There was "victory" in Iraq and a pending one in Afghanistan. Now, we're told, it's time to turn our weapons to the war on drugs.
The need for an escalation led U.S. Army Undersecretary Joseph Westphal to plant the thought in public discourse that invading Mexico is not out of the question.
We don't like losing wars. We fight only for the right side because our intent is for a happy ending. Just consult a history book, if you're in doubt.
Given that, a mistake was made from the beginning with the misapplication of "war" to the campaign to minimize illicit drug use. Wars provoke resistance from the other side. We don't like or understand that.
The Nixon administration gave the war on drugs a law-and-order spin in the early 1970s. Its concern was with out-of-control youth (mostly in college), the association of pot smoking with draft-resistance, hippies, yippies, cultural drift and the Beatles. Drug use was considered the common denominator with disorder and threats to the upright, the straight-laced, the moral community and what made over-the-top youth go bonkers.
A law-enforcement, rehab, talk-and-treatment therapy, and a public relations industry grew up around legitimate concerns over distribution and illicit drug use. However, the application of drug laws today tends to serve other social-control purposes.
For example, low-level pot possession is the number one cause of arrest in New York City, 50,383 cases. Of those, 86 percent of the arrests last year were of blacks and Latinos despite consistent research showing young whites use marijuana at higher rates, according to the Drug Policy Alliance.
In another theater of the war, a November 2008 report from the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C., co-chaired by Mexico's former president Ernesto Zedillo, declared the U.S. war on drugs had failed. The report called for rethinking the "asymmetrical" U.S. policy that calls for countries like Mexico to stanch the flow of drugs without making a successful effort to stop the flow of guns going south and avoiding the public health issue that large-scale illegal-drug consumption presents. The drug fight will fail so long as law enforcement remains the policy's emphasis. Neglect of the problem of consumption, despite all the health and brain-science evidence on addiction, shows how wrong-headed the policy is.
More than two years after the Brookings report, the Inter-American Dialogue also labels the policy a failure. It challenges the policy whose purpose is to fight on and spend into oblivion, with seeming disinterest on whether drug use and distribution is declining. Debate about the 40-year U.S. war on drugs," said the Dialogue, "remains muted."
Inter-American Dialogue president emeritus Peter Hakim presented his case to "drug czar" Gil Kerlikowske. He briefed staff at the Office of National Drug Control Policy, and discussed the report with assistant secretary William Brownfield of the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs.
Who was Hakim trying to move? The very people whose careers and budgets depend on keeping the drug war going?
Have we sat and watched this scenario before? Try public education, where bad results get more money, which produces more bad results.
Good money chasing good policy is the prescription. Not good money chasing bad policy. The "far-reaching debate" Hakim wants is sound but unlikely because of war promoters.
Look long and hard into the public policy syndicates that lie and have no serious public interest at heart. Reason demands something different.
With drugs, even the law and justice theme rings phony -- like documentaries for future TV episodes of "Cops". Some days, the glowing reports about a bust or a capture look suspiciously like that banner "Mission Accomplished," but eight long years before the Iraq war began winding down.
To make the Iraq war increasingly a thing of the past, it took some bold changes of policy, personnel and public attitude. Just as it will take in the war on drugs.
Dale Whiting posted at 9:18 am on Thu, Feb 24, 2011.
Jose,
Some mighty strong words, but not much fore thought!
"To make the Iraq war increasingly a thing of the past, it took some bold changes of policy, personnel and public attitude. Just as it will take in the war on drugs." Can you be more specific? Can you list a few measure needed to win this war? By quoting him, do you agree with Westphal?
"The need for an escalation led U.S. Army Undersecretary Joseph Westphal to plant the thought in public discourse that invading Mexico is not out of the question." Why not invade yet another country to solve our problem, not their's?
Perhaps you should have explained more fully what you meant by suggesting that the changes needed are in both "personnel and public attitude?" My thoughts on public attitude changes are contained below! But where did you give us your thoughts?
"We fight only for the right side because our intent is for a happy ending." Dream on Jose! Paul observed millenia ago that "all have sinned and fallen short." And Jose, "all" includes the US, too! Christ cautioned US to look ourselves in the mirror for those moats in our own eyes before we go on a beam hunt in the eyes of others. Which side is right? We are seldom "in the right." The "right" seldom is single sided!
In short, your article is full of sound and furry but contributes nothing, nadda, to any real solution of this OUR own problem.
Let US make war on drugs in OUR own back yard. Let US have strong laws which appropriately criminalize the distribution and sale of those drugs worthy of sanctions, decriminalize those which do not merit sanctions, and appropriately deal with those who would earn their living outside of our laws when acting in OUR back yards. [Jose, surely you know that Mexico is not our back yard!] Let US stop being the Arms War Lords of Central America.
Any war not waged on the home front is a war which is lost from its inception. [War on Drugs, War on terrorism, etc.] Waging war is best done without pointing guns at those whom we esteem to be our enemies. The true enemy is US.
So Jose, tomorrow when you start your day with that shave, look more deeply into YOUR mirror! There is a message there for US all!
Accuracy posted at 10:45 am on Thu, Feb 24, 2011.
Dale Whiting posted: "Let US make war on drugs in OUR own back yard."
--------------------------------
YES!
And according to the Associated Press; "Law enforcement officials across the country are conducting a nationwide sweep of suspected Mexican drug cartel members in the United States in response to the killing of U.S. ICE 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," said Carl Pike, assistant special agent in charge of the Drug Enforcement Administration's special operations division.
EmperorSmith posted at 12:57 pm on Thu, Feb 24, 2011.
cut and past. We are free are why not,.
Cerulean posted at 10:31 am on Fri, Feb 25, 2011.
Jose, I agree.
In 1996 Arizona passed the Prevention and Control Act. This voter initiative decided that first and second time non-violent drug offenders would be placed on probation AND provided treatment. We raised taxes on alcohol to pay for the treatment programs. I would be really surprised if any such 'treatment programs' actually exist today. We still pay the tax.
That said, we do like our alternative realities.
As Dale points out, some drugs need to be legalized; yes.
Drugs should be classified according to the caustic nature the drug has on the body. It's the designer drugs and heroine, drugs with a very high compulsive seeking, mind destroying effect that the War should go on about. Methamphetamine is one of those drugs. Trafficking meth between the U.S. and Mexico is so lucrative, that it is not difficult to question the motive of any interested party to include governments. ( The 2000 movie Traffic comes to mind as a depiction of the problem.) Mexico is not isolated however, India, China and Russia are also part of the pseudoephedrine trail.
To end, Dale uses an effective mirror metaphor, I will add the sentiment of Hillary Clinton and her book "It Takes a Village: And Other Lessons Children Teach Us".
Oh and yes it would be interesting Jose, to know what your exact thoughts are on the use of the US military in Mexico.