Not that simple. Although cartels have bases and stuff like that most of them live among the population. They are someones uncle, cousin, friend, friend of a friend etc. You cant just launch an airstrike because there will be a lot of collateral damage. Basically you would have to nuke innocent civilians along the way.
There is no fast solution. IMO through education of the younger generation would probably be the best way. The current members are too desensitized to the violence it might be just best to let them kill each other off and have a new generation of educated individuals that are not used to killling come into play
If the DFS hadn't been dismantled do you guys think they could have kept this thing from spiraling out of control?
CRUSH YOUR ENEMIES! GRIND THEIR BONES INTO DIRT! MAKE THEM REGRET THEY WERE EVER BORN!
Admittedly I'm not super familiar with the background, procedures, etc of the DFS.
However, I find it doubtful regardless that keeping them in place would have stemmed much of the issues we see today. In fact, one might argue they contributed to instability.
The presence of El Azul aside, the organization received many complaints in regards to torture, extrajudicial killings, disappearances etc. This sort of repressive approach (as seen in resistances in WW2 and a host of other countries and conflicts), forces anyone considered to be at the wrong end of the state to go further underground. Leaving them susceptible to interaction with black market players and criminal actors. (Nevermind the adaptation to more sophisticated means of operation or defense of their networks. I.E. Los Zetas.)
I think Brazil is a great example of this. The formation of the Comando Vermelho was as a result of the intermingling of leftist activists / political prisoners in particular and hardened criminals, which subsequently gave way to one of the largest and most powerful organized crime syndicates in the country.
The First Capital Command (now Brazil's largest gang), was also founded specifically as a result of the heavy handed and unethical approach of Brazilian authorities in regards to prisoners.
Just a lurker.
I didn't know which thread to ask this question in, but this seemed like it might be a good one as it sort of relates to the questions and comments raised here.
I noticed a few months ago that many of the better known and larger CDG/CDN rap and corrido channels on Youtube were being disabled. ElMetro21HTB, Linea del Golfo, Los de Meme Malandraka, Comando Exclusivo, etc.
Seems now they are being replaced by channels promoting narco rap style music that is instead about SEDENA, SEMAR and Fuerza Tamaulipas.
What do you guys think of this, rap artists singing tributes to military and police in essentially a gangster rap format? Is there any significance here?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlobColR7Zg&list=RDMCE9zXxLeCg&index=11 Marino Delta, SEMAR
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJ9GGsROfNo&list=RDMCE9zXxLeCg&index=18 El Perro, SEMAR (By MrTyzon, I have older songs by him for people like Casco 1.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8utrD9K1ae4&list=RDMCE9zXxLeCg&index=4 Fuerza Tamaulipas (Lirik Dog is in this one, he has made probably hundreds of CDG songs.)
Just a lurker.
¡Por fin llega la justicia!
The Mexican drug war is an issue as complex as it is violent. Over the past two decades, almost 200,000 Mexicans have been killed, and reporting on it is as dangerous as any conflict – more than 100 journalists have been killed, or disappeared, in the same period.
British-born journalist Ioan Gillo has covered the conflict for Time magazine and The New York Times, and in two critically acclaimed books, El Narco (2011) and Gangster Warlords (2016). I met with him to try to understand the war and began by asking him to outline its main players.
IG: Right now you’ve got a lot of fragmentation. You’ve got the Sinaloa, the oldest and most infamous cartel, run by Chapo Guzmán and his sons (“Los Chapitos”), and the Jalisco New Generation Cartel, based out of Guadalajara. Then there’s Los Zetas, the first paramilitary cartel, who have now split into factions; and the Gulf Cartel in Tamaulipas and Veracruz; the Juárez Cartel; and the Tijuana Cartel.
Then we come to the smaller cartels, the cartelitos: the Guerreros Unidos, Los Rojos, Los Caballeros Templarios and La Familia Michoaana. There are dozens of these.
ME: How wide are their operations?
IG: Oh, worldwide! The largest cartels have envoys everywhere. There’s a big presence in the U.S., the Caribbean and South America, but they are also active in Britain, mainland Europe, China, even Russia.
ME: What launched the cartels as a global force?
IG: There’s no single watershed moment, but the breakdown of the PRI [Institutional Revolutionary Party] was a big factor as it broke communication between municipal police forces. What was a stable system of top-down, endemic corruption suddenly became an unstable system of bottom-up, endemic corruption.
Another factor was the re-routing of the cocaine as it came into the U.S. After [former U.S. president] Reagan clamped down on the Caribbean route into Miami, cocaine started to steam through central America into Mexico, which became the final strait. After that the cartels began purchasing the cocaine directly from the Colombians at the border and selling it on. With more money came more violence for control of that money.
ME: Is it just about cocaine and other drugs, or are there other significant revenues?
IG: Concerning narcotics, there are five main products. The first is marijuana, a big cash crop. It’s inexpensive to manufacture and fetches a decent profit margin. However, legalization in the U.S. is damaging its reach. The second is cocaine – traditionally most profitable. A kilo of pure cocaine can be bought by cartels at the border for as little as US $2,000 and sold for a huge mark-up.
Then there’s heroin, which is now largely cultivated in Mexico. If you buy a wrap of heroin in Baltimore today, chances are it’s made in Mexico. Fourth, there’s methamphetamine, which ripped through Mexico after the 2005 Combat Methamphetamine Act in the U.S. And recently we’ve been seeing fentanyl being made in Mexico. This is a seriously dangerous opiod, responsible for tens of thousands of overdose deaths.
However, on top of the drugs, there’s anything and everything else. Stealing crude oil is big business for oil racketeers known as huachicoleros and other revenue comes from capturing agricultural plantations – avocados and limes, illegal iron mining, illegal logging. And there are the repugnant practices of people smuggling and people trafficking.
ME: Do you know how much overall revenue comes from all of this? And where it goes?
IG: It’s impossible to know. However, the Rand Center, commissioned by the White House, estimated the U.S. spends $100 billion per year on illegal drugs. Obviously much of that will not get to Mexico as the biggest mark-ups come from the street-selling level. Some of this money goes towards material wealth for the cartels and their lieutenants. But an enormous amount is laundered via U.S. banks, particularly in Texas, and through tax havens like Panama. Money is also laundered through real estate and shell companies all over the world.
ME: Can you describe the process in which people get involved with the cartels?
IG: It starts with an absence of government, an absence of wealth and an absence of family. With these three things, and the pull of easy money from (at first) petty crime, kids get involved. It usually starts with street gangs, then kids will be given a phone, a $50 weekly salary and told to stand guard on the corner as a kind of sentry, a halcón, before they’re moved to higher forms of crime, be it moving drugs or el sicariato (hitmen). And then the police are an active arm of the cartels in many areas.
ME: When you investigate in these dangerous areas, do you tell people you’re a journalist?
IG: Yes, always. I don’t want anyone to think I’m working for a rival cartel, or the DEA [U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration]. But reporting on organized crime can offer a strange protection. If I’m interviewing the head of the Red Command in Rio [de Janeiro], no one is going to hold me up because they know I’m with “them.” They also don’t want the trouble of robbing some gringo and having the whole police force roll up, guns blazing.
El Narco takes a look inside Mexico's criminal insurgency.
El Narco takes a look inside Mexico’s criminal insurgency.
ME: But journalists are targeted by the cartels in Mexico?
IG: It’s usually for a specific, terrifyingly petty reason. Sometimes it’s for publishing something they don’t like. A co-worker of mine was killed for publishing an op-ed by a grieving mother which called the cartels cowards. It can also be for not covering a story they want you to cover, such as an example murder. A Juárez newspaper once published a chilling headline, directed towards the cartels, titled ‘¿Qué quiere de nosotros?’ (What do you want from us?)
ME: I’m sure many newspapers back off. Are there any you respect for not doing so?
Yes many. El RíoDoce in Sinaloa, for example, after my friend Javier Valdez was killed in 2017.
ME: When have you felt most in danger?
IG: There was one time in Michoacán, when cartel members dressed as autodefensas [self-defense forces] thought I was a DEA agent and threatened me with a grenade. Another in Tabasco when the Jalisco cartel told me they were going to raid my hotel for potential ransom victims. Another when I managed to pull over just a few miles before a cartel roadblock in Coahuila. The list goes on . . . .
ME: If you were to offer a child in Sinaloa a “Chapo” or a Che Guevara belt buckle, which would they choose?
Oh, Chapo every time. But the question of ideology is a pertinent one. While many cartels don’t have a political ideology, they do have strange rituals. For instance, Los Zetas take the Marines’ philosophy of “never leave a man behind” to new levels – “never leave the dead behind” – and steal back their fallen brothers from morgues.
Many cartel leaders, such as [former Familia Michoacana boss] Nazario Moreno , are quasi-religious, or suffer from a type of Jerusalem Syndrome in which they think themselves gods. There’s also a Robin Hood angle – standing up for the little man and the poor, which is celebrated by the narcocorridos.
ME: Okay, I’m giving you a magic wand. How would you attempt to solve the narco problem?
IG: First, drug policy reform. We need to accept drug policy is failing. It should be about reducing the tens of billions of dollars that go to criminals. There are two areas of tragedy: the people dying of overdoses, and the criminals being funded to slaughter each other, as well as their fellow citizens.
With drugs that are problematic to legalize, such as heroin, you need rehabilitation, because both the money and the overdose deaths are about addicts. Other drugs, such as cocaine, which are taken more casually, I would consider decriminalizing, or even legalizing. Certainly, I think marijuana should be legalized.
Secondly, you have to fight for the hearts and minds of the young people who are recruited into cartels. Society needs to offer something to these children, with funding for social work. Wealth inequality also breeds crime. It’s only after areas are ghettoized that cartels have room to breathe.
Thirdly, how do you build a police force that’s trusted? It’s very hard to find a blueprint for this. Nicaragua, despite its poverty, is supposed to have a police force that’s resistant to the insurgency of gangs, particularly in areas where they fought the Contras, but trust has been undermined recently. Cuba has a lot less crime than its neighbours but it’s a fairly authoritarian society. Countries like Chile, too, but I’d put that down to per-capita wealth.
ME: Would you halt the flow of guns into Mexico from the USA?
IG: I would try. Most of the guns used by the cartels are purchased in the U.S. I don’t see banning guns in the U.S. as realistic, but there are many other steps you can take. We need to reduce the number of guns coming into Mexico.
ME: What’s your opinion, so far, on López Obrador’s presidency?
IG: When he was elected there was a moment of hope for change. It was the biggest win for a president in years. However, his first eight months have been disappointing. You’ve had an increase in violence and a flat economy. You can’t pin this all on AMLO’s presidency because these things are eternally complex and can’t be solved overnight, but his strategies haven’t been clear, or successful. The new National Guard, for instance, hasn’t avoided corruption in the way López Obrador thought it would.
ME: Finally, are you optimistic for the future?
IG: I really can’t say. It’s not my job to be optimistic.
Great interview and perfect place at this post to park it.Man you got connections or what Parro?
This is a very good question, and it is interesting reading everyones responses.
The first thing they have to do is try and root out the corrupt politicians. People have mentioned here things like sending in the US military, or various other things. Doing that isn't even a short term fix, as the corrupt politicians will find other people to smuggle the drugs into America.
Another thing that would go a long way in fixing Mexico is if America legalized drugs. All drugs. At first this sounds kind of extreme. The idea of having cocaine for sale in grocery stores just sounds nuts. However, it really isn't that nuts when put into perspective. Nicotine is the most addicting drug on the planet, and alcohol isn't too far behind. I do not drink anymore, and have never smoked tobacco. I walk right past that aisle just like I do the broccoli. If you sold cocaine in the grocery stores it wouldn't make me buy it. Its not like drugs are that hard to get a hold of if someone really wants to do it. Legalizing drugs would completely undercut the cartels.
Next, as has been mentioned, arm the citizens. Make it legal for law abiding Mexican citizens to own, and operate weapons that allow them to defend themselves. A unarmed population is a population that can be manipulated and controlled.
In reply to this post by Ciro
Ciro: With all due respect, the problem is no longer a simple "War on Drugs" where Mexico supplies narco-drugs and the USA consumes them.... and big money and laundered goods flow south.
Over the years, things became very complicated. What we see in Mexico today are only dramatic "surface" syptoms with newer "spin-off" problems surfacing that have nothing to do with addicting drugs. I list a few "spin-off" problems that readily come to mind:
1. People trafficking (includes sex trade and immigrants)
2. Money laundering with banks, real estate, manufacturing, commerce, tourism, music, entertainment, and the arts, involvements.
3. Racism and Classism (the indigenous and poor peoples are ignored, discounted exploited, and abused by the powerful not just criminal organizations.)
4. Oligarchic Ruling (symbiotic relationships with criminal organizations. This is all indirect for sanitized appearances. It is the question of "Who" really runs and rules Mexico. AMLO is trying to fight this...but will likely lose because he is just a gnat on an elephant.
5. Culture of corruption and violence. Mexico, like some othe 3rd World countries has "ingrained" cultural (virtually at DNA level) social mechanisms for dealing with problems that include even the Catholic Church. Here is a list of issues that bother me and suggest Mexico is a very long way from "fixing": JUSTICE and governance are problems like politicians, governors, Judges, courts, and police are compromized or corrupted? Morality and social institutions are seriously frayed with at least two generations of decay as manifested in the glorification of violent anti-heroes, immorality, and family values. The MIS-treatment and abuse of children is a moral issue that is shameful in Mexico. This problem goes back many generations and is common in the 3rd world. Some scholars believe significant proportions of abused kids enter the ranks of violent criminalit (nuff said).
6. Criminal Kindoms and fifedoms. Nominal "States" in Mexico run by governors and State official and functionaries have become secondary to geographic demarcations (pisos) declared by waring narco-cartels. In Mexico people had better explicitly know where the Hell they are because conventional boundries might be meaningless with respect with what criminal organization dictate!
..... I have been influenced in my negative views by many articles and posts in Borderland Beat and by books like : "Zero-Zero-Zero" by Roberto Zaviano (2013 Penguin Press). Zaviano's book is a mind blower because he discloses the complexities of "underword" crime organizations with the "surface" ones we live in in societies everywhere.
Please pardon my grammar and keyboard muffs.
In reply to this post by canadiana
Canadiana: First, thanks for helping out Chivis, and the staff Borderland Beat. You go girl!
Good point you make about Mexican society getting "into: addicting drugs themselves. Years ago when I worked in the field and met scores of "Chicanos" and Mexican legal and illegal immigrants, I noted the trend for them to become drug addicts.
In my line of work over about a 12 year span, I saw increasing numbers becomining heroin, meth, and cocaine addicts. Noting this, I told collegues, "These people sneer at the stupid gringo doing drugs to Mexico's economic benefit. But, now they are consumming these poisons themselves. If this keeps up, Mexico will have a huge problem. It is like they are blissfully spitting into the wind."
I don't know the statistics. but I bet they are alarming as to the numbers of Mexicans addicted to illicit drugs compared to the early days.
In reply to this post by Mosco
Well thought out statement
This post was updated on .
Micah/Mosco - I've been thinking about this and had some brain farts.
Instead of a border wall, a moving wall going south. Kind've like many wars, create a ring of security. . then clear out the bad guys.
If you look at the Mexican/American War, also known as the Mexican War or "Intervention Estadounidense en Mexico, from 1846 to 1848, which followed in the wake of USA taking Texas, James Polk, then President had an expansionist theory of USA from the Atlantic to the Pacific Oceans.
After securing Santa Fe, for the USA, norte americanos headed south. They took over New Mexico, Utah, Arizona and California, that were Mexico's. Not speculation, but history. Mexico was unprepared militarily. In fact we took over Mexico City, Baja California and the port of Veracruz. Only the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo reset the lines of a border.
It was a lop-sided victory for USA. Of course Pancho Villa stormed Columbus, NM later and retreated back to Parral. He is revered to this day as a hero of Mexico.
Now the hard part. Agree with Mexico, that USA wants to adopt Mexico as one country with us, as it once was, but we were Mexican in the west. Instead of us vs. them, it's all of us together. Then move the wall south of Matamoros, across the country. Set up free elections, replace the current politicians, police, state and federal forces. No impunity and a cleansing of the germ, called cartel. After that long fought battle, move south again, doing the same.
Fentanyl has killed more norte americanos, than all the people killed each year on intentional homicide in Mexico from the Cartel Wars. Think about it, we are losing more citizens to overdose just to "fentanyl" in the USA, then the violence we read about on these pages, in Mexico.
If we do not adopt Mexico, there is no solution to the problem in both Mexico and USA. We talk of Mexico's problem, but it's actually both of our problems.
Corruption is rampant in Mexico, and that is the known. Corruption is not rampant in USA and that is known as well.
We are protected on the north border by Canada in a strong alliance. We do not have the same reassurances in the south, Mexico. We are susceptible to China/Russia interference and compliance in the war. In fact there is long time resentment on what Polk did. We could stop talking walls, deportation, violence and unnecessary deaths on both sides. We can encircle, clear, put systems in place and move further south. Long term, but with serious casualties on both sides.
The thugs, that are the cartels, would not rule the integrated property. Their theatre becomes smaller and smaller. The immigrants become our brothers & sisters. Finally we do not let a wall or a river set our cultures apart. We help the 97% that are innocent (with no guns), overthrow the 3% cartel. We create a middle class in Mexico that does not exist currently. We derail socialist theory and replace it with empowerment. Instead of hate, we talk of peace.
I do think that this is a radical idea, but should be considered as another scenario that I've never seen. Kind've like John Lennon's masterpiece, "Imagine".
I have family on both sides of the border. I do not think of them as them, but as "us". It's a shame the paperwork they go through just to visit children and other family members who will not return to their families because of the violence in Mexico. Not protectionism, but inclusion. Not Democratic/Republican, but the people.
The longer this war goes on, the worse it gets for both sides of this Borderland.
Switzerland’s Experiment With Addiction Treatment
Prescribed heroin cuts crime and saves lives.
“I started taking heroin as a way of coping with my psychological problems,” said David, 50, an addict for 25 years. “It destroyed me. I lost my job as a watchmaker. I ‘borrowed’ money from my girlfriend, and my friends. I ended up on the street. To fund my habit, I became a user-dealer.” Every day for 18 months, he’s been attending an injection center attached to the Geneva University Hospitals, where, under the experimental heroin-prescription program (PEPS), he is given a syringe of diacetylmorphine—heroin manufactured legally by a Swiss laboratory. “The program has allowed me to rebuild my life, and pay my friends back.” He looked at his watch: “I’ve got to go. It’s time for my treatment.”
The 1,500 patients at Switzerland’s 22 PEPS centers have all tried unsuccessfully to kick their habit with drug-replacement therapy. Marco, 44, said: “Methadone didn’t work for me. The side effects were terrible, and I didn’t get any tranquilizing effect. So I was taking other drugs on top of it. I’ve been registered here for the last six months. I’ve put on weight, and cut my heroin use by 80 percent. Eventually, I want to get clean.” Chantal, 54, an addict for 30 years, said: “The treatment gives me structure. I don’t have to chase after my dealer any more.” Jeff, 54, had just injected his daily dose; his pupils were dilated, and he spoke in a loud voice: “My quality of life has definitely improved. It’s stabilized my day. Before I got into the program, I was a dealer. I was cunning, I found ways to get money, I did stuff.”
Yves Saget, an addiction nurse, said: “Addiction happens when taking drugs becomes the only strategy for dealing with difficult situations. We don’t say ‘fix’ here, we say ‘treatment.’” He explained: “The brain becomes dependent, and needs heroin to maintain its balance. At this center, we are treating 63 patients with diacetylmorphine. Medical heroin is pure, unlike the drug you buy in the street, which is cut with caffeine, paracetamol, and other substances. Street heroin isn’t satisfying, so addicts often take other narcotics with it, or alcohol, or psychotropic drugs such as benzodiazepine. Our dosage, which is individually tailored, allows patients to live as normal a life as possible.” He added: “We emphasize good citizenship—patients must treat our staff and the neighborhood with respect. This is their treatment center, so it’s up to them to protect it.”
“GETTING THEIR LIVES BACK ON TRACK”
“Heroin on prescription gets them out of the vicious circle of antisocial behavior,” said Pedro Fereira, a psychiatrist. “They don’t have to buy the drug for themselves, so they don’t have to resort to desperate measures, such as theft or prostitution, to get money. That gives them psychological breathing space to get their lives back on track, set goals for themselves, and rebuild relationships with their family and friends. And they get access to a psychiatrist, too.” Every patient is assigned a nurse, a doctor, and a psychiatrist...
Studies showed, as time went on, the addicts were finding themselves using less and less heroin (to eventual abstinence), while their quality of life increased exponentially.
Curious to read more? Check out the link provided above..
It matters not how a man dies, but how he lives.
El Bujo, respectfully, comment on my thread before going off in a different direction. I want to hear argumentation on my thought, without introducing another thought. It's important to me to listen to the arguments that are necessary.
Thank you, Parro
My argument is that legalizing drugs (while providing sufficient rehabilitation services) would significantly help solve the issue, if not remove the cartel’s power of the populous all together...
It matters not how a man dies, but how he lives.
In reply to this post by Parro
Parro: You post "meaty stuff" in all your posts...congrats, amigo. i am thinking about your most recent recommendations and ideas.
BTW: To everyone who has contributed to this thread.... "Awesome... Some responses worthy of contributions "politicians, journalists, poicy makers, and even 'at risk' youngsters."
In reply to this post by Parro
I think what you raise is a curious suggestion here.
I do see some flaws in it personally, though as you say it is a long term plan and with enough time and blood most things are likely to succeed. I still firmly believe the best solution is the one that results in the fewest casualties. As outsiders its very easy to condone loss of life when it isn't your own that is being given up, and what the Mexican people actually -want- is peace.
I don't necessarily agree with annexation. Culturally and politically Mexico and the USA are too different. The USA has become increasingly and almost worryingly nationalist over the years, since 2001 I think, and I think that because of that you would have a difficult time getting Americans to accept the annexation of Mexico without treating them as second class citizens (as they already do with immigrants, those states of Texas, California etc are good microcosms of this. Just look at the spate of severely racist comments we've had on the forum recently as an example.) You would likely end up with a situation similar to how Palestinians are treated in Israel, where their lives are considered forfeit. Human beings are inherently tribal in this way, you cannot escape this reality no matter how progressive your society may become.
It is curious to see the brief mention of a need to remove socialist theory. I have always found it interesting how much Americans despise any hint of socialism, a byproduct of the cold war? We have socialist elements here in Canada too which govern our system, and it has helped to rank us within the top 10 happiest countries in the world. In fact, I would argue that maintaining a system of free or subsidized healthcare would help to curb criminal violence. Many people in the US turn to crime in order to pay off exorbitant medical expenses.
Adding further financial grief to an already impoverished populace would not have a positive effect on crime rates.
That being said, I agree that the issue is both a US & a Mexico problem. It is in fact an entire North American problem - just look at Jamaica, Honduras, El Salvador etc. (People often seem to forget all of these countries are in North America.) There is a deeper cause to why all of these countries universally suffer from increasing crime rates, and if you wish to solve the problems of one country you must examine all of them and find commonalities between them. It is a continental wide issue after all.
Canada as well has had a steadily growing power base of organized crime, and like Mexico a lot of the unregistered weapons coming here are coming from the US.
Forcing a new system of governance that works for one country upon another is not likely to succeed, imho. The US has tried to force their political systems upon other countries in the past and it has not often come out with positive results, because it neglects cultural differences. Examine Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and many others if you wish to take lessons from that. The misguided idea there are only two valid forms of governance has helped to prolong the Korean war and leave South Korea at risk of annihilation at the DPRK's slightest whim.
In Mexico in particular I think stripping things down would deal with the current actors of violence, certainly. But long term since the root issues have not been dealt with you would just find yourself with new players to take these open positions, as has been happening repeatedly for years.
This process of 'clearing' began in 2006 - so there is no new suggestions from anyone when it comes to clearing out cartels, it isn't innovative in any way. We've been doing it for 13 years and it is sheer hubris to think outsiders could do any better when they know very little of the culture or the dynamics of what has taken place. (I raise Afghanistan as the latest example. We sought to clear out the Taliban, now they control massive swathes of the country and enjoy great support.)
What has the result of a violent approach been? The murder rate has increased from 9.9 in 2006, which was much closer to the US' own, to something like 28 or 30 since then.
Criminal groups now control roughly 80% of the country, with what was it, over 300 groups in Guerrero alone?
Violent government pressure has only given crime a greater grip simply because crime thrives in chaotic, violent environments.
Solutions can only present themselves when we attempt to grasp the entire picture rather than one piece of it. Examining Mexico on its own is not enough, I agree, but I think limiting it to the US & Mexico also does us a disservice. We should be looking at Canada, Honduras, El Salvador, etc. All of the other countries of North America which are afflicted by this plague so we can ask the simple and yet pertinent question of why?
Why does the common person turn to crime?
What are the primary inciting reasons for this in 8/10 cases?
Once you have that answer you can backtrack and discover whichever policies, cultural or economic catalysts come to light as a result of that delving.
Just a lurker.
First, Bujo. Thanks I get it, complete legalization of drugs. My problem is I'm an addictive person, and if I could find drugs legally, it would end up badly. Only my thoughts. Been there.
Secondly Podrido, thank you for your comprehensive rebuttal to my weird theory. My debate for such a dramatic proposal.
The results with the least casualties - In 2018, 33,341 murders in Mexico took place. Most attributed to the cartels. The National Center for Health Statistics estimates there were 68,557 drug overdose deaths in 2018. An estimated 47,590 involved opioids, and 31,897 involved synthetic opioids, such as fentanyl and tramadol (note the numbers do not add, and from the National Center for Health Statistics).
This is 101,898 deaths a year. Let's say 80% are cartel related, not the the Stackler family or Purdu Pharmaceuticals. That is 81,518 deaths a year. 57,939 members of U.S. armed forces died or were missing for the USA in Vietnam. This was from 1954 to 1975, or an average of 3,882 deaths per year. In the US, 2017, there was an estimated 17,284 murders. Most in St. Louis. Not Chicago, as most posters claim. No where near Mexico levels.
Which is the worst war? Vietnam or the Cartel Wars?
National Geographic reports that Latinos are rising to power. Members of the Palmer Society, a campus women's organization, the predominant graduates are Latino. This is Richard Nixon's alma mater. They are also, increasingly affluent.
The Latino population has grown sixfold since 1970, reaching an estimated 57.4 million in 2016, or nearly 18% of the population. Because of this increase, The United States will become a "minority majority" country by the middle of the century. This reordering of the demographics of the US has caused opportunistic politicians and media commentators to increasingly state that whites as victims of an increasingly diverse United States. Trump, has cast Latinos as violent gang members, job stealers uninterested in learning English, who come to the US to have so-called anchor babies. These accusations against the 11 million undocumented immigrants, helped fuel the political shifts that sent True to the White House.
The town I'm from in NM is 80% hispanic, when growing up it was 15%. They are the only people who will do the hard work. Most are from poverty stricken Mexico, which is the norm. For the most part, they exist peacefully with their white neighbors.
Most immigrants, want a job, work hard, be loyal to those who employed them and are not like the current generation.
According to the UN the following are the 10 happiest countries in the world;
2018 and 2019 are similar. Canada is in neither.
Mexico resents USA taking their territories in the Mexico-American War. Witness in 2004, after 9/11, the Mexican crowd that jeered the US soccer team with chants of "Osama!"
Go to soccer games in the US, when playing Mexico, most of the crowd are Latinos, supporting their team. They are deeply in love with their country of origen, and feel slighted from events a long time ago. Witness the afro-americans resentment in the US after 149 years of abolition.
Cocaine, no longer comes from Columbia, but through Mexico to the US. Central America is the supply chain to the US. If you remove the biggest link, the supply chain crumbles.
Most Mexicans, want to stay in the USA, but struggle with the English language. Over 90% cannot understand the language because of the dramatic difference in grammar between the two, and their heavy work schedules. Remember, that most immigrants that come here, have a limited education. Learning a language is harder for them, than Spanish for us.
Just think about it. The powerless majority of Mexico (not gun owners by law), is ruled by the 3% cartel, with their heavy weaponry, larger that most policing powers. In this forum, we have the retired police officer in Texas, who is skilled at making weapons for retirement. He made a mini-gun for a straw purchaser, that was confiscated at the border. A mini-gun fires at a rate of 2,000 to 6,000 rounds per minute, equivalent to 100 rounds per second. A laser of death. A mini-gun mounted on an Apache, would wipe out the majority of a crowd in a sports stadium, according to Marine documentation. Clear and Present author, Tom Clancy, could not state that statistic with a nuclear bomb.
Police leave their ranks, because of low pay. Children look up to sicario, and most don't even have a choice. Corruption is rampant. There is simply, no middle class. The few wealthy, and the many poor with no hope.
Lips are sealed in Mexico, they don't know who is listening, families tore apart by extortion and kidnapping.
Really, same old, same old. It won't work, it get's worse. Peace to all. Again, only my thoughts.
Here is a link to the UN happiness report published in 2018 that you appear to be citing. Canada is listed as #7 in between the Netherlands and New Zealand. It was ranked as #6 until 2017, when we were overtaken by the Netherlands.
Here are the same tables from the actual UN report posted to Wikipedia for your convenience.
I am pro-immigration personally, and I am very much pro-cultural diversity, I think it is wonderful that America has such a diverse populace and I agree 100% with you that for whatever reason immigrants seem to get a very bad reputation for little reason. There are bad apples in every sector of Humanity, but this should not colour an entire populace.
The thing that worries me primarily is the rising nationalist sentiment in the US amidst various cultural lines, I think this would not bode well for any sort of annexation scenario for the reasons noted in my previous response. Especially given the latest political climates that you mention in your post. Examples of this are seen the world over - Rwanda, human trafficking in Libya, human rights violations in Palestine and the West Bank, etc.
I think we can all agree that what is happening in Mexico right now is beyond unfortunate, and I think this can be said for many of the countries in North America, hence why we see so many immigrants coming from other afflicted countries such as Honduras and El Salvador, the murder rates of which sometimes near levels double that of Mexico's own. Mexico is simply the easiest to examine because it is the closest to our mutual borders.
Over all I am admittedly much more interested in the sociological, political and economic reasons for -why- people choose to get into crime. I think this is the key to understanding how we can try and curb crime in the future.
Just a lurker.
|Free forum by Nabble||Edit this page|