Taking Down "El Chapo"

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by eric/, Aug 14, 2012.

  1. eric/ Guest

    eric/

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Location:
    Ohio, United States
    #1
    I think this is a very interesting article which has quite a few underlying issues, including foreign sovereignty.

    If the Mexican government is unable to stop the cartels, does the US have the right to intervene since it's so close to US soil?

    Would legalizing drugs solve the problem?

    Thoughts?
     
  2. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #2
    The Mexican government won't stop them, they're part of the economy.
     
  3. Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #3

    Given the US record on foreign interventions, I would advise keep the **** out.:D
     
  4. benthewraith macrumors 68040

    benthewraith

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    #4
    I think this should be a last resort option when all other diplomatic channels have been exhausted. The cartels are involved in much more than the drug trade. From human trafficking, kidnapping, blackmail and extortion. Legalizing drugs won't change that behavior.
     
  5. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #5
    Yeah- the last thing we need is more world police duty. Legalize drugs and make them here instead. Problem solved.
     
  6. Peace macrumors Core

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #6
    The SEALS got Bin Laden. We heard about it after the fact. If the SEALS go after someone else I can guarantee you we won't know about it until after the fact. If ever.

    I call B.S. on this story.
     
  7. juanm macrumors 65816

    juanm

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Location:
    Fury 161
    #7
    Kill him, and after a week-long bloody power struggle, you've got another one in its seat (ore even worse, the Zetas will take the opportunity to gain even more power). It's pointless to kill individuals.
     
  8. eric/ thread starter Guest

    eric/

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Location:
    Ohio, United States
    #8
    I think you are misunderstanding. He's wanted dead already.
     
  9. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #9
    US intervention in Mexico would be a catastrophically stupid idea. Aiding the Mexican government to the extent it asks for intervention might be OK, but I do not see how knocking off individuals will change the economics: People pay for drugs because they enjoy the cheap thrill and that ain't going to change. People kill for money and that ain't going to change either.
     
  10. Peace macrumors Core

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #10
    I think you are misunderstanding. The ONLY reason we heard about the SEALS getting Bin Laden was because it was very important to national security. Otherwise we would have never known about it.

    "If" the SEALS have a job to take out a drug lord the info wouldn't be out there. We would never know for sure the SEALS did it.

    Loose Lips Sink Ships.
     
  11. eric/ thread starter Guest

    eric/

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Location:
    Ohio, United States
    #11
    I think you are misunderstanding. We hear about this because it's a political issue, much like Bin Laden, among plenty of others on the most wanted list, or high-profile AQ targets. We just don't hear about when the operation is going to happen, or what the details are.

    Loose lips sink ships only applies when nobody knows that you want them dead.

    Everybody knows that the SOCOM and the CIA operate in these countries. We just don't know the details, which are the only thing that's important. Saying that the SEALs are being considered to kill this guy isn't really big secret squirrel news.
     
  12. Peace macrumors Core

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #12
    I'm not in the mood to argue with you.

    Continue believing what you want.

    :)
     
  13. eric/ thread starter Guest

    eric/

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Location:
    Ohio, United States
    #13
    Then don't post I suppose? :confused:
     
  14. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #14
    I believe the Monroe Doctrine has *some* insight into this one. I'm not advocating going after or doing nothing, but just providing historical background, as it may apply in this situation. Only issue here is that it would be saving Mexico from itself, not colonization from Europe.

    BL.
     
  15. NickZac macrumors 68000

    NickZac

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    #15
    Agreed. Usually I say a country should not be subject to our intervention, but this is a little more complicated because their (in)actions affect us. Mexican drug cartels result in dead US Citizens. Although "El Chapo" is nowhere near as much of a threat as the Zetas...their capabilities are horrifying.

    ----------

    Yes, but the Sinaloa Cartel is known for slaying citizens not related to the drug economy, and working with the Mara Salvatrucha in the US. Their violence is by no means confined. You could be walking down a street or on a tourism bus, these people show up, chop your genitals off, feed them to dogs, and watch you bleed to death. These are some sick people who will kill anyone for no reason at all.
     
  16. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
  17. CHAOS STEP macrumors 6502

    CHAOS STEP

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2005
    Location:
    playing tiddlywinks with Kim Jong-un
    #17
    Apparently the raid is called off because seal team 6 were told that there was a high wall around the compound.

    You see their tricked out helicopter, crashes into things.

    Also there apparently are 4 or 5 maids that might be armed with mops, which would make them considerably more formidable than the resistance they had from Bin Ladens chill out vacation house.
     
  18. Fazzy macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2011
    Location:
    check the tracking device
    #18
    Was it just me who misread the first line as El Chapo who aided Osama Bin Laden?
     
  19. chown33 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    #19
    Apocalypse Now?
     
  20. jav6454 macrumors P6

    jav6454

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #20
    Doing that would only move the problem else where. Once an addict, always an addict. Those who can't beat it will create other type of crime such as theft in order to pay for the habit.
     
  21. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #21
    Clear and present danger
     
  22. HarryPot macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2009
    #22
    Legalising drugs is the only real solution. The amount of money currently generated by drugs is huge, and with that kind of money you can buy almost anything you want.

    "El Chapo" could have been killed/arrested in the past, it's just that with the money he has, and the power it gives him, he is almost untouchable. And if you ask me, killing him won't solve anything. Someone else will come along, and the worst is, the one that takes his place will probably be even stupider than him.

    The war on drugs is a fiasco. The problem can't be solved in the countries that produce the drugs, it needs to be solved from the US by legalising drugs. In the end, if the US doesn't legalise drugs, I think South American countries will just go back to the same functioning of before, but with maybe more control:

    - Select two/three cartels to run the drug business, help them kill the opposing cartels, and give them free pass thru your country to take the drugs onto the US.


    On the contrary, these cartels are destroying the mexican economy.

    But the money comes from the drugs. They cannot maintain their current "life-style" from just kidnapping.
     
  23. ugahairydawgs macrumors 68020

    ugahairydawgs

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    #23
    This....a thousand times over.

    ----------

    And tax the hades out of it.
     
  24. LethalWolfe macrumors G3

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #24
    It's not about the addict in this case, it's about the power and wealth that can be built up by creating and selling a sought after black market product and the violence that is part and parcel with that. If you legalize it and sell it like alcohol, for example, you destroy the black market for it and that drug turf violence goes away. It's like the rise of organized crime & violence due to bootlegging booze during Prohibition. When booze was made legal again there was no profit (therefore no point) for organized crime to keep manufacturing and selling it under the table.
     
  25. jav6454 macrumors P6

    jav6454

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #25
    True, but the cost itself on the people is worth that? Forget about the government telling you what to drug or not. Think of those who have the habit formed and can't kick it. How many people sell their kid's food money just to get high? You think that'll go away? It'll be worse because now, there is no incentive to not buy. Worse case, with legalized drugs you get desperate people trying to get money somehow to finance their now legal habit.
     

Share This Page