First off, it's not the government's business what I, or anyone else, put into our own bodies. If you take hard drugs, or do drugs without testing them, it's on you, the individual.
The CIA is directly involved in the drug trade, and has been for many years. If you're so concerned about overdoses maybe we should root out the corruption in our own system. But that will never happen because Trump is part of the same swamp he claimed he wanted to drain.
The fentanyl is not coming from Venezuela, never has. This is a poor pretense for an undeclared war, and most people see right through it.
Drug money is significant income to Vz. Cut it off.
Maduro (not mentioned by name in the article 🤔) is an illegitimate leader and a communist malignancy in the western hemisphere. Maduro needs to be cut out like a cancer.
Ever notice those boats? With three outboards operating at high speed in major shipping routes. Every boat with identical payload bundles visible from above? If it looks like a drug boat. Goes over the water like a drug boat. Has bundled drug pay loads like a drug boat. Then blow the evil God damned thing out of the water.
I'm no fan of Maduro, but he's just as legitimate as any government that initiates force to achieve their means. Venezuela has the same rights to blow up boats in our waters as we do in theirs: that is, zero.
Seems odd that those high years (2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 - not 2019?) were also when the USA and CIA were meddling in Venezuelan affairs. Also odd they didn't include more years before. Didn't read it all - did they mention how the UK stole their gold reserves?
The irony is fighting these people is what guarantees they exist. There is demand. If the problem isn't solved at the demand side then there is money to made. And if you make it dangerous to make that money then there is money to be made by people willing to do dangerous things. If you opened up trade there would be no value in hiring paramilitary to move the drugs.
Drugs don't kill people. People kill people. If someone chooses to do a drug and dies no moral wrong happened. A free person is free to do something dangerous. The drug certainly didn't make a choice. Maybe if we stopped trying to save drug addicts people wouldn't feel a sense that there is a safety net beneath them and people will stop doing it all together.
If killing people over drugs is right why not the people who choose to do drugs? Is death ok or not ok? I think death is ok. Just not murdering people. Especially when it doesn't and never will get the outcome you want.
Also making these substances illegal adds a pressure to transport drugs that are more potent by volume and thus more dangerous. Fentanyl deaths are a result of fighting drugs.
Emotional aspect is not an excuse to ignore technical facts. In fact it is a reason to do more of it. Because it is more important to be right about things that matter than things that don't. The problem is a large number of people turn off their brain once they have an emotion. So the things the impact humanity the most are consistently miscalculated. That makes for a sucky world. A sucky world where people act on their emotions and then ask why nothing ever improves. I guess we'll just act on unthinking emotion harder next time.
Why do you assume I'm missing something if I see things you don't. Maybe I see all of it. But intellectual discipline helps us make sense of the gray areas better. Just because I understand deontological ethics doesn't mean I don't get feelings. This is the strawman emotional thinkers assume in others. "If you don't come to my same emotional conclusion then you must not have feelings at all." I do. But I can also do something useful. Think clearly as well. It's like emotions+.
Log in
Nobody complained when Obama targeted US citizens with drone strikes. Only Democrats can do it legally.
Plenty of people including myself complained. The military industrial complex is bipartisan.
archive.today mirror | archive.org mirror
The author is in denial about the impacts of the drug trade and perhaps has TDS.
If an organization came to a country and killed 100,000 per year with munitions, we would be at war.
But killing 100,000 a year through drug overdoses…oh no! That’s not war. These actions are extrajudicial.
Right. Sure.
Start with the countries that are actually killing way more people.
Or better - start with the CIA, cocaine import agency, the world's largest drug traffickers.
Then if the problem persists, bring justice through the court system with evidence. Do not start a drug war to justify the theft of oil and gold.
First off, it's not the government's business what I, or anyone else, put into our own bodies. If you take hard drugs, or do drugs without testing them, it's on you, the individual.
The CIA is directly involved in the drug trade, and has been for many years. If you're so concerned about overdoses maybe we should root out the corruption in our own system. But that will never happen because Trump is part of the same swamp he claimed he wanted to drain.
The fentanyl is not coming from Venezuela, never has. This is a poor pretense for an undeclared war, and most people see right through it.
Drug money is significant income to Vz. Cut it off.
Maduro (not mentioned by name in the article 🤔) is an illegitimate leader and a communist malignancy in the western hemisphere. Maduro needs to be cut out like a cancer.
Ever notice those boats? With three outboards operating at high speed in major shipping routes. Every boat with identical payload bundles visible from above? If it looks like a drug boat. Goes over the water like a drug boat. Has bundled drug pay loads like a drug boat. Then blow the evil God damned thing out of the water.
I'm no fan of Maduro, but he's just as legitimate as any government that initiates force to achieve their means. Venezuela has the same rights to blow up boats in our waters as we do in theirs: that is, zero.
They wouldn’t dare blow up a US boat. 🤣 Vz actually has fewer rights.
Proof or corporate media says so?
IFIFY: All banksters and ALL governments need to be cut out like a cancer.
They deserve a trial, with evidence.
https://www.caracaschronicles.com/2024/01/08/state-enabled-illicit-trades-represent-more-than-a-quarter-of-venezuelas-economy/
Estimated $5.1 billion, 16% of GDP in 2022.
Thanks. Interesting stuff.
Seems odd that those high years (2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 - not 2019?) were also when the USA and CIA were meddling in Venezuelan affairs. Also odd they didn't include more years before. Didn't read it all - did they mention how the UK stole their gold reserves?
https://SaidIt.net/s/Venezuela
Started by fred_red_beans. Haven't seen him here yet.
The irony is fighting these people is what guarantees they exist. There is demand. If the problem isn't solved at the demand side then there is money to made. And if you make it dangerous to make that money then there is money to be made by people willing to do dangerous things. If you opened up trade there would be no value in hiring paramilitary to move the drugs.
Drugs don't kill people. People kill people. If someone chooses to do a drug and dies no moral wrong happened. A free person is free to do something dangerous. The drug certainly didn't make a choice. Maybe if we stopped trying to save drug addicts people wouldn't feel a sense that there is a safety net beneath them and people will stop doing it all together.
If killing people over drugs is right why not the people who choose to do drugs? Is death ok or not ok? I think death is ok. Just not murdering people. Especially when it doesn't and never will get the outcome you want.
Also making these substances illegal adds a pressure to transport drugs that are more potent by volume and thus more dangerous. Fentanyl deaths are a result of fighting drugs.
A dead person is dead…”moral death” or not. Such a technical analysis over an event that has significant emotional aspects too.
And putting drugs in oneself is just a personal decision. Until the taxpayers have to pick up the pieces of homelessness and crime and emergency care.
Legalized drugs? And how’s that working for Amsterdam?
Emotional aspect is not an excuse to ignore technical facts. In fact it is a reason to do more of it. Because it is more important to be right about things that matter than things that don't. The problem is a large number of people turn off their brain once they have an emotion. So the things the impact humanity the most are consistently miscalculated. That makes for a sucky world. A sucky world where people act on their emotions and then ask why nothing ever improves. I guess we'll just act on unthinking emotion harder next time.
You’re missing a lot in life.
Everything is not black and white.
Not only are there shades of gray…some people realize that things come in colors too.
Why do you assume I'm missing something if I see things you don't. Maybe I see all of it. But intellectual discipline helps us make sense of the gray areas better. Just because I understand deontological ethics doesn't mean I don't get feelings. This is the strawman emotional thinkers assume in others. "If you don't come to my same emotional conclusion then you must not have feelings at all." I do. But I can also do something useful. Think clearly as well. It's like emotions+.