Nobody has to "do" anything. Much like many of the worst parts of the world, America really should institute a hands off policy and allow them to naturally implode; at which point something useful can be built where the fire burned itself out.
While I would agree with a hands off policy for most places and events in the world I would disagree here. We have a definite interest in keeping our neighbors stable. If Mexico were to implode what would be left? Who would build something there? Even if the government were to implode the cartels will still be there.
The drug cartels have a direct impact upon the US, and they're there because of our demand.
The situation Mexico IS our fault, it IS our responsibility. And the best part is that we can stop it all and not even need to fire a single bullet or send a single person into Mexico.
Well so long as the Woman's Leagues will let us drink alcohol ...
Sorry I seem to have slipped into the 1920's, they're so similar!!
So long as Conservative Groups will let those who want to smoke do as they will and keep out of their brother's affairs we can help keep our neighbors safe as well. Simple as that.
Deploy the FBI on our side and the CIA into Mexico to gather intel. Use those two organizations to identify all the Arms/drug smuggling routes, then deploy the Navy/Coast Guard to interdict smugglers at sea, and use the FBI to grab them when they Straw purchase/move arms in the US. I don't think that there is really anything we can do with the Mexican government, the corruption is so deep. I think at this point the elected and appointed people are the only ones that aren't corrupt but the rank and file is inundated with people working for the cartels,m including the military and the police.
My opinions on this are of course bias and being in the middle of this and seeing the stuff that I have seen is hard to look back and form a reasonable well thought opinion. But I do want to share some stuff.
Right now I live right at the border with the US, a few months ago close to where I live the Military found what was basically a slaughterhouse with over 30 bodies. They found it because one poor guy faked his death and then escaped till he found a Military post. Turns out the survivor was from El Salvador, and most, if not all of the bodies found were immigrants from El Salvador and other parts of Central America. So these immigrants, save whatever money they can, they abandon their families and cross Mexico in hopes to reach the US. If they survive enough to reach the border they have to find someone to illegally take them across, this someone of course are the cartels. The cartels are payed to send this guys to the US, but since they are at war they sure could use some more money, so they kidnap and have this immigrants held up in tiny houses, with no furniture, little food and little water until they can come up with more money. Don't have money? Well the cartels sure can use some man power, it is war, and the Military are sure killing a lot of this low level tugs. So not only did they made extra cash, now they have more people with guns running around the city. And if you can't pay and you don't want to work with the cartels you simply get killed.
I think it was mentioned before but if the US wants to do something, before thinking about troops and invasion think about migration, and foreign aid. Think about how this is not a problem for one country but a problem that eventually affects the whole region. America as a continent.
How come citizens from these countries don't try to reform their governments rather than flee to the U.S.?
Because the existing power structures are too entrenched to take out without coordinated and costly violence, and the lack of general security from violence and coercion prevents peaceful transition.
They can't vote to fix the problem because the system's so corrupt. They can't shoot to end the problem because the cartels have their own armies.
Because the existing power structures are too entrenched to take out without coordinated and costly violence, and the lack of general security from violence and coercion prevents peaceful transition.
They can't vote to fix the problem because the system's so corrupt. They can't shoot to end the problem because the cartels have their own armies.
How is that any different than any other militaristic government? I'm not trying to trivialize the situation, but there have been plenty of revolutions which have overthrown powerful armies.
Think about how this is not a problem for one country but a problem that eventually affects the whole region. America as a continent.
How come citizens from these countries don't try to reform their governments rather than flee to the U.S.?
They possibly think it's the easiest solution to the Fight-or-Flight response.
I've been listening to several NPR podcasts about the war going on there, and most of the Mexican media are no longer reporting the violence going on because they are also being targets by the drug cartels. It seems that people are in fear of doing any sort of I guess people would rather flee to somewhere that seems better than opposing the cartels and risking their lives.
They can't vote to fix the problem because the system's so corrupt. They can't shoot to end the problem because the cartels have their own armies.
Not only is it corrupt, but people who currently running for office that oppose the cartels have been murdered.
How is that any different than any other militaristic government? I'm not trying to trivialize the situation, but there have been plenty of revolutions which have overthrown powerful armies.
Think about it this way, you are in a crappy backwater country and right next to you is a "land of opportunity". Which outcome is probably better for you and your 3 children? A. Die in a costly rebellion that may not work. B. Escape to the better country just across the border.
Think about it this way, you are in a crappy backwater country and right next to you is a "land of opportunity". Which outcome is probably better for you and your 3 children? A. Die in a costly rebellion that may not work. B. Escape to the better country just across the border.
This doesn't solve the problem though, and in all honesty, probably exacerbates it to a greater extent. So this pattern continues for what, 10-20, 50 years? Then what, we have autonomous regions which are basically run by cartels? Does the U.S. then invade and annex the land? Why should we be burdened by the corruption allowed by our neighbors? The best thing for the entire region is for the U.S. to reform immigration and legalize some drug production. Portugal has had some positive results from legalizing drugs which could fuel the argument in favor of such action.
Because the existing power structures are too entrenched to take out without coordinated and costly violence, and the lack of general security from violence and coercion prevents peaceful transition.
They can't vote to fix the problem because the system's so corrupt. They can't shoot to end the problem because the cartels have their own armies.
How is that any different than any other militaristic government? I'm not trying to trivialize the situation, but there have been plenty of revolutions which have overthrown powerful armies.
Most powerful armies in those situations haven't sent dissenters Coleman coolers stuffed with their own dismembered wives for the past fifteen years.
The drug war in Mexico is an example of the absolute perfect weaponization of fear.
The problem is that Mexican drugs aren't good. They're bought and sold by the mob, gangs, and poor people. Connoisseurs and the rich get their drugs from other places.
Case study: Pot. In California and places where pot is relatively decriminalized (and the climate is good), pot is high quality, locally produced, and plentiful. The only reason someone from California would every buy Mexican stuff is if either they didn't care at all about quality ("Sexy Mexi" is still cheaper than local stuff) or bought it from the gangs. On the east coast, most of the commercially available pot is shipped from Mexico, since the gangs (and other nefarious criminal organizations) have the infrastructure to transport it. The rich in NYC, however, buy high quality stuff either sent to them from the west coast or produced locally (hydroponically, since the climate is ass).
tl;dr right now, the poor fuel the Mexican drug trade. If we produce locally, things wouldn't suck as much.
Swiss bankers should just freeze every account tied to a Mexican drug lord. Fuck neutrality.
Here's another idea seemingly just as obvious that will also never happen.
New law: We don't give a fuck what country your money travels through. If you are a US entity, we tax ALL your dollars. Dutch Sandwich, Caribbean, doesn't matter. All the moneys are taxed fully. The only way to avoid it is straight up laundering, which is already a nono.
New law: We don't give a fuck what country your money travels through. If you are a US entity, we tax ALL your dollars. Dutch Sandwich, Caribbean, doesn't matter. All the moneys are taxed fully. The only way to avoid it is straight up laundering, which is already a nono.
I form a multinational that isn't based in the US, but has a branch there. How do you tax dollars that never enter the country, or that leave it never to return?
I form a multinational that isn't based in the US, but has a branch there. How do you tax dollars that never enter the country, or that leave it never to return?
I was under the impression that these tax havens and sandwiches existed as a way to bring the money into the US with as little tax as possible. If they aren't bringing the money into the US, then no taxing. However, if that money gets reported in their accounting books, we can tax it anyway!
Comments
The drug cartels have a direct impact upon the US, and they're there because of our demand.
The situation Mexico IS our fault, it IS our responsibility. And the best part is that we can stop it all and not even need to fire a single bullet or send a single person into Mexico.
Well so long as the Woman's Leagues will let us drink alcohol ...
Sorry I seem to have slipped into the 1920's, they're so similar!!
So long as Conservative Groups will let those who want to smoke do as they will and keep out of their brother's affairs we can help keep our neighbors safe as well. Simple as that.
You best be trolling.
Right now I live right at the border with the US, a few months ago close to where I live the Military found what was basically a slaughterhouse with over 30 bodies. They found it because one poor guy faked his death and then escaped till he found a Military post. Turns out the survivor was from El Salvador, and most, if not all of the bodies found were immigrants from El Salvador and other parts of Central America. So these immigrants, save whatever money they can, they abandon their families and cross Mexico in hopes to reach the US. If they survive enough to reach the border they have to find someone to illegally take them across, this someone of course are the cartels. The cartels are payed to send this guys to the US, but since they are at war they sure could use some more money, so they kidnap and have this immigrants held up in tiny houses, with no furniture, little food and little water until they can come up with more money. Don't have money? Well the cartels sure can use some man power, it is war, and the Military are sure killing a lot of this low level tugs. So not only did they made extra cash, now they have more people with guns running around the city. And if you can't pay and you don't want to work with the cartels you simply get killed.
I think it was mentioned before but if the US wants to do something, before thinking about troops and invasion think about migration, and foreign aid. Think about how this is not a problem for one country but a problem that eventually affects the whole region. America as a continent.
They can't vote to fix the problem because the system's so corrupt. They can't shoot to end the problem because the cartels have their own armies.
I've been listening to several NPR podcasts about the war going on there, and most of the Mexican media are no longer reporting the violence going on because they are also being targets by the drug cartels. It seems that people are in fear of doing any sort of I guess people would rather flee to somewhere that seems better than opposing the cartels and risking their lives. Not only is it corrupt, but people who currently running for office that oppose the cartels have been murdered.
The drug war in Mexico is an example of the absolute perfect weaponization of fear.
It must be nice for you guys.
Case study: Pot. In California and places where pot is relatively decriminalized (and the climate is good), pot is high quality, locally produced, and plentiful. The only reason someone from California would every buy Mexican stuff is if either they didn't care at all about quality ("Sexy Mexi" is still cheaper than local stuff) or bought it from the gangs. On the east coast, most of the commercially available pot is shipped from Mexico, since the gangs (and other nefarious criminal organizations) have the infrastructure to transport it. The rich in NYC, however, buy high quality stuff either sent to them from the west coast or produced locally (hydroponically, since the climate is ass).
tl;dr right now, the poor fuel the Mexican drug trade. If we produce locally, things wouldn't suck as much.
New law: We don't give a fuck what country your money travels through. If you are a US entity, we tax ALL your dollars. Dutch Sandwich, Caribbean, doesn't matter. All the moneys are taxed fully. The only way to avoid it is straight up laundering, which is already a nono.