War on Drugs Cant Be Won, According to Global Leaders

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Nobody said a fix is easy, but the current way is seriously flawed, costly, and ineffective. Something needs to change. Obviously a gradual change is necessary. Start with legalizing weed and go from there. I think that's the route we're slowing heading anyway.

I am pretty much in agreement with you as to this statement.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

So back on topic, is the war on drugs worth it or not? I think it's obviously been proven to be a giant failure, so what's the next step?

its not worth and its really obvious.

The next step is changing perception of the issue. Government needs to look at it (drug use) is a health issue/epidemic not a crime issue. The black market creates the criminal element.

Im more of a decriminalization of marijuana similar to the netherlands than full out legalization. But id take full legalization vs a criminal record for a joint = that sh*t is absolutely effing crazy. Hallucigens, some designers drugs decriminalize for those too.

I would not be in favor of any type of legalization of herion, cocaine or crystal methamphetimine. The potential devastation to communities would be horrible.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

its not worth and its really obvious.

The next step is changing perception of the issue. Government needs to look at it (drug use) is a health issue/epidemic not a crime issue. The black market creates the criminal element.

Im more of a decriminalization of marijuana similar to the netherlands than full out legalization. But id take full legalization vs a criminal record for a joint = that sh*t is absolutely effing crazy. Hallucigens, some designers drugs decriminalize for those too.

I would not be in favor of any type of legalization of herion, cocaine or crystal methamphetimine. The potential devastation to communities would be horrible.

Agreed with all your points.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

its not worth and its really obvious.

The next step is changing perception of the issue. Government needs to look at it (drug use) is a health issue/epidemic not a crime issue. The black market creates the criminal element.

Im more of a decriminalization of marijuana similar to the netherlands than full out legalization. But id take full legalization vs a criminal record for a joint = that sh*t is absolutely effing crazy. Hallucigens, some designers drugs decriminalize for those too.

I would not be in favor of any type of legalization of herion, cocaine or crystal methamphetimine. The potential devastation to communities would be horrible.

Good points.

Portugal has taken to viewing addiction as a health issue rather than a crime issue, as you say, and has done some serious decriminalization. Contrary to the arguments of naysayers, they have found that decriminalization actually makes drug use, and especially drug abuse, go down.

[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

[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?

[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.

[Beemnseven]

Legalize 'em -- all of them. It'll never happen, of course.

The War on Drugs is government's permission slip to snoop on our finances, to stop us if we're carrying too much cash, seize that cash, to burst through our front door in the middle of the night, to shoot our dog, to search our cars, ... on and on ...

It's also been very effective at chipping away at that pesky 4th amendment. Plus it ensures that cash continues to flow to the police departments, gives lots of government tax-feeders with plenty to do (not to mention the police union reps employed). It gives a reason for SWAT teams to exist -- making sure that after-market paramilitary equipment doesn't go to waste. The asset forfeiture laws give police departments all sorts of cool toys to play with, without even needing a guilty verdict preceding the forfeiture of the toys... It keeps the prison popluation up, keeps prison guards employed...

In other words, this endless, highly expensive "War" is just another way to keep the serfs in line, and provides the justification for tax dollars to continue to be sucked up by government.

It's a HUGE racket, and politicians aren't about to give that up.

[Dogtag]

The headline sounded misleading to me ... I just didn't trust what it was saying. So I looked up who these WORLD LEADERS were. Former politicians from Columbia, Mexico & Brazil.
Kinda sounds like the world leaders of DRUNKS AGAINST MAD MOTHERS saying that efforts against drunk driving are wrong.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Legalize 'em -- all of them. It'll never happen, of course.

I think marijuana should be legalized, not any hardcore drugs. I do however think we should decriminalize possession of hardcore drugs (anything other than selling).

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

The War on Drugs is government's permission slip to snoop on our finances, to stop us if we're carrying too much cash, seize that cash, to burst through our front door in the middle of the night, to shoot our dog, to search our cars, ... on and on ...

You are a bit off on this. Actually, the war on drugs is a effort on the behalf of lobbyist from the Tobacco, Alcohol, and other pharmaceutical industry. Know who the Partnership for a Drug-Free America is? Up until 1997, they were receiving millions of dollars from the alcohol, tobacco and pharmaceutical companies. Now, they only take checks from the pharmaceutical companies...lol OOOOoohh...the irony.

Pot Boiler

For a group fighting drug abuse, the Partnership has taken cash from some odd parties—including American Brands (Jim Beam whiskey), Philip Morris (Marlboro and Virginia Slims cigarettes, Miller beer), Anheuser Busch (Budweiser, Michelob, Busch beer), R.J. Reynolds (Camel, Salem, Winston cigarettes), as well as pharmaceutical firms Bristol Meyers-Squibb, Merck & Company and Proctor & Gamble (Marin Institute Backgrounder, 2/97).

The Partnership recently announced it will quit its alcohol and tobacco habit but will continue to mainline pharmaceutical checks (Village Voice, 3/12/97). And its silence continues on America’s deadliest drug problems: tobacco (400,000 annual deaths), alcohol (100,000, including 20,000 from drunken driving), and pharmaceuticals (6,000 to 9,000).

It's always been about money and greed and keeping their foothold in the market of consumers. It's never been about stopping drugs or helping the people.

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

It's also been very effective at chipping away at that pesky 4th amendment.

The War on Terrorism has eroded more civil liberties than anything. LOL PATRIOT ACT.

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

It's a HUGE racket, and politicians aren't about to give that up.

It is a huge racket, and politicians are going to keep taking those lobbyist checks to keep that policy intact.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

You are a bit off on this. Actually, the war on drugs is a effort on the behalf of lobbyist from the Tobacco, Alcohol, and other pharmaceutical industry. Know who the Partnership for a Drug-Free America is? Up until 1997, they were receiving millions of dollars from the alcohol, tobacco and pharmaceutical companies. Now, they only take checks from the pharmaceutical companies...lol OOOOoohh...the irony.

My point wasn't off at all. You're correct, as far as big pharma goes. They like the War on Drugs too, but it doesn't negate my point. They like it because it stifles competition from other mind-altering substances, but government likes it even better because it's a great tool for keeping their eyes on our business and their boots on our throats.

[mlmdub130]

Originally Posted by Dogtag

The headline sounded misleading to me ... I just didn't trust what it was saying. So I looked up who these WORLD LEADERS were. Former politicians from Columbia, Mexico & Brazil.
Kinda sounds like the world leaders of DRUNKS AGAINST MAD MOTHERS saying that efforts against drunk driving are wrong.

your statement doesn't really make any sense and you obviously didn't take much time to look it up. this is one of the first links after you google war on drugs failed. and fyi paul volcker was chair of the fed reserve under carter and regan and was an economic advisor to obama, schltz was sec of state under regan, if you actually cared.


The 19-member commission includes former presidents of Mexico, Brazil and Colombia, Greece's prime minister, former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, former U.S. officials George P. Schultz and Paul Volcker form, the writers Carlos Fuentes and Mario Vargas Llosa, and British billionaire Richard Branson.


Read more on myFOXdfw.com: Panel: War on Drugs Failed, Regulate Marijuana