Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...

The drug lords kill anyone they want, including judges, military
officers,
journalists. The government cannot stop it.

Then who is really in charge? Why should thugs be allowed to get away
with the things that they do? It's the same thing as what is going on in
the middle east. Why should thugs be allowed to hold the civilized world
hostage to their demands, while operating above the law, and with little
regard for their fellow humans? All the while, those who would seek to
end this sort of rogue tyrrany are prevented from doing so by
humanitarian restraint.

Why should thugs be allowed to get away with the things that they do? Dave,
there are countries in South America, Central America and Africa which have
been that way since I first became clearly aware of history, in the mid
1960s. Ever heard the term "banana republic"? It's got nothing to do with
clothing stores. Most intelligent historians attribute the problem to the
Cold War, when the U.S. and the USSR said "eenie meenie minie mo" and chose
which little countries were going to be their "allies". Meaning: We both
wanted a few friendly places to park our spies. By doing so, we labeled the
countries as "right" or "left". And, within each country various factions
labeled each other that way. Even the Catholic church earned a different
label depending on which country was doing the labeling and how powerful the
clergy was in terms of influencing the local "jefe" (boss).

You've just described the problem, now let's hear the solution.


We and the Soviets sent arms to these countries. Many of them are still
buying arms from us. We set up a cycle that may never end. If YOU can come
up with a solution, you'll win a Nobel prize. But you'll have to become
better informed.

Like many other liberals, you are excellent at outlining problems, but
fall far short on offering up solutions. Instead you spend time
ridiculing people who do offer solutions, even if they may have a
dubious chance of success. I get the distinct impression that you'd
prefer to just leave things go as they are, as you don't want to expend
the (admittently enourmous) effort to change things for the better.


I know that. The point is, and the one you are trying to make here is
that the druggies threaten the farmers. The government poisons the
crops. So rather than put the blame on the drug lords for causing the
problem in the first place, you cite their seeming invincibility as a
justification for the government to just allow them to grow illegal
crops, and to show compassion for the farmers by not attempting to
enforce the law

You do know what message that would send don't you?

Let me see if I understand: You have herbicides which the manufacturer
honestly says will make people hideously ill if used on food crops. You use
it anyway, knowing full well that you will sicken your own citizens. What
message does THAT send? "You have a choice of being killed quickly by
criminals, or killed slowly by your own government. Choose." Is that the
message?

It's better than doing NOTHING.



4) The farmers aren't like you and I. They don't have a Safeway or
Giant
supermarket 3 blocks away. If you contaminate their crops, they may
still
have no choice but to eat it. This issue, the health issue, has
nothing
to
do with anyone's opinion of drug laws.

Sure it does. As long as these drug lords are allowed to run roughshot
over the farmers, then they are ultimately to blame for the decline of
the health of their fellow countrymen.

That's roughshoD. And, the druglords do anything they want because
they're
better equipped than the Colombian military. We continue giving money to
the
military, but it seems to vanish.

Gee, maybe GWB should send in the next group of troops there huh?

Pretend you're the president. Please describe clearly the reason you'd give
the American people for such a military action.

To rid the world of deviant thugs who have little respet for law, and
for other people.



I would organize a revolt.....

...and you'd end up tied to the wall of a hut in the jungle, until your
captors decided to either kill you or cut you loose. They kill most of
their
captives.

Who would plant the crops if all the farmers are dead?

I was referring not to the farmers, but to government officials, clergy,
foreign reporters and workers. Are you aware that 3 American civilians are
still being held hostage down there? I thought you told me that you DO read
or listen to legitimate news sources. Read the link below. This was on 60
Minutes a month or so ago. The story's been kept sort of quiet because our
government has some other weird reason for not wanting to move on it.

Maybe because the story is lacking in credibility. There are a lot of
"stories" that make the rounds in the leftist propaganda rags. You may
think the reason that they rarely see the light of day in the mainstream
press, is due to some "vast right wing conspiracy" trying to keep a lid
on it. The more obvious reason could be that they lack truth.



Write to your representatives and tell them 30
years is long enough to see that a program doesn't work. No more money
for
Colombia.

I don't agree. We need to form a combined task force to sweep in and
burn the druggies out.

Yeah. OK, Dave. We'll just sweep right in there. Do you know that opium's
being grown again on a large scale basis in Afghanistan, and we know about
it? As a longtime knowledgable gardener, you know that in many parts of that
country, there's little else that'll grow well enough to be of economic use
to the natives.

So once again, you become the apologist. You'd give them a "pass" on
growing substances which are illegal in most countries, and which bring
nothing but eventual pain and psychological issues to those who use
them, becasue you see no alternative? Maybe in places like Afghanistan,
farming should not be their main commercial product.


You really are a mess. Beginning this weekend, you will begin reading the
Sunday NY Times and Washington Post from beginning to end. And, you'll
listen to both the morning and evening NPR news broadcasts.

If you can prove to me that these are not the left biased propaganda
sources that I know they are, then I might consider it. Otherwise I'll
stick to more credible sources.

Dave