From a piece in the WSJ about a commission of former Latin American Heads of State stating the drug war has failed and that massive changes are necessary, the following quote:
U.S. law-enforcement officials — as well as some of their counterparts in Mexico — say the explosion in violence indicates progress in the war on drugs as organizations under pressure are clashing.
“If the drug effort were failing there would be no violence,” a senior U.S. official said Wednesday. There is violence “because these guys are flailing. We’re taking these guys out. The worst thing you could do is stop now.”
Hrmm. Escalating violence is proof we are winning. Why does that sound so familiar?
kommrade reproductive vigor
Oh yes. Victory! Cue up the Black Knight bit from Monty Python’s Search for the Holy Grail.
These goons have police in Mexico on the run, they’re skipping across our border like it isn’t there and bringing some heavy fire power along but that’s a good thing. Such a comfort to the families of those murdered.
Walker
Our success in the drug war must also be why Phoenix is second only to Mexico City in kidnappings.
El Cid
Look, these are the same ‘policy experts’ who feel like it’s 100% a vote of confidence for the massive U.S. military aid to Colombia that about 1/3 of its government and military and intelligence officials have been arrested or indicted or under court investigation for direct collaboration with the right wing narco-paramilitary death squads who run the vast majority of Colombia’s drug trafficking, because they answer all questions with barking about the FARC rebels.
Now you have one nation’s narco-paramilitaries getting ready to link up with the massive, military- and police-penetrating cartels of Mexico.
The rest of the hemisphere more free from U.S. influence is pursuing policies designed to actually work, not just keep bombing and spraying peasants.
So, the countries which are at the root of the problem are those most connected to U.S. policy, and those nations most isolated from U.S. influence are blamed the most for being the problem.
OK.
Shygetz
Drugs are in their last throes.
SalParadise
Bring ’em on!!
wilfred
And they know a thing or two about failure. Does this give us the right to use disproportionate force against, say, Mexico, since so many Americans die from these drug shipments?
I think we should teach them not to fuck with the United States.
SGEW
Suck. On. This.
low-tech cyclist
If only Condi were still around to tell us we were witnessing the birth pangs of a new Central America!
ComradeDread
What else are they going to say?
"We’re an abysmal failure. You should repeal the laws we’re hired to enforce, lay us off, and use our budget to fund productive citizens who might actually succeed at their job: like building freeways, or funding health care, or any number of other jobs that wouldn’t involve bending the Constitution and taxpayer over a table and giving it to them good and hard?"
Libby
It’s just the birth pangs of the new world order, where no one will use drugs and everyone will believe in Teh Rapture.
The Moar You Know
This is such a load of shit it is hard to believe that somebody said it with a straight face. I live 38 miles from the border. The last time I was in Mexico was about three months ago – I used to go down there on a regular basis.
The reason there is so much violence has nothing to do with cops, or interdiction, or the DEA. Far from it. Cops don’t weigh into this at all save as minor impediments. The gangs have taken to the police frequencies to tell the cops that won’t play ball with them (a very small minority) which one of them is going to be the next to die. And then they kill that officer, frequently his family as well, and then get on the radios again to taunt the police over what they’ve just done.
No, the reason there is so much violence is because there is so much business the previously established guys can’t handle it all, and the new guys are fighting for market share.
Colonel Danite
I agree that the "War on Drugs" is a waste of resources. However, given that the drug cartels are killing judges, police officers and journalists in Mexico, what would you have the Mexican government do? The previous PRI governments and local officials of all parties allowed the drug cartels to operate freely in exchange for cash. President Fox and President Calderon have tried to break up those corrupt relationships and that has definitely escalated the violence. If street gangs had control of local and state governments, the police and media here in the U.S., I think most citizens would be clamoring for the Federal government to intervene.
Reverend Dennis
Lest we forget, Richard Nixon was the one who coined the term "War on drugs" back in 1971. His words were in reaction to the report by the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse (the "Shafer Commission") report which concluded that marijuana use and possession should be decriminalized.
Here are two of Nixon’s remarks on pot (From the Nixon Tapes):
Our policy on marijuana was formed by Nixon. And no one in government has seriously questioned it since 1971.
aimai
Years ago I remember reading an article on the early war on drugs–probably in the eighties–and the journalist reported, utterly uncritically, one of those bits of counterintuitive…uh…lies like "you get more bang for your buck…." doing something–napalming the coca fields probably–than doing X. I remember thinking back then "oh, this isn’t good. The journalist has just reported in one paragraph the utter failure of this approach, how the drugs and the drug lords simply work around what we are doing and raise their prices to boot. And yet in the next paragraph they approvingly quote the local US military authorities contradicting the known facts and assuring us that everything is going very well. And that was *&^%$ years ago.
aimai
Argive
"Yeah, we’re taking out the guys on top, and then their lieutenants and other new aspiring drug lords are fighting it out to see who gets to take over the empire. Then we’ll take out those guys, and the cycle will repeat. You know, normal, healthy progress."
SGEW
@Reverend Dennis:
You know, I spent so much time blaming everything on Bush (or, perversely, Reagan) that I sometimes forget that Nixon was totally batshit insane and almost destroyed the country.
This nation has had some very, very weird heads of state.
Reverend Dennis
@SGEW:
Heh. I was born in the Forties so the Nixon years are still vivid in my memory. Despite that, I still regard G.W. Bush as the Worst President Ever. Nixon turned a law enforcement matter into a war, much as Bush did with terrorism, and we just can’t lose a war – can we? So any rational re-thinking of our strategy, any modification of our goals or tactics is easily characterized as "surrender." Which is why America has always been at war with drugs, terrorism and Eastasia.
Stooleo
Legalize pot and tax the shit out of it. Use revenues for stimulus package.
magisterludi
What Stooleo said.
magisterludi
What Stooleo said.
Conservatively Liberal
If the amount of violence is indicative of the effectiveness of the War on Drugs(TM) and that more violence means success, does less violence mean failure? Do these people even think about what they are going to say before they say it? Are they sampling drugs before press conferences? If so, I am pissed that they took some wicked shit like that off the streets and are bogarting it for themselves.
I remember St. Ronnie of RayGun talking about the effectiveness of the War on Drugs(TM) and how they were winning the fight. Same with Poppy Bush, we were kicking ass! Then Clinton came along and we were still winning the War on Drugs(TM). Chimpy got loose in the White House and we assured us that the War on Drugs(TM) was tough but that we were winning.
Now we have Obama and according to this, we are still winning the War on Drugs(TM)! I guess we are just lucky in that we are naturals when it comes to winning. BTW, can anyone tell me what it would be like if we were losing? Oh, right. There would be less violence.
Is it ok to want to lose this War on Drugs(TM)? I think I prefer drugs and no violence to no drugs and endless violence. That might be because I am not a Rushublican, eh?
Keith
Uhh, doesn’t that mean that it would be desirable for the drug effort to fail? I mean, at the end of the day, isn’t the best thing to stop the violence?
Calouste
@Conservatively Liberal:
Fixt. It’s not like drugs are going to go away no matter how much law enforcement you throw at it. Ok, maybe a 1984ish police state woudl work.
Comrade Dread
You don’t understand the mindset of these people.
It’s okay for thousands, perhaps millions to die if it means one dirty f***ing hippie can’t get his reefer.
Purity of essence, man. Purity of essence.
TenguPhule
@Those in favor of Legalization
It’s too late. The Cartels are established, legalizing would only have them ensuring that only their drugs are sold, all competition would be killed off (except for perhaps Weed). Prices would still be high, crime would still live off of it, supply would only be artificially kept low by the cartels instead of the police.
Comrade Dread
Hence why Al Capone continued to rule Chicago’s liquor market after the end of Prohibition brutally slaughtering the Coors family and relegating them to the cold isolated mountains of Colorado.
SnarkyShark
Comrade Dread..
Bravo sir. You destroyed that false assertion in one eloquent sentence.
Well done
SnarkyShark
Of course one has to point out that big Al himself wouldn’t have been available due to a little tax problem.
But his underlings would still have been in play, so the point remains.
Stooleo
I’m only in favor of legalizing marijuana. The government could raise money revenues by issuing growers licenses (as well as a host of other taxes). Because pot is so easy to grow it would make it very difficult IMHO, for one cartel to control the supply. This of course is in stark contrast to cocaine or heroin which is difficult to grow and needs to be heavily processed.
esblofeld
It’s like climbing a mountain that you can’t see the top of, and claiming that you’re almost to the summit simply because you’re getting tired.
I understand their point, but as you said, we’ve seen these "death throes" before.
WyldPirate
We have always been at war with Mother Ganja…just like we will always be at war with Eastasia.
Well, not really. Just since the 20’s-30’s since folks figured they could use ant-Ganj propaganda to hate on dark-skinned folks and William Randolph Hearst and Dupont figured out that hemp products could put a dent in the profits from their timber holdings and burgeoning synthetic chemicals (primarily oil-based of course) industries.
Check out Henry Ford’s car made with plastic derived from cannabis…
Pete Guither
Michael Goldfarb, in the Weekly Standard, defends the official’s statement, quoted in the Wall Street Journal.
But he is, of course, completely wrong.