4 ms·
> the best solution seems to be treating them as military targets. The United States isn't the world police. We have both a mixed track record of military eng
by hx8 1y ago
> the best solution seems to be treating them as military targets.
The United States isn't the world police. We have both a mixed track record of military engagements with similar non-state targets, and a poor track record of long term disruption of the drug trade. The drug cartels are better funded, better trained, and better connected than terrorist organizations. I wouldn't put money on this turning out well over a twenty year period. Our military budget is extensive, but the resources are still finite. Let's spend them defending ourselves and allies from the type of state actors we are effective against and find another solution to drug trafficking.
- rayiner 1y agoThe fact that the cartels are better funded, better trained, and better connected than terrorist organizations is a reason to treat them as quasi-state actors rather than merely criminals. And I agree the U.S. isn’t the world police. But the cartels are having negative effects in the U.S., not only in Latin America. And it’s not just drugs. They are involved in human trafficking on the border, and have expanded into other areas like supplying illegal construction labor.
- judahmeek 1y agoOkay, so "War on Drugs" 2.0 then. Because that's worked out so well the last time...
- rayiner 1y agoThe war on drugs was prosecuted through law enforcement means inside the U.S., focused on controlling drugs. This would be executed through military means with the goal of eliminating organizations. Ideally like a combination of the war on ISIS m and the war on the italian mafia.
- judahmeek 1y agoFirst, the war on drugs did have spec ops operations against cartels: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Snowcap https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Snowcap Second, there's no reason to trust that using the military will work out better: https://www.democracynow.org/2025/8/14/fort_bragg_cartel_seth_harp https://www.democracynow.org/2025/8/14/fort_bragg_cartel_set... Wars on drugs are basically fighting laws of economics themselves. The only option that actually works is legislation & regulation. Why we think that we can't regulate cocaine the way we regulate alcohol, weed, or cigarettes is beyond me.
- rayiner 1y agoSo what do we do about cartels smuggling illegal labor into Arizona to work on construction projects?
- jeffbee 1y agoWe should subsidize that.
- judahmeek 1y agoMandate E-verify with high penalties for employers & a fast remedy track for false negatives.
- anigbrowl 1y agoMake seasonal work permits easy to get and make it easy for people to leave, instead of the current IIRIRA mandatory 10 year bar which incentives people to stay in the black economy. Or if you're Trump, just fire missiles at things. For all you know some of the people killed on that boat were victims of trafficking themselves.
- rayiner 1y agoWhat’s a solution that doesn’t involve adding sub-market price foreign labor?
- 1y ago
- jeffbee 1y agoISIS was in a declared war with 60 countries. Some dudes in a boat are not the same thing.
- jacquesm 1y ago> The war on drugs was prosecuted through law enforcement means inside the U.S., focused on controlling drugs. That isn't the whole story, not by a long shot. Plenty of Latin American countries collaborated on this with the United States and there were DEA personnel in many of those countries, some stationed permanently, others on shorter tours mainly involved in educating local LE. In Colombia for instance your chances of being interviewed by US DEA officer when leaving the country were pretty good. Even today they have plenty of representation outside of the USA: https://www.dea.gov/foreign-offices/north-and-central-america https://www.dea.gov/foreign-offices/north-and-central-americ...