U.S. : Afghan poppy production doubles

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Nov 28, 2003.

  1. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #1
    link

    i find it interesting that the taliban were WAY more effective at limiting opium output than the US is (not that that's the US' main goal in afghanistan, but there supposedly _is_ that War on Drugs).

    should i assume that, in order to "win" a war on drugs, the US must resort to a taliban style of government?

    or does a certain level of drug use go hand in hand w/ an open society?
     
  2. toontra macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Location:
    London UK
    #2
    Re: U.S. : Afghan poppy production doubles

    I doubt whether the US care too much about drug use in Afghanistan, open society or not.

    What should worry them very deeply though is the impact this huge amount of exported heroin will have on the youngsters of the west, specifically the US & UK.

    This could have been predicted. It's issues like this that should be weighed before invading countries, especially if there is any doubt as to whether you are prepared to stay "for the long term" to ensure destabilization caused by war is brought under control.
     
  3. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #3
    Re: Re: U.S. : Afghan poppy production doubles

    i'm afraid i was being vague in my post.

    what i meant was -- there's supposedly this War on Drugs going on. part of that effort includes reducing the supply in foreign countries, but in afghanistan there's been a stunning increase in production.

    the taleban, for all their faults, was able to minimize production. i'm wondering if, in order to secure that much control of drug use in the US, the US would have to resort to taleban-like levels of control.

    if so, does that then imply that, in order to enjoy the current freedoms americans currently enjoy, does that necessarily imply a certain amount of drug use?

    the 'open society' in my first post still referred to the US, not afghanistan.
     
  4. yamabushi macrumors 65816

    yamabushi

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    #4
    Opiates have been a major source of revenue in Afganistan for a long time. The Taliban was in the odd position of both benefiting from the exports and attempting to reduce cultivation and sales.
     
  5. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #5
    Opium traffiking also funds terrorism and the drug smugglers use the same routes that the weapons smugglers use, so allowing it to flourish is detrimental to those efforts. Problem is, how do we convince opium farmers to switch to less profitable crops?
     
  6. jonapete2001, Nov 29, 2003
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2012
  7. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #7
    the only way, imo, to make headway is to remove / reduce the reasons people use. i've noticed that drug use (and crime) are inversely proportional to the strength of the economy.

    iow, concentrate on improving people's standard of living.

    and i'd make the same argument for the unwinnable "War on Terrorism"
     
  8. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #8
    I'd go a step further and say that much of the drug use in this country is due to the phenomenal pressure to succeed that our society places on us. In addition to poorly thought out social programs that are in place to solve the problem instead of prevent it. We all know that Headstart is one of the most successful programs ever to come out of DC, yet gw has decided to "unleash" it and force those 3 and 4 year olds to become accountable for their places. Next thing you know the "anti-government" republican party is going to require means tests before anyone can become pregnant. If you can't support your child then you can't have one with no exceptions and accidents don't count.

    Drug use is a product of a fractured society, not the other way around.
     
  9. jonapete2001, Nov 29, 2003
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2012
  10. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #10
    That's going a bit far. There are drugs that affect people in such a way that they become a serious danger to society.
     
  11. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #11
    And yet you won't legalize marriage between two men. Let people do what they want only goes so far huh?
     
  12. K4NN4B15 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2003
    #12
    Did you watch the news in 2002? supply and demand....

    lol
     
  13. SPG macrumors 65816

    SPG

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Location:
    In the shadow of the Space Needle.
    #13
    Just about everybody thinks they know why people use drugs. I don't. I have some ideas but since I've never been an addict I don't really know. Treating anyone who tries any kind of drug (except alcohol) as an automatic criminal definitely isn't the best method, look at the overcrowded prisons, look at the broken families. We should start by treating addiction as a health issue rather than a legal problem. I do not advocate legalizing all drug use, just decriminalizing some of it. Treat the addicts then start on reducing the reasons these same people become addicts. More opportunity for the less priveledged would be a start.
     
  14. jonapete2001, Nov 30, 2003
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2012
  15. SPG macrumors 65816

    SPG

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Location:
    In the shadow of the Space Needle.
    #15
    You did say you'd like to let people do what they want. What does that include? What does that exclude? If you think it's okay for people to do whatever drugs they want regardless of the consequences to society, it's hard to not ask why other things that are far less damaging should be excluded.
     
  16. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #16
    Deflection.
     
  17. jonapete2001, Nov 30, 2003
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2012
  18. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #18
    you should come live in a big city for a while.
     
  19. jonapete2001, Dec 1, 2003
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2012
  20. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #20
    to be honest, chicago is starting to feel pretty small to me.

    i disagree w/ your assessment. to use your legal example, alcohol has destroyed countless lives, both directly and indirectly. if that doesn't fulfill your definition of a 'public problem,' maybe we should discuss what you mean by that term.
     
  21. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #21
    Oh I'm sorry Mr. High and Mighty. Have you been promoted to moderator lately?

    And when I see a logical inconsistency in your arguement I'm going to point it out, on topic or not.

    Looks like I'm not the only person who has wandered off-topic before. But did I order you around and tell you to post that drivel in your own thread? No. Please afford me the same respect.
     
  22. jonapete2001, Dec 1, 2003
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2012
  23. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #23
    Well at least you are going out in style.
     
  24. Judo macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #24
    You crack me up jonapete2001.
    How old are you?

    Hmmmm you seem a little angry. I think someone needs a hug.
     
  25. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #25
    Ummm.... I don't think we'll be hearing from him anytime soon. Unless he goes the Ovi/San Felipe/G5Man route of course.
     

Share This Page