3 ms·

> It means you eliminate the abuse and criminal behaviours of drugs. > Obviously it's impossible to eliminate every single instance Exactly. So when does it e

> It means you eliminate the abuse and criminal behaviours of drugs. > Obviously it's impossible to eliminate every single instance Exactly. So when does it end? What target needs to be reached for the war on drugs to stop? > it's quite easy to eliminate virtually all negatives to society. Then why has nobody done it?

seoulmetro 2y ago
It ends when you eliminate nearly all. The same way when does anything end? When you reach the level that is what you can feasibly resemble as "the end". So in this case, drug-free. >What target needs to be reached for the war on drugs to stop? You need to eliminate the negatives that society has to deal with related to illicit drug use? It's not that hard. When is a newly built house finished? >Then why has nobody done it? Huh? Many countries have done it. Why many others haven't is because they don't want to.. Drug usage is a problem for the lower rungs of society, not the government or higher ups. The government must want to improve the life of their citizens at the cost of themselves. Like most objectively good government decisions.
- bheadmaster 2y ago
  > The same way when does anything end? When you reach the level that is what you can feasibly resemble as "the end". So in this case, drug-free. You seem to be unaware that you're cyclically defining "the end" to be "when it's over". War generally ends when the other side capitulates, or when both sides run out of resources and come to a peace agreement. In war on drugs, there's no "other side", there's just an invisible black market that you can get more and more visible by introducing more and more survaillence.
  - seoulmetro 2y ago
    Right. The ends to things are subjective. What's your point? When is a house completed?
    - bheadmaster 2y ago
      > The ends to things are subjective. What's your point? Exactly that. War on drugs can not effectively be won because the concept of "winning the war on drugs" is ill-defined.
      - krapp 2y ago
        That's because the purpose of the war on drugs is to "disrupt" and "criminalize" black and leftist communities. Obviously you can't just say the quiet part out loud, even though they have: “We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or blacks, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin and then criminalizing them both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night in the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did,” - Richard Nixon’s domestic policy advisor John Ehrlichman, 1994. The goal of the war on drugs was never to remove drugs from society or eliminate drug use. The US government introduced LSD to the 1960's counterculture through MKULTRA and crack cocaine into black neighborhoods. The US government funnels arms and money through drug cartels. The US government wants drugs on the streets, and wants them to be illegal, and wants drug laws to be arbitrary and cruel, because they know the specter of the angry black man and the dope-smoking communist will scare the mainstream so bad that they'll beg the government to be as violent and authoritarian as they like just to keep "law and order."
        seoulmetro 2y ago
        Doubt it. It may have started with this, but it didn't live its life like that. Drug free societies are way better in every measurable way. You only have to live in one for long enough that returning from that place seems absurd to be ridiculed with drugs.
      - seoulmetro 2y ago
        It can be won. Winning the war on drugs is defined. You lose 99% of all the aspects of a drug-stained society.

seoulmetro 2y ago

It ends when you eliminate nearly all. The same way when does anything end? When you reach the level that is what you can feasibly resemble as "the end". So in this case, drug-free. >What target needs to be reached for the war on drugs to stop? You need to eliminate the negatives that society has to deal with related to illicit drug use? It's not that hard. When is a newly built house finished? >Then why has nobody done it? Huh? Many countries have done it. Why many others haven't is because they don't want to.. Drug usage is a problem for the lower rungs of society, not the government or higher ups. The government must want to improve the life of their citizens at the cost of themselves. Like most objectively good government decisions.

bheadmaster 2y ago
> The same way when does anything end? When you reach the level that is what you can feasibly resemble as "the end". So in this case, drug-free. You seem to be unaware that you're cyclically defining "the end" to be "when it's over". War generally ends when the other side capitulates, or when both sides run out of resources and come to a peace agreement. In war on drugs, there's no "other side", there's just an invisible black market that you can get more and more visible by introducing more and more survaillence.
- seoulmetro 2y ago
  Right. The ends to things are subjective. What's your point? When is a house completed?
  - bheadmaster 2y ago
    > The ends to things are subjective. What's your point? Exactly that. War on drugs can not effectively be won because the concept of "winning the war on drugs" is ill-defined.
    - krapp 2y ago
      That's because the purpose of the war on drugs is to "disrupt" and "criminalize" black and leftist communities. Obviously you can't just say the quiet part out loud, even though they have: “We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or blacks, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin and then criminalizing them both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night in the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did,” - Richard Nixon’s domestic policy advisor John Ehrlichman, 1994. The goal of the war on drugs was never to remove drugs from society or eliminate drug use. The US government introduced LSD to the 1960's counterculture through MKULTRA and crack cocaine into black neighborhoods. The US government funnels arms and money through drug cartels. The US government wants drugs on the streets, and wants them to be illegal, and wants drug laws to be arbitrary and cruel, because they know the specter of the angry black man and the dope-smoking communist will scare the mainstream so bad that they'll beg the government to be as violent and authoritarian as they like just to keep "law and order."
      - seoulmetro 2y ago
        Doubt it. It may have started with this, but it didn't live its life like that. Drug free societies are way better in every measurable way. You only have to live in one for long enough that returning from that place seems absurd to be ridiculed with drugs.
    - seoulmetro 2y ago
      It can be won. Winning the war on drugs is defined. You lose 99% of all the aspects of a drug-stained society.