The Mexican Drug Wars

Alright, so I am reading a magazine on the Gang Wars in Mexico, Acapulco to be specific, and am quite shocked at the assaults and murders Canadians and Americans have to go through.

So I figured, since there is no topic (Or Is It?) on this, why not ask the tropers what they think of these drug wars.

Incompetent/corrupt officers are a big problem.

And while I know that not all parts of Mexico are chaotic and violent, I still question the foreign tourists who go to Mexico for a vacation.

Does that country have any Scenery Porn?

edited 6th Apr '11 12:40:54 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

You're shocked at the violence in Mexico that Americans and Canadians have to go through? That seems inadvertently self-centered a statement, unless you're prepared to say that the Mexicans actually living there don't 'count.'

Bottom line, Mexico isn't going to get any better until the US changes a lot of its policies.

edited 6th Apr '11 12:42:27 PM by Karkadinn

Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.

I think it's the corrupt Senators that are convincing people to tour Mexico by saying how wonderful the place is and how the violence doesn't affect the lifestyle to the slightest. In the magazine I read, there are a lot of people who beg to differ.

edited 6th Apr '11 12:44:36 PM by Psyga315

Sure they count, but they aren't any of Americans' or Canadians' business. The Americans and Canadians who get killed down their are.

(Edited for a typo)

edited 6th Apr '11 12:52:29 PM by Wanderhome

Oh...so no Scenery Porn?

I question why tourists go there anyways then...yeah I judge countries by how many porn of sceneries they have. Ireland is hardcore◊.

---

As for the drug wars...something needs to be done about the law enforement there first.

edited 6th Apr '11 12:49:42 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

There's plenty of scenery porn in Mexico. Some nice beaches. Them fucking temples. More shit. Tourists tend to go to look at this shit.

If someone wants to accuse us of eating coconut shells, then that's their business. We know what we're doing. - Achaan Chah

@Karkadinn: We could change everything that we do in regards to Mexico next week and it won't remove the gangs or halt the violence, thus in the big picture we're irrelevant when it comes to the Mexican violence. (I'm just about at the point where I can start calling it a civil war, but military action by Districto Federale has been very minimal.)

I'm concerned as much as anyone else (because not a week goes by without something being busted on I-25 or in Colorado related to Mexican drug runners, gangs or illegal immigration) and I know that likely we'll have no other option in the long run besides parking the Army at the border to prevent spillovers but I know better than to think everything going on in Mexico is all the US' fault.

edited 6th Apr '11 12:52:46 PM by MajorTom

The temples are such a bitch to climb. Why were they made so steep?

I don't get why Mexico being a cesspool of corruption and violence isn't made more of in the US. I mean, they're on our border. Surely that's worrisome to more than border states.

i. hear. a. sound.

I don't remember climbing them or going to see them at all sadly. Apparently I cried about going up the steps because I was scared and then cried because my mom wouldn't let me go on the tour inside.

If someone wants to accuse us of eating coconut shells, then that's their business. We know what we're doing. - Achaan Chah

Tom, I would LOVE to see you try to explain how American drug policies have nothing to do with Mexican violence and crime that is in large part spurred on by criminals who make their daily bread by way of selling drugs to Americans. Your solution has all the subtlety of Palin's 'lol just build a wall' quip, though. Sure, Mexicans are just inherently violent and it has nothing to do with us civilized people.

edited 6th Apr '11 1:00:50 PM by Karkadinn

Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.

He did not say they have nothing to do with it. He said that Mexico has a responsibility, too. Those are not the same thing.

EDIT: Right, because the only possible reason you could want to control the border is if you're a racist, right? I mean, it's not as if Mexico is, as noted, a cesspool of corruption and crime.

Anyway, wasn't your whole point that the root of the problem was drug exports to America? Does it not follow that one possible way of dealing with the problem is preventing the movement of drugs across the border?

edited 6th Apr '11 1:03:33 PM by Wanderhome

We could start by fixing the border problem, once we have that dealt with, then we can start going into Mexico; don't hold your breath though.

"He did not say they have nothing to do with it. He said that Mexico has a responsibility, too. Those are not the same thing."

'We both need to share the responsibility instead of it being entirely the fault of the US' is NOT the statement I am getting from:

"@Karkadinn: We could change everything that we do in regards to Mexico next week and it won't remove the gangs or halt the violence,"

If you would like to explain how you got the above from the below, then I'm willing to hear it.

"EDIT: Right, because the only possible reason you could want to control the border is if you're a racist, right? I mean, it's not as if Mexico is, as noted, a cesspool of corruption and crime."

And, AGAIN, I'm sure that has NOTHING to do with the fact that we're FUNDING their criminals.

There is a difference between 'controlling the border' and exercising a military iron fist over it. And in any case, controlling the BORDER while the COUNTRY is still a hellhole is ridiculous. What you want to do is make Mexico a better place to live, and then you won't have to deal with all those troublesome illegal immigrants. Fix the PROBLEM, not the SYMPTOM.

And I wouldn't call you and Tom racist so much as in love with the illusion of American Superiority, regardless of the costs to the rest of the world in maintaining that illusion. That goes hand in hand with a certain amount of xenophobia, but it's not based on race so much as culture.

Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.

The rampant corruption must be dealt with, but I don't think we can force them to fix their own problems. We could if we annexed them, but that would create a whole host of other problems. Slapping troops (or a giant wall) on our southern border doesn't fix their problem - but it still is their problem... right?

So, how does one go about fixing their corruption problem?

Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.

And the tequila.

Also, since I'm the thread and a wall was mentioned: Doooooooooooom Fortresses.

edited 6th Apr '11 1:33:51 PM by Deboss

Fight smart, not fair.

Crime has to be fixed before government corruption is fixed, for obvious reasons. Once you have a safe operating environment for the government, you can actually hold it accountable for things like bribery, etc now that lives are no longer on the line. The temptation to be corrupt will also be greatly reduced if there are legal and profitable means to make money - say, through allowing Mexican corn to actually compete with American corn by spreading out America's corn subsidies to other crops.

Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.

"If you would like to explain how you got the above from the below, then I'm willing to hear it."

Even if we seal the border and crack down on drugs in the United States, there will still be some drugs getting through, and thus there will still be violence. If anything, it might increase in the short term as the reduction of export volume leads to more intense competition among drug traffickers.

"There is a difference between 'controlling the border' and exercising a military iron fist over it. And in any case, controlling the BORDER while the COUNTRY is still a hellhole is ridiculous. What you want to do is make Mexico a better place to live, and then you won't have to deal with all those troublesome illegal immigrants. Fix the PROBLEM, not the SYMPTOM. "

And why should we violate the sovereignty of another nation just to babysit them? You describe the idea of using the military to seal the border as "iron fisted" (I agree that it would be a bad idea, but for different reasons, by the way), but at the same time you seem to be talking about marching down into Mexico to take over law enforcement. How can you reconcile that?

"And I wouldn't call you and Tom racist so much as in love with the illusion of American Superiority, regardless of the costs to the rest of the world in maintaining that illusion. That goes hand in hand with a certain amount of xenophobia, but it's not based on race so much as culture. "

Again, you are the one talking about the paternalistic policing of other countries. Besides, "superiority" is neither here nor there. No country is in a vacuum; they are all either influencing others or being influenced. I, for one, would prefer that America would be the one doing the influencing, at least as far as preserving its own interests without unnecessary violation of foreign nations' sovereignty.

That's just it - all we can really do is encourage them along, lest we violate their state sovereignty.

(and sovereign is such a goofy word to spell right.)

Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.

"Even if we seal the border and crack down on drugs in the United States,"

Statements like these make me think you're not paying attention to anything I've said before, anything I'm saying now, or anything that's actually going on in Mexico. For God's sakes, when I'm suggesting policy changes re: drugs in the US, I'm not suggesting getting TOUGHER on drugs! I'm telling you that the 'War on Drugs' is a failure, and one of the casualties of that war has been Mexico!

All your other responses are similarly gross misinterpretations of what I've been trying to say, and arguably that may be somewhat my fault for assuming you'd seen enough of the other threads in the forum to see where I'm coming from. At any rate, take a moment to let that premise sink in.

Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.

You never said that your premise was that the War on Drugs was a failure in this thread, and I no more study each individual poster's complete philosophy throughout the forum than I expect them to study mine.

I do agree with that premise, though. The use of illegal drugs has not yet been eliminated in the United States. That's the point of cracking down harder on drugs and securing borders and ports against drug trafficking. If Mexico is a "casualty of the War on Drugs", it is only because they failed to stop the drug trade in Mexico as we have as yet failed to stop it in the United States.

^

So we should just give up and legalize everything?

No, unless we tax the ever-living piss out of them.

Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.

^ As in 500-5000% rates.

If it isn't drugs, it'd be something else. Wars are never caused by just the one issue.

Final Fantasy, Foreign Policy, and Bollywood. Helluva combo, that...