talkpolitics | (no subject)

johnny9fingers.livejournal.com posting in

Given that the "War on Drugs" appears to the rest of the world to be lost:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13624303

I wonder what would make the US finally give it up as a lost cause?

Is it that there is just too much invested in the "War" for the US powers-that-be to relinquish one of its sacred cows? Or given the CIA's historic role in Latin America, and in various "drugs for weapons" and "drugs for freedom" operations world-wide (TM Oliver North, Taliban insurgency, et al) would liberalising the drugs laws run counter to US interests?

My own opinion is that we should legalise immediately. But I may just be an old hippie.

Threaded | Flat

From:

southwest

If you legalize cannabis, next thing you know, we'll have red light districts and socialism here.

From:

medea34.livejournal.com

Yup - people will kill, steal, lose their teeth, their families and their dignity for their addictions. Criminalization and military action can't fight that kind of problem.

From:

the-rukh.livejournal.com

1) the former leaders of some countries that the current leaders disagrees with don't count as "the rest of the world".

2) No country has legalized drugs. I'm not talking about marijuana nor coffee.

3) There is a big difference between decriminalization/legalization, illegal posession/illegal distribution.

4) Babby/bathwater. We should fight terrorism. Invading Iraq being a terrible idea doesn't mean we shouldn't.

From:

underlankers.livejournal.com

Eh, what? North sold guns to Iran as a means to raise money for a bunch of nun-raping mass murderers Reagan couldn't get legal financing for. There was nothing to do with the War on Drugs in the Iran-Contra Affair.

From:

peamasii.livejournal.com

From a POV of population control, decriminalisation means loss of power. Government is force, once if you allow liberal social policies, its legitimacy is threatened.

In the US and the UK the government is strong enough, despite deficits, to be in a position to enforce such ridiculous laws. In countries like Netherlands, Belgium, etc. we've given up trying to control recreational drug usage, it costs too much and it creates more criminmality that we'd have to deal with. The police will still go after trafficking but personal consumption cannot be effectively punished.

From:

lai-choi-san.livejournal.com

I wonder what would make the US finally give it up as a lost cause ?
A reflection campaign on the question "are we all equal when it comes to drug addiction ?" would be a good start to demonstrate the absurdity of the current war on drugs.

From:

soliloquy76.livejournal.com

It would run counter to corporate interests, therefore it would run counter to US interests.

Legalize them. It would create some problems, to be sure, but would solve so many more.

From:

eracerhead.livejournal.com

I wonder what would make the US finally give it up as a lost cause?

It will not be a lost cause until politicians stop getting traction from the war on drugs.

From:

jerseycajun.livejournal.com

We'll stop when irrational fear ceases being an effective tool to get elected.

From:

root-fu.livejournal.com

The war on drugs benefits American and corporate interests.

The thing people need to understand is that it is possible to certain parties to benefit from waging an ineffective, expensive, pointless war on drugs.

From:

okmewriting.livejournal.com

Why, we have enough problems with the legal drugs. We don't need any more.

From:

harry-beast.livejournal.com

Legalizing drugs may be sound policy, but it's bad politics. Much like reducing the deficit, it's a good idea but there is a irrational resistance to it among influential segments of society. Maybe in a couple of decades, after more billions are wasted, more lives are ruined and more communities are torn apart, it will come to pass.