Seems To Me - If One Wanted To Stop The Flow Of Illegal Drugs Into The U.S. That What Is Needed Is To.....

[global1]

destroy the growing fields of the raw drugs and take out the manufacturing capabilities of the Drug Cartel(s).

When they won't be able to produce more finished product - there would be no need to take out boats that are said to be transporting those drugs. There would be no drugs to transport.

Our beef should be with the Drug Cartel(s) right from the beginning of growing and then manufacturing the finished products. Maybe then there would be more support for what the administration would be doing.

Right now - too much confusion. Is it the drugs or is it a move by this administration to take the oil?

Doesn't this sound like a more rational way to deal with this situation?

[lame54]

1. That's war

[global1]

7. It's Not A War Against A Country (i.e., Venuzuela).....

It is an action against the criminals in the country that are behind the growing, manufacturing and transport of illicit drugs into the U.S..

To me it seems to be more easily justifiable to take on the Cartel(s) versus the government of the country.

It seems to me that it would be more justifiable to get the Congress and the American People behind such an action - versus - surrounding a country with an armada of naval ships and blowing up and killing people on these so-called transport boats that they say are carrying these drugs to the U.S..

Blowing up those boats don't accomplish anything if the Cartel(s) can keep the fields growing and continuing to manufacture more drugs.

Seems to me we need to get to the root of the problem and that root lies with the Cartel(s).

Maybe if we approached this in this manner - even the countries government might get behind the action - because they would know that they have the support of the U.S. to help them deal with the cause of the problem in their country - and that is the Cartel(s).

[lame54]

9. So, we are free to militarily bomb Mexico?

[Emile]

2. We lost the drug war back in the 1970's.

[ProfessorGAC]

5. It Was Lost The Moment It Was Initiated

Never had a chance to succeed.
As soon as they considered "war" and no a public health issue the effort was doomed to failure.

[global1]

15. But We Didn't Have A President Back Then That Would Surround The Cartel(s) With The Largest.....

armada ever!!!

[marble falls]

3. Nope, it'll move the supply around and increase the cost. Wanna make it stop? ...

... Legalize it and cut the prices by doing so. The drug problem isn't the suppliers, it's the users. Take the profit out out of it and eliminate high paying jobs to people who go around packing guns. No profits, a much lower supply.

[Brother Buzz]

4. Seems To Me - If One Wanted To Stop The Flow Of Illegal Drugs Into The U.S. That What Is Needed Is To.....

?width=300&height=412&fit=crop&format=pjpg&auto=webp

[essaynnc]

6. Perhaps, Just perhaps....

If America was still the land of opportunity, and affordability and a future and doing better than our parents did, there would be a lot less people gravitating towards drugs of almost any kind. "It's the escape, stupid!" Like was posted above, we lost the drug war in the 70's. As soon as we get rid of one supplier, one manufacturer, one distributor, another one is just waiting to take their place; it's a game of whack-a-mole, and we will never win it. How about a living wage, how about mental health counseling, how about real prison reform (not just incarceration)????

It's funny that I can come up with this stuff and I'm not a trained psychology or judicial professional. GO ASK THEM WHAT WOULD WORK, DON'T ASK A FUCKING WAR PRESIDENT WITH HUGE TIES TO THE PRIVATE PRISON INDUSTRY !!!!!

Whew, I feel a little better. Thanks for listening to my rant.

[global1]

11. I Don't Diagree With You As We Should Use All The Suggestions Available To Attack This Problem.....

But to attack a country - without some sort of plan as to what is needed to help solve this problem doesn't seem like logical thinking.

Starting a war - without Congressional approval or support of the American People seems fruitless.

It is just a dream of an American President to be called a 'War President'.

He says - he stopped - what 7 or 8 wars. Why does he want to start this one the way he's approaching it.

We have a system (government) that delineates how to deal with this. And not using that system government to that extent is not acceptable.

Or are we just going to - overlook how the law is being skirted again and say this is just 'unprecedented' - like we've given this administration a pass with everything else they are doing that is contrary to our Constitution?

[taxi]

8. Well, being perfectly honest about this requires more than a passing thought or acceptance of what media tells us.

Let's face it, there are not millions of small-time dealers communicating with the growers and producers in a handful of foreign countries. There are a few high-high level individuals who orchestrate the entire operation, and they have both political connections and vast sums of money. To destroy the growing and manufacture of the finished product isn't their goal - that would be the same as closing up their shops. Their goals are to get rid of the middlemen who they see as siphoning off profits.

[GusBob]

10. I don't know if there are fields for synthetic drugs?

Meth and fenty are made in labs?

[global1]

12. Then Take Out These Friggen Labs too ....

If there are no drugs to pass on to transporters, distributors, pusher and sellers - that would go a long way of stopping the flow of these illicit drugs into the U.S. versus - blowing up and killing those people on the transport boats.

[GusBob]

13. I tend to agree

Drone bomb the labs
Another issue with regards to fields: with synthetics they can make it non stop, no growing season. So find the storage units too

[maxsolomon]

14. What a great idea.

Destroy all the Coca plants in S. America. Sounds easy.