War on Drugs Cant Be Won, According to Global Leaders

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

'cause my tax dollars will likely be paying for your cancer treatments while your stoned ass hasn't worked a day in 20 years. :FIREdevil

Maybe you shouldnt have to pay for my healthcare, just like maybe i shouldnt have to pay for yours? What if we were both responsible for paying for our own healthcare? What a crazy idea that would be......

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

Maybe you shouldnt have to pay for my healthcare, just like maybe i shouldnt have to pay for yours? What if we were both responsible for paying for our own healthcare? What a crazy idea that would be......

What are you? Some kind of radical reactionary liberatarian lefty?!?!? Don't you believe in "Change we can believe in"?

Okay, back on topic - war on drugs bad.

[Dirtbag59]

[quote=mlmpetert;805456]^

Was the guy crazy because he was on meth or was he on meth because he was crazy? Like matty said I think its more about not putting people in prison for simple position or making people crimes more severe if committed on a regulated drug (ie armed robbery vs. robbery).

Hard drugs like meth and coke have been proven to literally destroy the brain to the point where parts of the brain responsible for basic decisions (like not punching someone because they didn't get your order right at McDonalds) are eroded. Maybe going after the users that have done nothing besides use is the wrong COA however the people that push these drugs need to be sent to jail.

So my Grammy and others with arthritis or nerve pain shouldn’t have all treatment possibilities afforded to them?

Not saying that. However what the legalize pot movement will try to get people to believe is an effective treatment for all forms of pain and should serve as a replacement for narcotics. To me thats a big jump and an overstatement thats main purpose is to get people to join a cause under false pretenses.

And people that receive relief from chiropractors or acupuncturist should be dismissed and put on prescriptions drugs or forced into surgery or some other form of therapy?

Maybe I'm biased against chiropractors and acupuncturist but thats because I've heard stories about promises of cures for everything from arthritis to cancer and people being charged more then they would have to pay for legitimate medical procedures backed by science and peer reviewed research. Obviously not every chiropractor and accupuncturist promises to cure cancer. However Chiropractic has been proven to be nothing more then a dangerous form of massage by legitimate medical journals. Accupuncture's benefits have only proven to be therapeutic/placebo and unnecessarily risky.

It shouldn't be illegal to perform chiropractic or acupuncture however more people should be informed of the risk, and it most certainly should be illegal for both types of practitioners to claim to treat diseases for which there is no medical evidence that they can provide treatment.

You probably think hackie sacks are overrated too, don’t you brah?

Hackie sacks only marginally improve hand-eye coordination. People that use them should be put to death.

Do you support making cigarettes illegal because you cant/couldnt control yourself from smoking or because others need to be controlled from marginally harming themselves overtime?

Part of it is experience. I ended up very sick in part because of Cigarettes, which is obviously a big part my fault. However the fact of the matter is while pot has some medical benefits, cigarettes have virtually zero. And even though it makes money from sin taxes and the like it also force others to pay inflated health care cost. Still it's a pointless drug that even as a legal substance causes more harm then good.

Then again at this point the only real way to fight against cigarettes is to have it further labeled as a social stigma, more then it already is. Making them illegal would be an ineffective deterrent.

I just think your reasons sound selfish.

I never said my reasons weren't selfish. And though I didn't clearly state them as such I did infer with my "not in any rush to legalize pot" statement. Granted part of my reasons fall under the "for the good of society" column. However I won't deny that part of my reasons are in fact selfish.

Why shouldn’t I be allowed to treat my body the way I want to treat it?

You should. However I, or anyone else for that matter, shouldn't be allowed to overstate, or even outright lie, to get you to join my cause or undertake a certain form of treatment. In many cases thats what I see from the legalize pot movement, and while we're at it many alternative medicine practitioners (of course the topic of this thread is the war on drugs so I'll digress on said topic until an appropriate thread is created).

Then again simply saying "I want to get high while not destroying my liver" might not be as politically effective as "hey look, a treatment for cancer and glaucoma that big pharma doesn't want you to know about."

[JoeRedskin]

[quote=Dirtbag59;805477]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

^



Hard drugs like meth and coke have been proven to literally destroy the brain to the point where parts of the brain responsible for basic decisions (like not punching someone because they didn't get your order right at McDonalds) are eroded. Maybe going after the users that have done nothing besides use is the wrong COA however the people that push these drugs need to be sent to jail.



Not saying that. However what the legalize pot movement will try to get people to believe is an effective treatment for all forms of pain and should serve as a replacement for narcotics. To me thats a big jump and an overstatement thats main purpose is to get people to join a cause under false pretenses.



Maybe I'm biased against chiropractors and acupuncturist but thats because I've heard stories about promises of cures for everything from arthritis to cancer and people being charged more then they would have to pay for legitimate medical procedures backed by science and peer reviewed research. Obviously not every chiropractor and accupuncturist promises to cure cancer. However Chiropractic has been proven to be nothing more then a dangerous form of massage by legitimate medical journals. Accupuncture's benefits have only proven to be therapeutic/placebo and unnecessarily risky.

It shouldn't be illegal to perform chiropractic or acupuncture however more people should be informed of the risk, and it most certainly should be illegal for both types of practitioners to claim to treat diseases for which there is no medical evidence that they can provide treatment.



Hackie sacks only marginally improve hand-eye coordination. People that use them should be put to death.



Part of it is experience. I ended up very sick in part because of Cigarettes, which is obviously a big part my fault. However the fact of the matter is while pot has some medical benefits, cigarettes have virtually zero. And even though it makes money from sin taxes and the like it also force others to pay inflated health care cost. Still it's a pointless drug that even as a legal substance causes more harm then good.

Then again at this point the only real way to fight against cigarettes is to have it further labeled as a social stigma, more then it already is. Making them illegal would be an ineffective deterrent.



I never said my reasons weren't selfish. And though I didn't clearly state them as such I did infer with my "not in any rush to legalize pot" statement. Granted part of my reasons fall under the "for the good of society" column. However I won't deny that part of my reasons are in fact selfish.



You should. However I, or anyone else for that matter, shouldn't be allowed to overstate, or even outright lie, to get you to join my cause or undertake a certain form of treatment. In many cases thats what I see from the legalize pot movement, and while we're at it many alternative medicine practitioners (of course the topic of this thread is the war on drugs so I'll digress on said topic until an appropriate thread is created).

Then again simply saying "I want to get high while not destroying my liver" might not be as politically effective as "hey look, a treatment for cancer and glaucoma that big pharma doesn't want you to know about."

Nice post.

[CRedskinsRule]

Canadian Science shows the inherent dangers (yes I think this is an awesome video!)

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by mredskins

Why do folks always point out it is their tax money when it is going to something wasteful but never say their tax money is being used for something good?

First, I was joking. Sorry, once again, forgot to put on the sarcasm font.

Second, my tax dollars go to many, many good things. Too numerous to name. So, b/c the vast majority is well spent [ just saying that to piss off firstdown and CRed ], I and others should just ignore what they believe to be wasteful spending of public funds? If I consider it a misuse of public funds to subsidize the self-destructive habits that have no public health value, am I not entitled to voice such an opininon? And when I do, why do I have to add a disclaimer about all the good things my tax dollars go to?

Just as mlpertert's "reasons sound selfish" to you, yours (if you weren't joking) smacked a little of unjustified entitlement to me. You can treat your body any way you want to - just don't then expect the rest of us to bear the costs for you idiocy.

[NC_Skins]

About as stupid as the "War on Terrorism" and about as affective too.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

About as stupid as the "War on Terrorism" and about as affective too.

Um....OK. You're right, stopping at least 30 terrorist plots since 9/11 and saving thousands of lives is stupid and ineffective:

http://s3.amazonaws.com/thf_media/20..._figure1_2.pdf

- I'd say the U.S. Intel community and NSWDG were pretty damn effective in killing Bin Laden.

- Folks in Afghanistan who were living under Taliban rule don't think the War on Terrorism is stupid.

- I also would imagine the folks in Iraq that had been through Saddam's rape and torture rooms don't think the War of Terrorism is stupid. Pretty sure the Kurds would agree too.

- The War on Terrorism won't be over in our lifetimes. As long as there are Muslim extremists who believe violence is the way to advance their religion and is the way to paradise, and there are Muslim leaders willing to manipulate/exploit them to advance their agendas, we will be a target and it won't be over.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Um....OK. You're right, stopping at least 30 terrorist plots since 9/11 and saving thousands of lives is stupid and ineffective:

http://s3.amazonaws.com/thf_media/20..._figure1_2.pdf

- I'd say the U.S. Intel community and NSWDG were pretty damn effective in killing Bin Laden.

- Folks in Afghanistan who were living under Taliban rule don't think the War on Terrorism is stupid.

- I also would imagine the folks in Iraq that had been through Saddam's rape and torture rooms don't think the War of Terrorism is stupid. Pretty sure the Kurds would agree too.

- The War on Terrorism won't be over in our lifetimes. As long as there are Muslim extremists who believe violence is the way to advance their religion and is the way to paradise, and there are Muslim leaders willing to manipulate/exploit them to advance their agendas, we will be a target and it won't be over.

Thank you. The comparison between: (1) the attempt to stop people from voluntarily using mind altering drugs and (2) the attempt to stop people from killing innocent civilians is flawed on so many levels.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Thank you. The comparison between: (1) the attempt to stop people from voluntarily using mind altering drugs and (2) the attempt to stop people from killing innocent civilians is flawed on so many levels.

Not flawed. I would imagine that drugs have killed more people than terrorism. Also, I'm willing to bet you that we've killed more innocent people than the people we are trying to stop. Irony. Doesn't matter if it's not our people though. **** those brown people!!! WHO NEEDS THEM? AMIRITE? (if you can't tell the last bit is sarcasm....well then)

[NC_Skins]

back on topic. I find this hilarious.



Obama calls for decriminalization on drugs and called the war on drugs a utter failure.


Fast forward now.

White House “drug czar” Gil Kerlikowske called the report “misguided.” Office of National Drug Control Policy spokesman Rafael Lemaitre added, “Making drugs more available as this report suggests will make it harder to keep our communities healthy and safe.”

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Not flawed. I would imagine that drugs have killed more people than terrorism. Also, I'm willing to bet you that we've killed more innocent people than the people we are trying to stop. Irony. Doesn't matter if it's not our people though. **** those brown people!!! WHO NEEDS THEM? AMIRITE? (if you can't tell the last bit is sarcasm....well then)

I understand your sarcasm. However, do you believe people actually have the thoughts in bold? If so, who?

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Um....OK. You're right, stopping at least 30 terrorist plots since 9/11 and saving thousands of lives is stupid and ineffective:

http://s3.amazonaws.com/thf_media/20..._figure1_2.pdf

- I'd say the U.S. Intel community and NSWDG were pretty damn effective in killing Bin Laden.

- Folks in Afghanistan who were living under Taliban rule don't think the War on Terrorism is stupid.

- I also would imagine the folks in Iraq that had been through Saddam's rape and torture rooms don't think the War of Terrorism is stupid. Pretty sure the Kurds would agree too.

- The War on Terrorism won't be over in our lifetimes. As long as there are Muslim extremists who believe violence is the way to advance their religion and is the way to paradise, and there are Muslim leaders willing to manipulate/exploit them to advance their agendas, we will be a target and it won't be over.

Oh god, it's hilarious watching Americans swallow everything they're spoon fed. Americans also thought we could win a war on drugs back in the 70s and 80s too, and here we are today. How's that going by the way? Let's look at the money spent on this "war on drugs" and it hasn't changed one bit. Same as the war on terrorism. It's a sham. Plain and simple. Even George Bush says we can't win it, and he's the guy that started this faux war.

Exclusive interview with President Bush - TODAY.com

Lauer: So I’m just saying can we win it? Do you see that?

President Bush: I don’t think you can win it. But I think you can create conditions so that those who use terror as a tool are less acceptable in parts of the world — let's put it that way.

Let's see what a military general thinks about the war on terror.

"I decided a year ago that he cannot win the war on terror," said retired Gen. Merrill McPeak, former Air Force chief of staff, at a news conference in New York organized by Democrats.

Read more: Bush: U.S. Can't Win War On Terror - CBS News

You talk about the "folks in Iraq" that went through the rape and torture with Saddam, yet fail to realize that we have killed and injured more civilians in Iraq than Saddam ever has. Irony at it's best. I guess blowing up innocent civilians was in their best interest. After all, look how well they are doing now!!! /sarcasm off

Iraq: Blackwater shootings killed 17 - USATODAY.com

Blackwater, our paid mercenaries...lolol Iraq people are loving this freedom I tell ya!!!

Also, those Folks in Afghanistan are happy with the war on terror? Really? You know this how? You live in Afghanistan? You have family that does? Or you just parroting what the mass media is pushing you? I'm going with the latter.

Here is the deal. The media uses fear to pump into individuals like yourself to deter from the real issue at hand, which is the failing economy and the crooks stealing your money. Also, lets ask our self something. How many of these surrounding countries are currently being bombed by terrorist organizations of the extremist Muslims? Italy? Greece? Turkey? Russia? Spain? If they are, chances are it's due to their foreign policy. I imagine if we change our foreign policy, then this "war or terror" would fix itself.

What you are trying to fight is a "ideology" in the extremist Muslims, and you can't fight a ideology or a belief.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/thf_media/20..._figure1_2.pdf

Any evidence on any of these "foiled terrorists"? We've been keeping these "terrorist" locked up, tortured without showing any proof or putting them on trial. All that money spent on intelligence and people have still brought bombs on planes. It was just a miracle they didn't blow up due to the user's stupidity. Guess they were too busy putting devices on "terrorists" vehicles to actually use real intel.

Guy Finds FBI Tracking Device On Car, Posts Pics Online... FBI Shows Up Demanding It Back | Techdirt

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

It's a sham. Plain and simple. Even George Bush says we can't win it, and he's the guy that started this faux war.

Let's see what a military general thinks about the war on terror.

It's funny all you've got is a couple of quotes taken out of context and sensationalized by the liberal leaning media (NBC, CBS) leading up to the 2004 election. Nothing I say or any fact I present will change your mind anyway.

You talk about the "folks in Iraq" that went through the rape and torture with Saddam, yet fail to realize that we have killed and injured more civilians in Iraq than Saddam ever has. Irony at it's best. I guess blowing up innocent civilians was in their best interest. After all, look how well they are doing now!!! /sarcasm off

As usual with you far lefties, all soundbyte, no factual correctness. Here's some facts, it's good to check them every once in a while.

Twentieth Century Atlas - Death Tolls and Casualty Statistics for Wars, Dictatorships and Genocides

Casualties of the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Under Saddam a very conservative estimate of 500K people died because of his actions. Since the end of major combat operations in Iraq (2003) reputable sources put the number of Iraqi deaths between 100-150K, and most of those were not the result of U.S. military action, but rather terrorist or other violent groups (criminals) in Iraq.

Economy of Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Looks like the Iraqis aren't doing so bad after all.

From the article: "Since the peak of 1980, the nominal GDP of Iraq steadily shrunk to $12.3 billion in 2000. However removal of sanctions, after the overthrow of Saddam, had immediate effect. The nominal GDP had reached $55.4 billion by 2007[5] due to increase in oil output as well as international prices. In 2006, the real GDP growth was estimated at almost 17 percent.[6]"

Also, those Folks in Afghanistan are happy with the war on terror? Really? You know this how? You live in Afghanistan? You have family that does? Or you just parroting what the mass media is pushing you? I'm going with the latter.

Sounds like you're parroting more far-left conspiracy nonsense. I'm sure women in Afghanistan will agree with me. Again, here's some fact from the Dept. of State.

I. The Taliban's War Against Women

Here is the deal. The media uses fear to pump into individuals like yourself to deter from the real issue at hand, which is the failing economy and the crooks stealing your money. Also, lets ask our self something. How many of these surrounding countries are currently being bombed by terrorist organizations of the extremist Muslims? Italy? Greece? Turkey? Russia? Spain? If they are, chances are it's due to their foreign policy. I imagine if we change our foreign policy, then this "war or terror" would fix itself.

Ah yes....the old Neville Chamberlin-esque "foreign policy" excuse for terrorists attacking INNOCENT CIVILIANS. And without posting multiple links, terrorist attacks happen in many other countries around the world regardless of their "foreign policy"

What you are trying to fight is a "ideology" in the extremist Muslims, and you can't fight a ideology or a belief.

You can damn sure fight against those who take violent action against others because of their beliefs. That's a lot better than sitting back and either hoping you don't become a target, (kind of like an group of antelopes being stalked by lions) or give in to the demands of violent extremists.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

It's funny all you've got is a couple of quotes taken out of context and sensationalized by the liberal leaning media (NBC, CBS) leading up to the 2004 election. Nothing I say or any fact I present will change your mind anyway.

The link I posted was a straight interview. Nothing opinionated, nothing liberal, nothing edited. It's the transcript of the President. Nothing was taken out of context. The President said it plain as day. This has nothing to do with "liberal media". Stop parroting that shit please.

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

As usual with you far lefties, all soundbyte, no factual correctness. Here's some facts, it's good to check them every once in a while.

First off, I'm not a liberal, nor am I a conservative. I hold no affiliation to a party unlike the rest of the moronic Americans out there. TWO PARTY SYSTEMS ARE GETTING IT DONE AMIRITE?

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Twentieth Century Atlas - Death Tolls and Casualty Statistics for Wars, Dictatorships and Genocides

Did you even bother to read any of the "facts" you are trying to present? Apparently you didn't. Those aren't deaths by Saddam. Those are deaths that came about due to UN Sanctions on Iraq.

(one of the very sources from your link)
Washington and Baghdad Agree on One Point - Sanctions Hurt - NYTimes.com

Listen people, if you are going to argue your stance, at least read your "facts" before you present them. /facepalm

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Casualties of the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You can always tell people don't have "facts" when they start linking Wikipedia as a source. You do realize that anybody can edit these "facts". Here, use this.
Iraq Body Count

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Under Saddam a very conservative estimate of 500K people died because of his actions. Since the end of major combat operations in Iraq (2003) reputable sources put the number of Iraqi deaths between 100-150K, and most of those were not the result of U.S. military action, but rather terrorist or other violent groups (criminals) in Iraq.

The US forces killed 1 billion innocent children and women. See I can make up numbers too. How about presenting something besides Wikipedia please. Thanks in advance. Also, those deaths were from UN Sanctions, from the very link you posted earlier. Kinda shot yourself in the foot on that one bro.

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Economy of Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Looks like the Iraqis aren't doing so bad after all.

LOL. Are you serious? Have you been to Iraq or do you know anybody that lives there? So you are taking their GDP and assuming they are living the good life. I imagine most Iraqis would tell you to go to hell. You want to know about that GDP? It's the oil my man. The whole reason we were there. The country is still in turmoil and you now have civil wars between the sunni and shiite. I can see Iraq has turned into a regular Dubai. *rolls eyes*

Man. I'm ready to pack up and roll to Iraq so I can live the good life!! Hear, listen from the good people of Iraq if you don't believe me.



You really are delusional if you believe the Iraqi people are better off.

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Sounds like you're parroting more far-left conspiracy nonsense. I'm sure women in Afghanistan will agree with me. Again, here's some fact from the Dept. of State.

I. The Taliban's War Against Women

You expect me to believe some propraganda from the US about how great the Afghanistans love us? hahahahahahahaha You are killing me. The very people that are swindling you, robbing you blind, taking away your civil liberties, these are the guys you turn to for the truth? Guys, it's ok. The Afghanis love us for our invasion because our government says so. My brain hurts thinking about it. Show me something else please.

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Ah yes....the old Neville Chamberlin-esque "foreign policy" excuse for terrorists attacking INNOCENT CIVILIANS. And without posting multiple links, terrorist attacks happen in many other countries around the world regardless of their "foreign policy"

If you don't think our foreign policy isn't the reason we are hated, then you seriously don't need to be voting. People are attacked for various reason, and not all by "extremist Muslims". When is the last time China was attacked by terrorist? Do they even have that worry? Nope. Why? FOREIGN POLICY!!

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

You can damn sure fight against those who take violent action against others because of their beliefs. That's a lot better than sitting back and either hoping you don't become a target, (kind of like an group of antelopes being stalked by lions) or give in to the demands of violent extremists.

...or you could you know, stay the **** out of people's business and lands? You know, that goes a long way. We have bases spread out around the world. Would you allow another country's military base in our nation? Didn't think so, and neither do these people. America need to pull back it's troops, defend it's borders, pretty much like China has. Worked well so far and right now they are the top dog.