| Pages:
1
2
3
4
5 |
Iflyfish
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3747
Registered: 10-17-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Barry A.
FFPam--------You have a good point-------I just never thought of it that way (the "recreation" aspect), and it kinda horrified me. But I will concede
the point.
As to Fish (and others) "point" on education-------a case in point is on page 14 of the latest AARP BULLETIN where they point out that 85 to 90% of
all Lung Cancer is caused by smoking------it is education of the folks that does impact us, and it sure impacted me. The health information is what
made me finally make up my mind to quit smoking 10 years ago, and once I had made up my mind to quit, it was sooooo easy. The secret (for me at
least) was MAKING THE DECISION TO QUIT. I see this as the answer to all addiction, tho that is probably a vast oversimplification. (I like simple
answers)
Thanks for your feedback, Pam.
Barry |
From someone with your back ground this is indeed a major acknowledgement and change of perspective. I admire your openness to see things differently
and to acknowledge that shift in thinking. We are in a real mess right now and continuing with the wrong premise will inevitably lead one to the worn
conclusion.
Having been involved in the field of Mental Health for a few years longer than yours in the "War on Drugs" I can attest to the fact that the decision
to quit is the FUNDAMENTAL decision. Once that decision is made, there is help available. The problem is that most addicts, and that is to any
substance, process or relationship, need to "hit bottom" before making that decision in a meaningful way. For many addicts the decision to not use is
so compelling that it can only be made a day at a time.
Drug use, alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines, morphine, heroin will not stop. Like Prostitution, people will seak out illicit
pleasure, the bottom line is pleasure, drugs feel good, at least at first they feel good, then for some, addiction sets in and then the drugs are used
to feel "normal". Drug use will wax and wane as it has through out history. Some will become addicted, that is a given. Education and social stigma
are powerful forces, they are not dramatic, take time, but in the end succeed.
To those who say essentially "let the addict stew in their own juices", "I don't want to fund treatment for their stupidity" they are ignoring the
very real cost that they pay anyway for this problem. Do you want to pay for incarceration? Do you want to pay the street sweeper for picking up the
bodies? Do you want the psychotic on our streets to simply be ignored also? Do you believe that we have no responsibility for the plight of our fellow
man? Do you indeed believe that you are not your brother's keeper?
Probably not.
Iflyfish
Iflyfish
|
|
|
Iflyfish
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3747
Registered: 10-17-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
Grover:
I am so out of it.....is that an advertisement? I am a fish out of water.
Iflyfish
|
|
|
fulano
Banned
Posts: 496
Registered: 3-31-2008
Location: Ramona, CA
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by flyfishinPam
I say this after studying very hard for a Mexican history exam that was required to get Mex. citizenship. |
Are you aware that a US citizen does not lose his US citizenship by becoming a citizen of another country? The only way to lose US citizenship is to
renounce your citizenship in writing. while in a foreign country.
Unfortunately, the new Mexican rules of naturalization required you to sign a renunciation of your other citizenships. You can read it here:
http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/53.pdf
Article 17.
|
|
|
woody with a view
PITA Nomad
Posts: 15939
Registered: 11-8-2004
Location: Looking at the Coronado Islands
Member Is Offline
Mood: Everchangin'
|
|
| Quote: |
Unfortunately, the new Mexican rules of naturalization required you to sign a renunciation of your other citizenships. You can read it here:
|
CLASSIC! yet the mex govt encourages it's people to leave, hopefully be given amnesty and do you think they expect them to renounce their mexican
citizenship?
"wherever you have a mexican, you have mexico"...
p.s. sorry for the hijack, jack....
|
|
|
Cypress
Elite Nomad
Posts: 7641
Registered: 3-12-2006
Location: on the bayou
Member Is Offline
Mood: undecided
|
|
Why would anybody in their right mind denounce /give up their US citizenship?Tax dodge? Legal issues? Insanity?
|
|
|
flyfishinPam
Super Nomad
Posts: 1727
Registered: 8-20-2003
Location: Loreto, BCS
Member Is Offline
Mood: gone fishin'
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by fulano
| Quote: | Originally posted by flyfishinPam
I say this after studying very hard for a Mexican history exam that was required to get Mex. citizenship. |
Are you aware that a US citizen does not lose his US citizenship by becoming a citizen of another country? The only way to lose US citizenship is to
renounce your citizenship in writing. while in a foreign country.
Unfortunately, the new Mexican rules of naturalization required you to sign a renunciation of your other citizenships. You can read it here:
http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/53.pdf
Article 17. |
well I haven't signed anything and we're still in tramite. i was explaining why I knew the history of Mexico and could relate it to today's
happenings. if I have to sign that document I will. I really want to become a citizen of Mexico. The USA recognizes dual citizenry and according to
their rules I will have to denounce my citizenship in front of a consular. this is my business entirely. and your point is?????
|
|
|
toneart
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4901
Registered: 7-23-2006
Member Is Offline
Mood: Skeptical
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by flyfishinPam
| Quote: | Originally posted by fulano
| Quote: | Originally posted by flyfishinPam
I say this after studying very hard for a Mexican history exam that was required to get Mex. citizenship. |
Are you aware that a US citizen does not lose his US citizenship by becoming a citizen of another country? The only way to lose US citizenship is to
renounce your citizenship in writing. while in a foreign country.
Unfortunately, the new Mexican rules of naturalization required you to sign a renunciation of your other citizenships. You can read it here:
http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/53.pdf
Article 17. |
well I haven't signed anything and we're still in tramite. i was explaining why I knew the history of Mexico and could relate it to today's
happenings. if I have to sign that document I will. I really want to become a citizen of Mexico. The USA recognizes dual citizenry and according to
their rules I will have to denounce my citizenship in front of a consular. this is my business entirely. and your point is?????
|
Uh oh! We are getting off the subject here. Maybe this would better stand alone in another topic.
|
|
|
DENNIS
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 29510
Registered: 9-2-2006
Location: Punta Banda
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Cypress
Why would anybody in their right mind denounce /give up their US citizenship?Tax dodge? Legal issues? Insanity? |
Because they never learned to appreciate what they are and have.
|
|
|
toneart
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4901
Registered: 7-23-2006
Member Is Offline
Mood: Skeptical
|
|
I hesitate to validate anyone's opinion for fear of them being chastised for being guilty/offensive/wrong/politically incorrect/"un-American", etc. by
association. In actuality no one is responsible for another's comments.
There is a lot of diversity among out fellow nomads. Many have specialized training in Law Enforcement and Mental Health which I do not. There have
been some brilliant comments and observations; Iflyfish, Flyfishinpam, Oldlady, and I always appreciate Barry A.'s comments for being so open minded
and fair, even though we often disagree politically.
My opinions are not given as an expert. I consider myself well informed and make logical deductions (according to me).
This, of course, will be held to ridicule by some of those who do not hold my points of view. My preferred choice of communication is to not attack or
ridicule those with whom I disagree. Through my years I find I learn more by exchanging by civil discourse.
I think that the premise of Mexico approaching "Failed State" status is a very real possibility. Any discussion of countries, drugs and politics
pushes emotional buttons. Many people allow their sense of nationalism, morality or politics to cloud their ability to think objectively.
Many of us on this board have ties to Mexico. Many of us love her people and some of us also have a vested interest, either as property owners or as
travelers to a place that we love. So lets try to reason out this problem of Mexico's stability being threatened by the "War on Drugs". There are
really three sides to this war; the cartels, the governments and the users. It is generally acknowledged that the current approach to end the threat
to Mexico's well being is not working.
The idea of decriminalizing or legalizing the usage of drugs ( I am not making a distinction here) holds merit because it would take the profit motive
or middle man out of it for now. The profiting middle man are the cartels. That is their business and they operate by intimidation, corruption and
violence. They are thugs. They exist on both sides of the border. They will always be thugs but they will just have to look for other lines of work
(or trouble), which they will surely do. But to deprive them of their profit will get them out of the drug trade. They will be marginalized and
dispersed.
That is not to say that there will not be consequences. There will surely be victims and social costs involved. There are anyway. I believe the trade
off would be worth it in terms of lives lost (fewer) and squandered resources (less). Statistics be damned! They can be skewed to support a point of
view. But I believe in my heart that the negative consequences will pale in comparison to the horror we are now witnessing, and the future of Mexico
and its relationship to The United States will benefit if a new approach is attempted.
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by flyfishinPam
Barry my words were not meant as an attack as I have no way of knowing your background and I never asked for anyones respect. this is a message board
where people opine and that's what I'm doing while waiting for someone to come it and kill time so to speak.
Since you are an ex fed of 29 years in the drug war, do you see this drug war as being a successful endevor?
also my legalization comment is not meant for the USA but for Mexico where the battling on the front lines is taking place. And in knowing that
please also understand that it is only a matter of time that the front lines move north of the border. |
Pam----The Drug Wars are an incredibly complicated problem-----have they been successful? Partially. Tons of "drugs" have been destroyed that would
have otherwise ended up on the streets-----that part has been a success tho we apprehended only a tiny part of the total drugs out there. Obviously
there is a problem, and I am open to ideas-----but to exagerate and call the 'wars' a total failure is over the top.
Fish-----No, I am NOT my brothers keeper, at least how I interpret your meaning of that phrase. Until I know your definition of "brother's keeper" I
cannot really say yes, or no. Like I said, when people make the decision to straighten themselves out, and demonstrate it, then I will help.
Maybe I would feel differently if I had "problem people" in my family or life, but I don't. It is tough for me to understand "problem people"-------I
was always taught to solve my problems, and that is the way I raised all my kids. They have always solved their problems, mostly with no help. But,
truthfully they did not have the type of problems we are talking about here, so again it is hard for me to relate.
I applaud your getting involved and trying to help, and I respect everybody until they give me reason to no longer deserve that respect (IMO, of
course).
Barry
|
|
|
flyfishinPam
Super Nomad
Posts: 1727
Registered: 8-20-2003
Location: Loreto, BCS
Member Is Offline
Mood: gone fishin'
|
|
timely piece
http://www.mexidata.info/id1848.html
Monday, May 26, 2008
The Drug Wars' Body Counts Continue To Mount in Mexico
By Allan Wall
In Mexico, the ongoing battles between the drug cartels, and between drug cartels and the government, go on and on – and the body count mounts.
On May 23rd, 2008, Mexican Attorney General Eduardo Medina Mora announced that, thus far in calendar year 2008, killings linked to organized crime and
drug trafficking have increased 47% over those in 2007.
According to Medina Mora’s figures, as of May 24th there had been 1,378 such murders. At this time last year the figure was 940.
Since it’s only May, that means that 2008 is well on the way to surpass the 2007 total of 2,500 killings.
The total body count (to date) during President Felipe Calderon’s administration is 4,152 killings, 450 of whom were policemen, prosecutors or Mexican
military personnel.
(As a point of comparison, the U.S. has lost 4,081 military personnel in Iraq since 2003).
Another way to look at the death toll is as a daily average. On May 22nd (the day before Medina Mora’s higher figures were announced), Mexico’s La
Jornada newspaper published its calculation of an average of 7.6 killings per day since Calderon took office, although it added that in the week
previous the average was 15 such killings per day.
According to Medina Mora, there has been a “significant increase” of killings in the northern states of Chihuahua, Baja California and Sinaloa.
Meanwhile, the killings have decreased in Nuevo Leon, Guerrero and Mexico City.
Ciudad Juarez (across the border from El Paso, Texas) has been the scene of heavy fighting, both between cartels, and between security forces and
narco gunmen. In Ciudad Juarez alone there have been about 400 such killings thus far in 2008.
In a grisly example near the city of Durango, six severed heads were recently discovered alongside the highway. Each had been placed carefully within
a cooler, four of them in an abandoned vehicle, accompanied by threatening messages to a rival.
It may be no coincidence that the heads were placed in the vicinity of where a gun battle took place several days earlier, in which eight gunmen were
slain.
Reports also indicate that a realignment and reorganization is taking place among the drug cartels, who live in a grim, dog-eat-dog world of shifting
dependencies and alliances.
The U.S. government is preparing to aid the Mexican government in its fight against the cartels, but this aid too is controversial.
President George W. Bush wanted to give Mexico US$500 million worth of aid, but neither congressional chamber was willing to give that much. The House
approved US$400 million and the Senate US$350 million. The difference is to be worked out in House-Senate conference during the next few weeks.
Both congressional bills include making part of the funding contingent upon human rights certification. This doesn’t set well with Mexican politicians
who have charged the United States with meddling. However, since this is an aid program, in which they’re getting the aid for free, Mexico will
likely take whatever it is given.
Mexican Attorney General Medina Mora has long complained about the smuggling of weapons from the United States to Mexico. Cartels arrange for the
purchase of weapons in the United States and move them into Mexico. This problem is exacerbated by corruption within the Mexican Customs department,
and the general lawless atmosphere that exists on the U.S.-Mexican border.
Tighter border security would definitely help. However, the Mexican government complains when the United States tightens up the border. If you have
a porous border it won’t be porous just for border crossers. It’s also porous for drugs and weapons! U.S. leaders might point that out to Mexican
leaders.
Of course, wherever there’s a market there are suppliers. As long as U.S. drug users continue to purchase lots of narcotics there will be people
willing to sell to them. That makes U.S. drug addicts themselves the principal financiers of the Mexican drug cartels.
Famed Mexico watcher George W. Grayson, a professor at the College of William and Mary, has gone so far as to say that “It’s impossible to win the
drug war while the demand exists in the United States and Europe.”
Combine corruption in Mexico which aids the cartels, and massive American demand for their products, and you’ve got a big problem. As the body count
continues to mount….
|
|
|
flyfishinPam
Super Nomad
Posts: 1727
Registered: 8-20-2003
Location: Loreto, BCS
Member Is Offline
Mood: gone fishin'
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Barry A.
Pam----The Drug Wars are an incredibly complicated problem-----have they been successful? Partially. Tons of "drugs" have been destroyed that would
have otherwise ended up on the streets-----that part has been a success tho we apprehended only a tiny part of the total drugs out there. Obviously
there is a problem, and I am open to ideas-----but to exagerate and call the 'wars' a total failure is over the top. |
I know that I have become pessemistic throughout the years but I see these "busts" as something to appease the taxpayers into thinking that this
expenditure is worth paying for. Its like the roadblocks on Mex 1 where they harass tourists to check for "guns and drugs" while they let the real
drugrunners get by. They show you these pictures of drugs that were confiscated during the roadblock in the past to appease you into thinking
"they're just doing their job" while you put up with effectively what is becoming a police state. I do not exagrerate the failure of the drug war the
proof is right in front of us.
|
|
|
Acuity
Nomad
Posts: 195
Registered: 5-26-2005
Location: Comox, BC, and Todos Santos
Member Is Offline
Mood: Craving sleep!
|
|
Uness the profit motive is removed (by legalizing access to at least some drugs), the cartels will exist and be well funded. If any move occured to
legalize drugs in the US, however, is it not possible that the monetary resources of the cartels would be directed to lobbying to keep the status quo?
Given their resources, what are the chances that such legislation could happen?
While it might seem counter-intuitive, the war on drugs (and the resulting "scarcity" , lack of transparency in the market and high margins ) is
exactly what the cartels need to make their game extremely profitable.
I often wish people thought more about the consequences of their "point" solutions to complex, systemic problems 
|
|
|
bancoduo
Banned
Posts: 1003
Registered: 10-3-2005
Location: el carcel publico mazatlan sin.
Member Is Offline
|
|
Back to a failed nation "GOOD MORNING BAGDAD"
http://www.banderasnews.com/0805/nr-emailthreat.htm
|
|
|
Woooosh
Banned
Posts: 5240
Registered: 1-28-2007
Location: Rosarito Beach
Member Is Offline
Mood: Luminescent Waves at Rosarito Beach
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by LancairDriver
How anyone can rationalize the "war on drugs" as bearing any resemblance to success is beyond comprehension. It is a complete failure by any
yardstick. Mexico is bearing the brunt of this failure. More Mexican police, military, and ordinary citizens have lost their lives in this "war" than
US lives that have been lost in both wars in Iraq and Afghanistan thus far.. |
Ya know what? It'as just as successful as what we did in Afghanistan and that's about the best Mewxico can hope for. You wipe out the Taliban and the
poppyfields once, but not for all. Well the poppies and heroin trade are bac, stringer than ever, and the US troops are helpless to do anything about
it- becuase it's not important to us anymore I guess.
Mexico has the government the people deserve. The rich like it the way it is, the poor are too busy keeping their stomachs full and the middle class
(who had the education and motivation to create change) gave up and went north to make it better for their own families- in this lifetime.
Jourlanilsts don't push for change- becaue Mexico is the only country more dangerous in the world for journalists than Somalia.
It's my sad experience that Mexicans are more content to have a crooked cop for a friend they might need someday than to go out on a limb and take a
stand against that crooked cop. They may talk about how sad they are for their country- but have no balls to do anything about it (those people are
fighting the wrong fight in the USA instead). Then again- change agents aren't rewarded anywhere. JMHO of course
|
|
|
Iflyfish
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3747
Registered: 10-17-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
Barry A:
The question "Am I my brother's keeper" comes from Genesis.
In the story of Cain and Abel, Cain slew his brother in a fit of jealousy. When he came home and the Lord asked him, "Where is your brother?" Cain
answered that he didn't know. "Am I my brother's keeper?"
It is clear from the question that god had some concept about the importance of Cain maintaining the life of his brother, Abel. One does not have to
be a Christian to believe that we all have responsibility for each other and our common wheel. It is in my interest that you do well. It is in your
interest that I do well also. If either of us is not doing well then there is a larger social cost involved. I just had a $36,000 total hip
replacement. Who pays for that? I have medical insurance that covered most of the cost, I am of course a very fortunate man indeed to be able to
afford this insurance. My point is that the cost of this surgery was covered by a group of people, myself included, that pay permiums for that
coverage. We are all in this together. The suffering of one affects us all. Have you noticed the behavior of the drug addicted parents? There are many
indirect costs to us when those in need are not provided what they need.
The issues of poverty are an example. If we do not address the issue of how to redistribute wealth in a Capitalist economy, then eventually a few own
it all. That is the nature of unbridled Capitalism. When there is too much wealth accrued by a few, social instability occurs. That instability can
and has historically led to revolutions and rebellions and in some cases failed states.
If we don’t pay for care for those less fortunate, in the case of addicts, we will pay in another way; they will become a potential source of civic
unrest and criminal behavior. This is already occurring. If we don’t find some way to deal with legitimization of access to drugs via the state we end
up with what is happening on the border of Mexico now. If we do not realistically address the very real demand for drugs, we will pay a significant
cost of the nature we are seeing along the border of Mexico and the USofA. No matter what happens, we pay. It is in our interest to choose how we
become our “brother’s keeper”. If we don’t decide, our brother certainly will decide for us.
Iflyfish
|
|
|
DENNIS
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 29510
Registered: 9-2-2006
Location: Punta Banda
Member Is Offline
|
|
This is all bullchit. Militarize the country and cleanse it. Not here and there, eveywhere.
Then you can figure out how to take it back from the military.
|
|
|
Iflyfish
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3747
Registered: 10-17-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
Whoooosh,
Very interesting perspective. FlyfishingPam alluded to cultural factors that might be at play also in her post.
Your information on Poppies and heroin in Afghanistan is accurate from my reading. The Taliban, religious fundamentalists, were death on drugs and
nearly halted the production of Opium poppies, the source of heroin. With the American occupation the poppies are now back in greater abundance than
before the Taliban ban.
The same fundamentalist mentality in the west would have us wage and all out “War on Drugs”. The cure might be worse than the problem. People on the
border in Mexico are now living in a war zone. I was just getting ready to post this when DENNIS expressed this perspective.
I would be interested in others take on your perspective on cultural factures that might mediate against resolution of this issue.
Iflyfish
|
|
|
fulano
Banned
Posts: 496
Registered: 3-31-2008
Location: Ramona, CA
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Woooosh
It's my sad experience that Mexicans are more content to have a crooked cop for a friend they might need someday than to go out on a limb and take a
stand against that crooked cop. They may talk about how sad they are for their country- but have no balls to do anything about it (those people are
fighting the wrong fight in the USA instead). Then again- change agents aren't rewarded anywhere. JMHO of course |
That's a good point. While my heart goes out the the average Fulano de Tal in Mexico because I know he is powerless to change the system and has
suffered the most, the extreme problems Mexico is having with the drug cartels was bought and paid for with their own past 100 years of indolence.
Ever since the Mexican Revolution, the socio-political-economic system of Mexico was based on two prime principles: co-opt those who stood in the way,
and exploit all the rest.
This allowed a system of graft to become so ingrained that it is woven into the very fabric of the country. When first Fox, and now Claderon, tried to
change it, the internal resistance was fierce and violent.
These headlines we are now reading of finding heads in icechests, gangs with automatic weapons and grenades, and whole towns "owned" by the cartels,
are uniquely a Mexican experience. This just wouldn't happen in the US. If 6 heads were found in an icebox here, the authorities would be all over
those criminals like stink on schitt.
|
|
|
Iflyfish
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3747
Registered: 10-17-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
fulano
Interesting post in response to Woooosh.
There are indeed differences between the USofA and Mexico. No doubt some of the issues you and Woooosh raise are significant in how this came about in
Mexico. The history fits with my understanding of Mexico and also with my limited knowledge of the culture.
My heart is with DENNIS, there is a part of me that would want to kick burro and take names. Mount the most aggressive campaign possible against the
Cartels. Escalate to the nines and let the heads roll. Fox and Calderone both have US education and experience in the US culture and their approach is
flying in the face of alliances that have been formed over decades. In some ways I applaude the Mexican government for making legitimate efforts to
address corruption. I really do. God bless those with the guts to stand up against the sort of corruption of the Cartels. No one elects them to rule.
I applaud the courage of those involved in this fight on the side of the government.
Having said this, I still remain skeptical of the ability of the government to deal with this issue solely by military means. Perhaps in the end the
Military will, perhaps as some think, again take back control of the trade and calm things down. Time will tell if Mexico continues to elect people
who are not of the old power structure and not amenable to its seduction.
Iflyfish
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2
3
4
5 |
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
