Quote of the Week

[Michael Emrys]

I got this in an e-mail from a friend:

"I think this sort of thing is more common than we would wish among the heavy hitters in the drug world, but then I am rather susceptible to conspiracy theories about such matters. I view the "War on Drugs" as the Fox Militia taking on the chicken thieves and bragging about the good job they're doing."

Michael

[gunnergoz]

Can't argue with that. It has been a colossal failure. Billions spent upon it, with almost nothing to show in the way of success. In retrospect, it would have been far better to have used the money to set up a crash program of medical research to discover the bio-chemical and genetic roots that underlie the behavioral aberration that is addiction. As it is, the problem of addiction in the US is so great that the demand and profit from drugs has seriously destabilized the government of Mexico (the "Narco Wars") and provided yet one more reason for us to remain entangled in the quagmire that is Afghanistan.

[Michael Emrys]

My friend, the source of the quote, holds that the probable reason we are in Afghanistan is to safeguard the flow of opium and its derivatives, which flow the Taliban had cut off for two years. Of course, as he states, he is susceptible to conspiracy theories. To give him credit where due, this one may be better grounded than the run of the mill.

Michael

[hoolaman]

What "sort of thing"?

[Michael Emrys]

What "sort of thing"?

We had been discussing The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo and he was referring to the very complex nesting of a host of enterprises owned by a certain Swedish gangster involved in concealing his true worth and the flow of money through his empire.

Michael

[hoolaman]

So the entire US Army is in the pockets of international criminal syndicates? I thought we were there 'cause of something about terrorists. Medicinal opiates are grown in various places in the world so I don't think Afghan poppies are really needed for anything good.

The war on drugs is genuine and self perpetuating because it is wrapped up in outmoded international treaties and UN conventions. The various countries that police it do so individually with great enthusiasm but at the direction of the UN/US. Thats the problem with regulation/prohibition often it is very difficult to go backwards as a whole bureaucractic apparatus springs up and the people invested in it spend a lot of time trying to validate their own existence.

After all EVERYONE knows the war on drugs approach doesn't work and hasn't worked. Politicians of every variety just don't have the stones to do anything about it.

[Stalins Organ]

I was watching a History Chennel prog on Sun Tzu last night & dutifully noted that the talking heads were all repeating the same mantra - war is a means to a political end.

Vietnam was the case used to illustrate this - where the military campaign became the end in itself - body counts weer all important, etc., but hte ewar was lost politically despite constant battlefield "victories".

And I couldn't help but think of Afghanistan (and indeed at the end of the programme there were shots of US soldiers in desert kit perhaps inviting the viewer to consier teh question in that context)

So what is the clear political objective in Afghanstan, how is the population being bought on side for it, and how does the military campaign support it?

[Michael Emrys]

So the entire US Army is in the pockets of international criminal syndicates?

I can't speak for my friend, but I don't think that was the intended message. Whatever the original reasons for going in were—and I for one feel that it was desirable to root the Taliban out—one of the consequences has been a vast increase in the opium trade. Whether this was foreseen and approved has not yet been proven. But I don't think it is too much to say that international criminal elements have been happy to piggyback on the Western military presence in the country, whether that is deliberate in some parts of our government or not.

Michael