Slaughterhouse Mexico - US failure

[TerraPrime]

S John:

I'd advice against taking anything Arakan said too seriously, or as too much of a representative of what the rest of the world thinks.

[Shryke]

Ending the drug bans would definitely help, but the gangs in Mexico at this point tend to have diversified into other non-drug forms of revenue (particularly extortion). I think the only thing that's going to really counter that is more local accountability for police and government officials, and reforms in the judicial system to make it more responsive in general (the percentage of unsolved crimes in Mexico is absolutely appalling).

The gangs themselves just need to be physically overpowered, to the point where they surrender when confronted by police and the army rather than shooting back. If you don't have that, you can't get anything else. Of course, they'd be more inclined to surrender if they don't think they'll get murdered by the police/army after doing so.

Yeah, these are the two issues.

The US ending the War on Drugs would help Mexico a bunch because if drugs are legal they no longer need to come illegally through/from Mexico. That's a good thing for everyone.

The problem is at this point the Cartels have made enough money for long enough that they no longer need the US drug market to continue operating. They have grown beyond that.

[Biglose]

@S John

Well, to get started, the US actually had quite a good reputation back under clinton or under G.H. Bush oder Ronald Reagan. (Sure espacially in europe there were a lot of people espacially on the left (or on the extreme right), which just disliked the US for beeing the US. (Sure some where angry about Ruanda or the Sanctions killing infants in Iraq. Or the some might even be angry about Grenada...)

But in general it is not that bad. ;)

I just google the nation branding (a survy to the "brand name of nations"). I only got the results from 2008 to 2014. It starts with the US in 2008 at rank 7 going straight to rank 1 for 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 to drop to rank 2. in 2014. Just to go for the facts. (It is a mixture of politics, general feeling about the country, products, culture and sports , tourism and immigration/investment.)

So out of 7, 5 times the first place is really not that bad now, is it? :cool4:

So the major thing with that is (as far as I think) that everything the US does (good or bad) is magnified. Which has a lot to do with the immense power of the mediacomplex in the US, which is just much more influential than any other in the world.

The issue with Mexico is in some regard like the last 16 years in the middle east. The US did something which did not turn out the way they wanted. They tried to undo it, didn't work so they tried to double down, did not work either. Repeat ad nauseam.

In general it is just a real shitty situation to begin with. You have countries with a low level of civil order on one hand and a huge market for whatever strange, forbidden things they could come up with right next door. Sure there are things that amplify the situation: Like the huge selling market of guns in the US or very specific operations like "fast and furious". But the problems would be there with or without.

So my take is that of course smart choices always help, but the problem is at a structural level within south america itself and therefor very hard to fix. (And really trying to fix it always runs the risk of making things much worse.)

[The Reckoner]

Just spitballing ideas, maybe we can give potential immigrants incentives for earning their immigration? Like pushing back against the corruption in the Mexican government? IDK a thing about politics TBH elol.

[Arakan]

S John:

I'd advice against taking anything Arakan said too seriously, or as too much of a representative of what the rest of the world thinks.

I know you are a mod on this site but that doesnt justify such a bully attack. Focus on the content not the person. If you disagree, that's fine.

[Suttree]

Focus on the content not the person.

Oh we are, hence TP's spot on comment above.

[jarl the climber]

Maybe I am a naive European but let me ask one thing: isn't it true that the US is THE main endcustomer destination for all the drugs? How can one be not be responsible when one is the demand? Without demand there is no supply, and thus no drug war in Mexico...

Besides that...the US has basically only two neighboring countries and in one of them we can witness for almost a decade now a massive humanitarian crisis, bloodshed and a failure of most public institutions. How is it that this is none of your concern (internal affair) when the same people in American policy are so eager to interfere in other countries far away?

I dont understand it, please enlighten me.

That's like saying from a German pov: hey in the Czech republic a massive drug war kills ten thousands of people every year but not my business. A bag of rice was stolen in Sri Lanka? Yeah that's my business.

The US has influence. Why dont use it to help your immediate neighbor?

The Mexican government has its problems, I would be a little reluctant to call it a failed state at this point. Having said that the Mexicans really don't want a bunch of Gringos from across the border telling them how to run thier country. None of the Latin American countries want that. Once in awhile, like back in the 90's, America and its ways becomes trendy but it never lasts. Of course people in that part of the world like to blame Americans for thier problems but if the American government had a more proactive policy in the region they would complain about imperialism and that we were trying to take them over. So, its not about having a good policy in the region, its about having a policy that causes the least harm.