The "root causes" of emigration from Central America.

Desk trauma

Front row at the dumpster fire of the republic
Site Supporter
Dec 1, 2011
20,422
16,432
✟1,191,018.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Again, why not go nuclear or, even better, deploy the life eater virus?

After all if you have man, you have problem. If you have no man, no problem.
 
Upvote 0

Desk trauma

Front row at the dumpster fire of the republic
Site Supporter
Dec 1, 2011
20,422
16,432
✟1,191,018.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I'm having technical difficulties with the quote function... It keeps adding a "QUOTE" at the end by itself. spooky.
I have had a similar issue. Something to do with leaving part of the code open in the first quoted section.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Landon Caeli
Upvote 0

ThatRobGuy

Part of the IT crowd
Site Supporter
Sep 4, 2005
24,712
14,596
Here
✟1,206,884.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Do you think it's a bad idea for the US military, to bomb cartel run sites with missiles, as if they were terrorist cells?

Gangs would have little reason to exist in many countries if we rob them of their lifeblood.

It would improve the lives of thousands of asylum seekers.

We've tried those types of interventions before, they haven't worked.

Either new cartels pop up in their place.

Or we end up destroying regional economies in the process because the part that people often forget/overlook is that, even though, in the US, their organizations aren't considered "legitimate", the people in those organizations are still making money and spending money.

Meaning, if you're a local restauranteur in one of those areas, you like the fact that people in your area have some money to spend on dining. Same is true of many other types of businesses. If you wanted to start an electronics store that was like a Best Buy...do you want everyone in your region to be broke, or do you want there to be some people who've got money to spend?

It also ignores the fact that people joined those organizations in the first place, because their wasn't a lot of other opportunities that paid well. I highly doubt there's young kids in their room at night thinking "I want to join a drug cartel when I grow up!".

The lack of opportunities that existed before the cartels formed, will still be there after cartel sites are "bombed" if we went with that plan...then what?

It's not as if getting rid of the cartels will magically make any of those countries booming economies.

In fact, the evidence shows quite the contrary...in areas where they're operating, the local economies are actually better (because there's more people with more money to spend).


That was even true here in the US. During a time when there was a major recession happening in the mid 70's to early 80's, Miami had somewhat of a "recession-proof" economy.


Medellín experienced an economic boom during the height of Escobar's reign, and then plummeted after he was taken out.

Taking a reliable source of revenue out of a region actually hurts the economy for the region, even for people who aren't directly involved within "the business".

If the US really wanted to intervene in a way that would be meaningful, it wouldn't be to bomb cartel sites, it'd be to encourage our domestic companies to open facilities (IE: creating jobs) that paid well in those regions so that people had options other than "be broke" or "work for the cartel".
 
Upvote 0

wing2000

E pluribus unum
Site Supporter
Aug 18, 2012
20,912
17,302
✟1,429,110.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That's true. They can't kill their own citizens, untried, because that's a violation of international law.

...But we can do it for them.

...Central American governments have a long history of killing their own citizens when the citizens stand up for themselves...(read the history...)

That's because we're wilfully weak.

Do you endorse what President Duterte does with drug traffickers (and users) in the Philippines?
 
Upvote 0

Pommer

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic
Sep 13, 2008
16,630
10,448
Earth
✟142,930.00
Country
United States
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
I have had a similar issue. Something to do with leaving part of the code open in the first quoted section.
They rebooted the server yesterday maybe sommmmmmmmm my things went wonkyyyyyy?
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟982,622.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
...Because we need the people living there to join the US military, at the bases we build, to start moving south into the Amazon.

I see no reason we shouldn't.

We do need to protect the rain forest.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟982,622.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
We've lost 70,000 Americans to drug overdoses alone in the last 20 years. That doesn't include all the killings for drug money, so you can round it up to 150,000+ in the US alone.
Overdose Death Rates | National Institute on Drug Abuse

...Now add the rest of the world. We're looking at multiple millions.

It's 70,000 deaths in one year, not 20 years. That's 70,000 people that no longer contribute to the flow of drug money . A conservative estimate of $1.75 Billion per year not going to the cartels. That's $1,750,000,000.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟982,622.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Depends on what you mean by "end the drug problem".

If you're referring to locking people up for non-violent drug possession and usage, then that'll be a hard pass for me.
(especially in the case of marijuana, which is relatively benign and no more harmful than alcohol which remains completely legal)

The "War on Drugs" has always been an abysmal failure, and drugs aren't any less available than they were before.

Maybe the government should start with baby steps first when it comes to attempting to block problematic behavior.

For a warm-up round, perhaps they can prove to me they're capable of stopping unsolicited telemarketing calls and scam texts from coming to my phone at 2am.

Then they can move to shutting down illegal/underage inappropriate contentography on the internet.

If they demonstrate that they can effectively accomplish those two tasks, then maybe I'll believe they can concoct at cogent plan for addressing certain drug-related issues which are much more complex than the other two things I mentioned.

I said end the drug problem, which centers around hard core drug addicts, then reevaluate the situation.

Interdicting the drug supply is an abysmal failure. Interdicting users would be much more successful. Possessing illegal drugs is still a crime, if even just a misdemeanor. That's enough to detain a user for a month or so at little cost.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟982,622.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I guess our only choice is to surrender to drugs, and embrace them.

That ship sailed long ago. We have to come back from the abyss before it's too too late. We need to fight the war with patience, one battle at a time.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟982,622.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
  • Agree
Reactions: Landon Caeli
Upvote 0