Horrible stuff happening in Mexico

[agamemnus]

Saw this first one on the MSNBC RSS on the front page, and the second one as a link from the first one. Sending chills down spine reading how Mexico is hostage to these brutal, sick people.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41759912...me_and_courts/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41609435...news-americas/

It's going to be Iraq, Afghanistan, Mexico: we have to send massive amounts of troops there: hundreds of thousands. With tanks and aircraft. If we don't do this, we'll never get a handle on this massive human tragedy.

Here's the start of the first one:

By ALICIA A. CALDWELL
The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Federal, state and local authorities conducted a massive sweep Thursday in the United States and Latin America of suspected Mexican drug cartel members in the United States in a widespread domestic response to the killing of a U.S. agent in Mexico last week.

Carl Pike, assistant special agent in charge of the Drug Enforcement Administration's special operations division, said the sweep is a direct reaction to the shooting death of Customs and Immigration Enforcement agent Jaime Zapata in Mexico last week.

"We are taking a stand and we are sending a message back to the cartels that we will not tolerate the murder of a U.S. agent, or any U.S. official," Pike said.
Story: Drug gang shot U.S. agents, Mexican governor says

An agent involved in a raid in Houston was shot and wounded Thursday, though the injury was not life-threatening, according to a federal official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the official was not authorized to discuss the operation. The shooting occurred during a raid by agents with the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and Houston police. It was not clear what agency the injured officer worked for, and the suspected shooter is in custody.

Pike said the roundup, which began Wednesday and was expected to continue into Friday, is targeting suspected criminals with ties to any Mexican drug cartel to try to disrupt drug trafficking operations in the United States.

[Being]

It'd be nice if we could stem the flow of American weapons to the cartels (it is suspected that an American weapon was used in the attack) and round up all the weapons we already let slip through.

[agamemnus]

It would help, it would help. It won't be enough, though. Serious American military presence for about 10 years should help turn things around, I think. And the prisons... Well, not that ours are much better, but at least they have better security. Turn those Mexican prisons into gulags.

[Being]

Might be better to just annex Mexico. That way we can at least recoup some of the costs through taxes and oil profits.

[Dreadnaught]

Once again, we have a failed state to our south and it's astonishing that we haven't been more proactive with it over the past two decades.

[Lewkowski]

Best thing we could do is legalize drugs and control the border. Cut into the profits of the cartel and prevent the violence from seeping over.

[RandBlade]

"Control the border" is not a practical suggestion, the other one is. If the drugs were legalised, there probably wouldn't be a need to control the border anyway - unless you're worried about immigration, not criminality.

[Being]

"Control the border" is not a practical suggestion, the other one is. If the drugs were legalised, there probably wouldn't be a need to control the border anyway - unless you're worried about immigration, not criminality.

How will legalizing drugs change anything? It'll still be the same cartels battling each other for market share. Rounding up the illegally obtained American weapons arsenals is a better plan. And annexation would make that feat easier.

[RandBlade]

How will legalizing drugs change anything? It'll still be the same cartels battling each other for market share. Rounding up the illegally obtained American weapons arsenals is a better plan. And annexation would make that feat easier.

Which illegal cartel runs Guiness? Or Budweiser? Which criminals run Coors? Is Miller ran by the mob? How many been murdered by the thugs behind Samuel Adams?

[Being]

Which illegal cartel runs Guiness? Or Budweiser? Which criminals run Coors? Is Miller ran by the mob? How many been murdered by the thugs behind Samuel Adams?

Oh, I see. You think Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, Roche, and GlaxoSmithKline are going to take over the operations from the cartels and the cartels aren't going to put up a fight. Quite dense thinging there I must say.

[RandBlade]

Oh, I see. You think Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, Roche, and GlaxoSmithKline are going to take over the operations from the cartels and the cartels aren't going to put up a fight. Quite dense thinging there I must say.

Really, so the Capones still run liquor do they?

[Lewkowski]

"Control the border" is not a practical suggestion, the other one is. If the drugs were legalised, there probably wouldn't be a need to control the border anyway - unless you're worried about immigration, not criminality.

Last time I checked crossing the border illegally was.... illegal

Legalizing drugs will cut down the *majority* of the issues with cartels and violence along the border it won't fix it all. Cartels are also into kidnapping, gun running and immigration.

[RandBlade]

Last time I checked crossing the border illegally was.... illegal

So is driving without a seatbelt or jaywalking in the US I believe, so what? Do you regard those as a serious act of criminality to be concerned about?

Legalizing drugs will cut down the *majority* of the issues with cartels and violence along the border it won't fix it all. Cartels are also into kidnapping, gun running and immigration.

You already have legal guns, legalise migration and there really would be nothing much left. Job done. Why should the Nanny State tell people where they can and can't live?

[Lewkowski]

So is driving without a seatbelt or jaywalking in the US I believe, so what? Do you regard those as a serious act of criminality to be concerned about?
You already have legal guns, legalise migration and there really would be nothing much left. Job done. Why should the Nanny State tell people where they can and can't live?

Entering into a country illegally in other places in the world can get you shot. If someone isn't going to respect a major law like that then they are probably going to disobey other laws as well. My beef really isn't with you on this one point but in general how in American we have taken to calling illegal immigrants "undocumented workers" and other PC bull shit.

Secondly I'm in favor of more legal migration but certainty not unlimited migration. American culture is superior to Mexican or Canadian culture for example and we wouldn't want our way of life and system of laws subverted. Controlled migration and absorption into the great melting pot is fully acceptable.

Mexico is almost a failed state. Violence does come over the border at times, even if we get rid of a big cause of that violence it will not eliminate it entirely. The border needs to be controlled.

[agamemnus]

Legalizing drugs is impossible. So you legalize marijuana. What's next? Legalize heroin? Cocaine? The drug cartels are going to start selling things that kill you after a month of using.

[RandBlade]

Legalizing drugs is impossible. So you legalize marijuana. What's next? Legalize heroin? Cocaine? The drug cartels are going to start selling things that kill you after a month of using.

Excellent, the cartels won't have many customers left after a couple of months then and they'll go bust, perfect.

I'd rather Phillip Morris sold marijuana/heroin/cocaine than the gangs.

[Being]

Excellent, the cartels won't have many customers left after a couple of months then and they'll go bust, perfect.

What an eloquently smug response. No wonder some guy smashed your face several years ago.

[Veldan Rath]

What an eloquently smug response. No wonder some guy smashed your face several years ago.

Ah the mind of a moonbat. When rational fails, resort to name calling and violence.

[Being]

Ah the mind of a moonbat. When rational fails, resort to name calling and violence.

I see, you feel a need to protect others. Good for you. How about defending the people he believes should die in order to end the cartels.

[Wraith]

What an eloquently smug response. No wonder some guy smashed your face several years ago.

<mod hat>Being, come on. This is totally unnecessary.</mod hat>

[Being]

<mod hat>Being, come on.</mod hat>

I agree the second sentence was harsh and I apologize.

[Lewkowski]

Legalizing drugs is impossible. So you legalize marijuana. What's next? Legalize heroin? Cocaine? The drug cartels are going to start selling things that kill you after a month of using.

I think you exaggerate the lethality. Ultimately though if someone is stupid enough to take cocaine then that *choice* is on them. Government shouldn't protect people from their own stupid self.

[Being]

I think you exaggerate the lethality. Ultimately though if someone is stupid enough to take cocaine then that *choice* is on them. Government shouldn't protect people from their own stupid self.

Are you against laws for seatbelts and airbags too?

[Lewkowski]

Are you against laws for seatbelts and airbags too?

Yes.

[Being]

Yes.

You realize those laws were heavily influenced by the insurance industry in order to secure profits, right? Without those laws, the insurance industry would be harmed. The laws aren't there to protect the individual being told to wear a seatbelt.

[RandBlade]

Wanting to vote in some places in the world can get you shot.

What makes moving house to get a better job to provide for your family a major law and wearing a seat belt so you don't kill yourself or others in an accident a minor one?

It seems to me you're no different to other nanny staters afterall.

[Lewkowski]

Wanting to vote in some places in the world can get you shot.

What makes moving house to get a better job to provide for your family a major law and wearing a seat belt so you don't kill yourself or others in an accident a minor one?

It seems to me you're no different to other nanny staters afterall.

LOL

Illegally invading a country, sucking up billions in resources and increasing the crime rate isn't something we should be worried about eh? Sorry you don't allow mass migration from a very different culture and expect it to be allowed.

If you believe there should be limits on migration then those limits are not nuisance laws. They are not minor laws. They are not freedom killing laws for your citizens. Oh other people citizens don't have the freedom to come here? A country should concern itself with the freedom and rights of its citizens above other people's citizens. Just like the murder of Americans by pirates infuriates and saddens me but the murder of other countries citizens by pirates only saddens me. The responsibility for your country resides in the people of that country, not other countries.

[RandBlade]

LOL

Illegally invading a country, sucking up billions in resources and increasing the crime rate isn't something we should be worried about eh?

We're discussing what should be the law so "illegal" doesn't mean much more than referring to drugs as illegal, or riding without seatbelts as illegal which are both laws you oppose.

Invade is quite a strong word, I don't think people are moving to the US to invade it.

Resources can be a net boon from migration. How's this: Migrants who want to work can do - must pay taxes etc from day one, can't claim any benefits until after 5 years of taxes have been made.

Crime rate? Punish the criminals and then expel them.

Sorry you don't allow mass migration from a very different culture and expect it to be allowed.

Very different culture? So if Democratic liberals from New York wanted to flood into rural Texas should that be banned? Afterall liberal Democrats from New York have a different culture to redneck rural Texas do they not?

If you believe there should be limits on migration then those limits are not nuisance laws. They are not minor laws. They are not freedom killing laws for your citizens. Oh other people citizens don't have the freedom to come here? A country should concern itself with the freedom and rights of its citizens above other people's citizens. Just like the murder of Americans by pirates infuriates and saddens me but the murder of other countries citizens by pirates only saddens me. The responsibility for your country resides in the people of that country, not other countries.

Yes it is a freedom-killing law for your citizens. What if you chose you wanted to move to the UK or Australia etc? You can't because of those same laws.

As for citizens, your definition is set only be the state. The same state you don't think should be interfering with your life. Funny that.

[Being]

Why doesn't anybody like my annexation idea?

[agamemnus]

Why doesn't anybody like my annexation idea?

I love it (assuming we don't give citizenship to Mexicans... maybe wait about 50 years?), but it might be politically impractical.