Trump calls for 'war'

originally posted by: ChefFox
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Cartels are not terrorists this isn't the middle east though.

I get confused because the war on drugs and the wars in the Middle East are about equally as (un)successful.

originally posted by: StallionDuck
a reply to: 35Foxtrot

LOL.

Spoken like someone who truly has no clue what a "volley of strategic missiles," is.

Or, what that would mean for my sons.

....Do YOU know what you're talking about?

I do.

You don't.

Or, at least, you haven't thought your ideas through.

Anyway. Thank you. Drive through.

I don't care, wipe out the Cartels, by any means necessary.

American children were killed, American citizens, a response is needed.

a reply to: StallionDuck

It's fricken disgusting what those lowlives did to that family.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: ChefFox
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Cartels are not terrorists this isn't the middle east though.

I get confused because the war on drugs and the wars in the Middle East are about equally as (un)successful.

You're not confused.

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: StallionDuck

I've wondered why we hadn't done anything about this sooner

Because most people realize this isn’t a problem you can fight or arrest your way out of. If your goal is to make the southern border more dangerous than it already is and have more people killed then going to war with the drug cartels is a great idea.

I really hope this is just small-hand energy Trump trying to talk like a badass and not a serious idea he’s having. Someone needs to tell him the world doesn’t work like an 80’s action movie.

Small hand? American children were killed and an American President spoke up for them.

Someone needs to tell you that inaction creates more violence and embodens criminals.

I say, go in and absolutely destory, if murders are happening on a daily basis, do nothing! Said the Leftist Underwerks.

Seriously, what do you expect to happen? We send in the military, they fight back the drug cartels, wipe them out, then yay! no more drugs in America or drug cartels?

Lmao. That’s about as far removed from reality as you can get.

The reality is that as long as there are Americans doing drugs there will be someone there to supply it. The money involved is too big for it not to be.

There will never be an end to cartels or cartel related violence as long as Americans continue to buy the drugs they produce.

It wouldn’t matter if you sent the entire US Military to Mexico to fight the drug cartels. All it would do is make the end product more expensive which would lead to more violence on our side of the border and make the criminals here more rich and powerful.

As I said in the last comment, this isn’t a problem you can fight or arrest your way out of.

originally posted by: Arnie123
I don't care, wipe out the Cartels, by any means necessary.

American children were killed, American citizens, a response is needed.

You sure you aren’t a liberal? You’re sounding just like a leftist talking about gun violence here in America.

I got hit with this full force this morning on FB.

I clicked on a video and next thing I know I'm looking and a bullet ridden burned out car with something/someones' inside. I had to close my eyes.

So - they shot them and burned them and on the radio someone said the girls were raped?

If that doesn't equal = GO IN AND CLEAN THEM OUT - I don't know what does.

Problem is? Who will fill the void once the 'cartel' that's in place, is not?

Isn't it ultimately a dog chasing it's tail of a sort?

And before you go there, no, legalizing drugs is just insane.

a reply to: silo13

Problem is? Who will fill the void once the 'cartel' that's in place, is not?

One of the numerous cartels that are waiting for a vacancy at the top. And then we’ll have our own little Middle Eastern never ending war on our southern border.

Good times.

a reply to: silo13

Serious question.

Why do you think legalization would be, "insane?"

I am actually curious to hear your rationale.

I obviously disagree, but I could be wrong. There's a first time for everything, right?

We send our soldiers to fight and die in countries halfway around the world for reasons most don't understand. The cartels have been murdering and terrorizing the people of Mexico for decades and it has spilled over into the US on multiple occasions.

The citizens have risen up many times and formed militias to destroy the cartels and the Mexican govt put a stop to it. If I was still in I would be more than happy to be sent there to destroy the cartels at least it would make a difference back home.

originally posted by: Arnie123
I don't care, wipe out the Cartels, by any means necessary.

American children were killed, American citizens, a response is needed.

It's not going to happen.

After 9/11 we went after Iraq when Saudi Arabia was the only sovereign nation with blood on their hands. We defend the poppy fields in Afghanistan.

The cartels are probably on a 3 letter agencies payroll.

a reply to: ChefFox

I been smoking over 30 years, house is all paid off I have no debt and work 40-50 hours a week. Prob sitting in better situation than you % wise. Have over 40k in savings, wich is way better than the majority of the country statistically. Oh and I only earn around 3 bucks an hour over minimum wage.

Not to bad for a junkie yeah?

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: StallionDuck

You quoted my point but you didn't look at my solutions?

I did look at them, and responded.

You essentially proposed intervention along with regime change in a sovereign nation, hardly a new idea in US foreign policy.

My response-

Mexico, and their people have to want to fix their problems. We cannot do it for them. When's the last time US intervention/regime change has been A-successful, B-efficient, C-beneficial?

It would cost a lot of money, and send even more refugees towards the US, further exacerbating an already existing problem.

When it involves our citizens and bleeds into our country and kills, disrupts, endagers and addicts our people... It's time to step in as it is act of war if that government freely, purposefully allows it to continue.

It's already costing a LOT of money. It wouldn't have people running to our border - quite the contrary. People would be rushing to Mexico for jobs in rebuilding the society, economy and education of that country.

The slightly valid part of that is the US stepping into their country and changing their government. But also as you said... It's nothing new to us so what's the problem? Is Mexico excluded? ...especially when it seriously needs it.

Is it a bad thing to get to the root of the problem and pull out the weeds? If a neighbor keeps pissing on your sidewalk, are you just going to tell him to stop while he laughs at you each and every day, indefinitely or are you going to take action?

Help me to understand the problem here and I'll agree with you. I need a seriously valid argument. Can you provide that?

a reply to: StallionDuck

I don't think we should bomb Mexico.

I don't see the cartels stopped because I honestly think the CIA and other intel agencies make to much money off them. I wouldn't be surprised if they actually run a cartel covertly.

originally posted by: cognizant420
a reply to: ChefFox

I been smoking over 30 years, house is all paid off I have no debt and work 40-50 hours a week. Prob sitting in better situation than you % wise. Have over 40k in savings, wich is way better than the majority of the country statistically. Oh and I only earn around 3 bucks an hour over minimum wage.

Not to bad for a junkie yeah?

Come on now. Everyone knows hop heads just wind up on the street, injecting reefers behind a dumpster.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: Arnie123
I don't care, wipe out the Cartels, by any means necessary.

American children were killed, American citizens, a response is needed.

It's not going to happen.

After 9/11 we went after Iraq when Saudi Arabia was the only sovereign nation with blood on their hands. We defend the poppy fields in Afghanistan.

The cartels are probably on a 3 letter agencies payroll.

They are.

Watch a pretty good drama called "Snowfall." It's mostly accurate.

And entertaining to boot!!

a reply to: underwerks

Just saying, chefox seems to be thinking everyone is like the potheads he knows. That's just a small fraction. There are.tons of very successful people that smoke pot. He has no clue

a reply to: underwerks

It is easy, the CIA will take over. Unless more of the swamp can be drained.

As stated previously as long as drugs are in demand there will always be someone to supply it. IF the US got involved and bombed the cartels into the stone age it may affect supply for a little but someone else would come in and the cartel would most likely rebuild at some point. Would drugs be harder to get? Most likely, but it would not solve the drug problem but it would most likely solve the cartel problem for awhile.

It could be interesting if the US goes in and confiscates property and money it could be a nice windfall for the budgets to pay for some things.