for outcome, but a desire for effort. Addressing most of the underlying issues behind the drug trade would be expensive, slow, hard to understand, and involve doing things that are unpopular (there isn’t really a long term solution that doesn’t involve tamping down on demand).
But killing bad people is easy to understand and makes the electorate feel good.
Very interesting article, well done.
'Do sicario'. Who knew violence was the answer 🤷🏼♂️.
Right now the cartels are driven by concrete, secular stuff that can be addressed. I fear an American assault could lead to formation of some transcendent ideology that once evolved is damn near impossible to shake off like we see with Islamism. There's a lot of potential parallels here with Afghanistan/Pakistan. The cartels currently utilize terror tactics so there's no aversion to the dirty work if an ideology can be built around it.
my fav taylor sheridan screenplay is lioness. badass chicks challenging eryone to measure dicks.
Thanks for the interesting and well-thought out article. Sometimes a solution that looks simple actually isn't.
Well thought article. Surprised that the other side of the equation is not mentioned, and I think, would be more effective.
1) Wouldn't it be better to curtail consumption on the US side? Reducing demand is way more effective than decapitating cartels.
2) What about disrupting the distribution network within the US, where the drugs end up on street corners, night clubs, and high schols?
3) Why not target the flow of weapons and cash south? When do you hear shipments of cash and/or weapons being confiscated on the US side? Just like drugs flow north, weapons and cash flow south.
If we addressed the drug problem effectively police departments would lose A LOT of funding, not to mention the ripple effect of all the businesses/consultancies that feed out of the trough, too
Same way the US would not want to see Putin, Xi, or Khameini go away, what would we need to MIC for anymore?
No one addresses this which is telling
Decapitation necessary. Not to stop drugs, but the cartel organizations themselves (which aren’t primarily funded by drug trade anymore). Let someone else pick up blow demand, this time very far away from the border. Break up Mexican organized crime’s near-monopsony on coca. They should also pick successor drug lords personally…like in Operation Paper. New guys chosen to dominate drugs market share should be vetted to ensure they are temperamentally averse to cutting wares with wildnil and other such. This is very important.