MTG Let's Bomb Mexico

Black ops is a better idea. Legalizing fentanyl is a terrible idea.

 

morons who support the war on drugs, as prohibition means people don't know what they are buying and are more likely to overdose

we saw the same with alcohol prohibition

so they are the ones that are really complicit in far more American death and misery.

 

No, that's an absolutely awful idea, between the fact that we share a huge border with American cities close to it and the fact that the Mexican government is actually trying (albeit failing) to fight the cartels.

 

But it’s not just about overdosing. One doesn’t have to overdose to have their life ruined by drugs. The onus is still on those taking the drugs.

 

Bin Laden was a surgical strike based on specific credible intel. Fairly simple. Going after the cartels, notice plural, not so much.

 

Why can't we do surgical strikes against the cartel?

 

Just think about it. It will come to you.

 

That's not an answer. In the end, you hypocritically agree with the Obama administration invading Pakistan, a sovereign nation with nuclear weapons, but don't agree with attacking the cartel, which is responsible for the deaths of countless Americans through drugs and other methods, because to do so would be to invade Mexico, which doesn't have nuclear weapons. You said that we cannot strategically drone strike the cartel, because Mexico is a sovereign nation, and that would be an act of war, but you see no problem with the Obama administration invading Pakistan, which, in your logic, would also be an act of war, but was not, somehow.

 

Correction, the Americans who’ve died from taking illegals drugs are the ones to blame for American deaths through drugs.
Do you blame Sig Sauer, HK, Smith & Wesson, etc for gun related deaths? Of course you don’t, nor should you. So why blame the cartels for people choosing to use illegal drugs? The cartels only exist because of demand.

 

It never gets old. The lefties and RINOS love to start wars in far away places that we have no business doing, yet don't give a flip about own border is being invaded and our country flooded with drugs....facilitated by Mexican cartels. I have no problem defending our border with bombing the absolute **** out of them.

Either that or quit pissing away money in ukraine and finish the wall. Then build another wall behind it.

 

According to the CDC, the number of firearm deaths in 2020 was 45,222, which is 13.7% per 100,000 people. Contrast that with the number of drug deaths, which is 91,799, which is 27.9% per 100,000, more than twice that of gun deaths. Additionally, no one is arguing against illegally importing and exporting guns, such as what may have happened when the Obama regime gave about 2,000 firearms to the cartels. No one on the right was defending that. Now people on the left? Well, yeah, of course. They were defending that, just as they defended letting the Merchant of Death, who sold guns to kill Americans and countless other people, be surrendered for some anti-American female basketball player. Lastly, there is a difference between cocaine and fentanyl and a Glock. The former has no redeeming qualities, whereas the latter can be used for self-defense. Thus, the comparison is an absurdity, yet typical coming from the left.

 

The point of course wasn’t about the number of deaths or some idiot basketball player or illegally importing and exporting guns. But I applaud your effort to try to move the goal posts.
The point is those who supply a product do so because of a demand. To blame the cartels for idiots using illegal drugs is asinine. If you use illegal drugs then YOU would be to blame if YOU overdose, not the cartel. Those supplying a product are only doing so because of the demand. Odd you would be so against personal responsibility.

 

Yes, there is a demand. It does not mean we need to facilitate the demand by sheer pusillanimousness. In fact, we have laws against this. Therefore, this is a black market. Since the cartels are engaged in a black market that kills many Americans, we should retaliate with drone strikes. We need to let these monsters know that we mean business. I want Biden, after a drone strike, to say, "The more you bring drugs into our country, the more drone strikes that will come your way. And I mean business, motherf-----." I mean, we know how presidential he is with his course language. He can even call it a "big ****ing deal" while he's at it.

 

Retaliate against what though? Americans who use illegal drugs are complicit in these cartels flooding the US with drugs. If we the people share in the blame then how can we justify bombing cartels? Doesn’t that seem a tad hypocritical?
Also why haven’t any previous presidents bombed cartels?

 

We arrest Americans who violate our drug laws. So, no, not hypocritical. We have done nothing against the cartels. So, if there is hypocrisy, it's fully on your side of not attacking the cartel.

We should not rely on what past presidents have done to determine if something is right or wrong. Liberalism, which advocates turning the other cheek while our enemies attack us, has grown in popularity, so by the time we had these weapons to make these kinds of strikes, there would be too much public pressure not to. But if we had this technology immediately after the Mexican-American War, when our culture cared about defending our country against foreign enemies, I do believe that President Zachary Taylor would use drone technology against the cartels.

 

We arrest cartel members too. That you think we don’t is astounding.
If you believe no previous president was able to bomb cartels then what makes you think the current president should? Don’t the same obstacle you mentioned still exist?

 

They legalized pot in California and now the cartels are selling more than ever, plus they have other “pharma” to offer.
I guess “A stoned society is a happy society… until the money runs out!”

 

No, if you had thought about it, you would have seen that a surgical strike is a very limited raid with a single, specific target. The suggestion that we bomb cartels is anything but that. Cartels are spread throughout the Mexican population. And then there are the orchards or groves where the leaves are harvested, not to mention the labs for processing which are widely dispersed. Do you see now why a surgical strike is a non starter.

Also, I never said I agreed with the Bin Laden issue. Re read post #80

 

At this point with available technology the border with Mexico could easily be made secure.
The border is effectively open because America's corrupt bipartisan ruling political class wants it that way.

 

supply and demand, pot is still illegal federally, thus harder to sell pot legally, they can't even put their money in the banks

 

It appears that you are actually comparing the cartels to Americans who have died from the illegal drugs that they import into this country. You know, the cartels that dismember their victims and have killed scores of thousands of Americans. That the cartels should not be bombed because Americans made the choice to use those drugs. How about Americans who don't have the mental hardwiring to consent to making the choice to use the drugs imported from the cartel and yet still get their hands on them? How about the Americans who have died from fentanyl overdose, such as cops investigating a crime scene? How about the Americans who have an addiction, which the cartel is feeding through a black market, and die from or rob and kill others to feed their addiction?

Clearly, what we are doing now is not working. MTG is saying let's step up the game against these people and show them that we mean business. That's all.

 

Per Wikipedia: "A surgical strike is a military attack which is intended to damage only a legitimate military target, with no or minimal collateral damage to surrounding structures, vehicles, buildings, or the general public infrastructure and utilities."

How is this not possible? Why can't the military attack certain areas where there is little to no collateral damage, such as a courier travelling in a remote location with drugs or a lab with little to no civilians at time of impact? You're arguing as if these methods of attack against certain networks and subnetworks of the cartel are logically impossible. And that is simply absurd.

I re-read post 80. You did not disagree with the raid that took out Osama bin Laden; you justified it.

 

Nope. You don't have one thing correct regarding all your assumptions above. I thought I was pretty clear. Let me try it one more time. After that there really isn't much more I can do to help you understand.
Let me try it this way...do those who use illegal drugs create a demand for said drugs? Yes they do. In doing so these people are in fact complicit in drugs flooding this country. The reason illegal drugs are in this country is because of people buying them. Classic supply and demand. If these people didn't buy these illegal drugs there would be no reason for the cartels to flood the US with said drugs. See how that works?
It's not unlike illegal immigration. If we stopped hiring them there would be no reason for them to come here. Supply and demand. If we keep hiring them, they will keep coming. We stop hiring them, they won't keep coming. Simple as that. We are our own worst enemy.

 

You were saying?

Clearly you miss the point and the level of death they bring to this country!!

 

I suppose as cautious as they are when they smuggle a couple million tabs of Fentanyl across the DNC open borders. I'm sure there's a warning label on the gunny sacks, right