4 ms·

> But from the cartels perspective, they're almost certainly in the right. Sure, but so is basically everyone. ISIS is in the right and justified then, too.

roger110 7mo ago
Also, coalition didn't get rid of ISIS by negotiation or something. They used bombs and, in one advisor's words, entrenching tools.
JasonADrury 7mo ago
> Sure, but so is basically everyone. Well, sure! The crucial difference between cartels and ISIS is that the cartels are in it to make money, ISIS is an ideologically motivated nation-building project. The cartels disappear when the activity becomes unprofitable, ISIS does not. The cartels tend to use violence when it's profitable, ISIS will use violence because they believe that an imaginary man wants them to do so. You could legalize and regulate their drug-related business, paying a small amount of taxes will probably be more attractive than maintaining a private military in the long term. Alternatively you can fight like this, barely dent the cartels and instead cause massive amounts of suffering for the regular people who live in the middle of it all? If you actually cared about improving things rather than making a show, surely you'd want to pursue policies that (a) actually help you get rid of the negative influence of the cartels and (b) avoid collateral damage by not forcing the cartels to retaliate.
- pipeline_peak 7mo ago
  > not forcing the cartels to retaliate. What do you mean forcing? They are organized crime, this is what they choose to do. The right thing for them to do is turn themselves in. How do you expect the cartel to subside and eventually dissolve? Policies that encourage them to play nicely?
  - JasonADrury 7mo ago
    >What do you mean forcing? They are organized crime, this is what they choose to do. The right thing for them to do is turn themselves in. Self preservation. Turning themselves in would be antithetical to that. To expect anyone to sacrifice themselves would be absurd. The only reason the government is only occasionally assassinating individual leaders instead of fighting open war against the cartels is that the cartels are willing and able to impose unacceptable costs in retaliation. It would be suicidal to not retaliate. >How do you expect the cartel to subside and eventually dissolve? Policies that encourage them to play nicely? Policies that eliminate their sources of revenue.

roger110 7mo ago

Also, coalition didn't get rid of ISIS by negotiation or something. They used bombs and, in one advisor's words, entrenching tools.

JasonADrury 7mo ago

> Sure, but so is basically everyone. Well, sure! The crucial difference between cartels and ISIS is that the cartels are in it to make money, ISIS is an ideologically motivated nation-building project. The cartels disappear when the activity becomes unprofitable, ISIS does not. The cartels tend to use violence when it's profitable, ISIS will use violence because they believe that an imaginary man wants them to do so. You could legalize and regulate their drug-related business, paying a small amount of taxes will probably be more attractive than maintaining a private military in the long term. Alternatively you can fight like this, barely dent the cartels and instead cause massive amounts of suffering for the regular people who live in the middle of it all? If you actually cared about improving things rather than making a show, surely you'd want to pursue policies that (a) actually help you get rid of the negative influence of the cartels and (b) avoid collateral damage by not forcing the cartels to retaliate.

pipeline_peak 7mo ago
> not forcing the cartels to retaliate. What do you mean forcing? They are organized crime, this is what they choose to do. The right thing for them to do is turn themselves in. How do you expect the cartel to subside and eventually dissolve? Policies that encourage them to play nicely?
- JasonADrury 7mo ago
  >What do you mean forcing? They are organized crime, this is what they choose to do. The right thing for them to do is turn themselves in. Self preservation. Turning themselves in would be antithetical to that. To expect anyone to sacrifice themselves would be absurd. The only reason the government is only occasionally assassinating individual leaders instead of fighting open war against the cartels is that the cartels are willing and able to impose unacceptable costs in retaliation. It would be suicidal to not retaliate. >How do you expect the cartel to subside and eventually dissolve? Policies that encourage them to play nicely? Policies that eliminate their sources of revenue.