• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Rick Perry Says Drug War "May Require Our Military in Mexico"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry spent today campaigning in New Hampshire, hammering away at his message that “over-taxation , over-regulation, and over-litigation” are hurting business and the U.S. economy, but he also advocated for a larger government role in the war on drugs.

At a house party in Manchester, Perry said that ending the drug war in Mexico “may require our military in Mexico.” “The way that we were able to stop the drug cartels in Colombia was with a coordinated effort, ” Perry said. “It may require our military in Mexico working in concert with them to kill these drug cartels and to keep them off of our border and to destroy their networks. I don’t know all the scenarios that are out there but I think it is very important that we work with them, to keep that country from failing.”

The comments raise questions about whether the governor would support military action by executive order. Perry has long supported sending U.S. troops to Mexico to help with the drug war.

Over and over Perry said that as president he would be sure to shrink the role of Washington, D.C., in the lives of Americans. Complete with colorful props, Perry vowed to do away with as much of the health care law passed by Congress — what he referred to as “Obamacare” — as he could. At one stop he pulled out the Sharpie he said he would use to sign it away. At another stop, he pulled out his pocket Constitution, saying that “Obamacare” wasn’t in there . At every stop, Perry was questioned about the Texas bill giving out-of -state tuition to children of illegal immigrants. He said it was a state solution to a state problem and that as president, he would uphold the 10th Amendment. He said
that he did not support the Dream Act. Many seemed satisfied with Perry’s justification for signing the Texas bill.

Bill Connors, who first asked the governor about his stance, said he came to the town hall in Hampton sure that he would not be voting for Perry. But based on Perry’s justification, he said he was now “thinking about it.” When questioned about his stance on global warming, Perry reiterated that he’s a “skeptic.” “The issue is, are we as Americans
going to jeopardize the future of this country economically, by putting into place a program that there are still enough skeptics in my book, to stand with them, and say, you know what, I don’t believe that man- made global warming is settled in science enough for us to justify an economic impact on this country that could be devastating for the future,” he said. But on the subject of off-shore drilling, he said, “We have to be thoughtful; we use science on how we protect our environment. But we’ve got to get back to drilling.”

Asked about American manufacturing and bringing jobs back to the United States, Perry said it was cap-and-trade policies that were causing companies to go overseas and do business. Perry also revealed that he was consulting with Steve Forbes regarding his economic and monetary policy. Perry and Forbes met during Perry’ s recent trip to New York. “I think at the end of the day, Perry will win the nomination, and I think he’ll win the election,” Forbes said.

ABC News’ Michael Falcone contributed to this article.

abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/10/rick-perry-says-drug-war-may-require-our-military-in-mexico/


Yes, please. Vote for him, guys.

Please.
 
Fernando Rocker said:
abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/10/rick-perry-says-drug-war-may-require-our-military-in-mexico/


Yes, please. Vote for him, guys.

Please.
Eh, no. I do promise to lend support in anyway to give Mexico any military aid or equipment it needs. I just could never vote for Perry (well and not in a primary since I'm a registered Democrat).
 
Rick Perry is not a convenient president for the U.S.
Even if this possibility may help us Mexicans (or could backfire in a disaster), I don't think it's fair for Americans to vote on this single issue.
 

derder

Member
Honestly, I never thought that I would say this; but:

"better to fight them over there then over here"
 
HellKarnassus said:
Rick Perry is not a convenient president for the U.S.
Even if this possibility may help us Mexicans (or could backfire in a disaster), I don't think it's fair for Americans to vote on this single issue.
Like I said I'd support it providing Mexico with the tools and talents it needs, but not Perry.
 
Speaking as a bleeding heart lefty, I don't know that I disagree with his fundamental point. I read and hear about the drug cartels but I never read about how it's going to be solved in 5 years. If we have the power to dismantle them, and Mexico welcomes us(I'm sure they would at this point), I think we should do it.

There may be some set of facts or line of thinking I haven't thought of that makes this obviously a bad idea...shoot me down if that's the case.
 
Karma Kramer said:
Only way to end the war on drugs, is to take the approach of Portugal. Have we learned nothing over the past 30 years.

This isn´t about a war on drugs this is about a war on the drug cartels.

And I don´t think you need to support rick perry to get the us involved. It´s seeming just more like a matter of time and that who ever is president will have to do something. Does anybody not think that one of these cartels will do something and cross over the border or something that would violate US soverignty? Any president if that were to happen would be forced to respond.
 
el retorno de los sapos said:
This isn´t about a war on drugs this is about a war on the drug cartels.

isn't it the same thing? the black market funds them and gives them the power... look at prohibition of alcohol
 
Karma Kramer said:
isn't it the same thing? the black market funds them and gives them the power... look at prohibition of alcohol

no it´s not. These guys are much more than drug pushers. They are the mexican mafia. the do more than just sell drugs.
 
ItAintEasyBeinCheesy said:
How good are satellites at finding crops/plantations?
I don't know, but our Army just found the biggest one in history a couple months ago. It was disguised as a tomato plantation field.

es-us.noticias.yahoo.com/fotos/hallan-plantío-de-marihuana-en-méxico-1310675334-slideshow/
 
el retorno de los sapos said:
no it´s not. These guys are much more than drug pushers. They are the mexican mafia. the do more than just sell drugs.

do you think they would be in this position if they weren't making huge cash off drugs?
 

Amir0x

Banned
Maybe you should pray for a solution, Fernando Rocker. That seems to be Rick Perry's solution for the drought. God will save you.
 
Karma Kramer said:
do you think they would be in this position if they weren't making huge cash off drugs?
True.

It's a $30 billion dollars per year business. But still, they do other things like extortion and kidnapping.
 
Karma Kramer said:
do you think they would be in this position if they weren't making huge cash off drugs?


If all drugs were legal, no. But I don´t think that is ever going to be posible or disirable. If you think just legalizing weed (or other drugs) is going to solve this you (IMO) are mistaken. This problem is much more wide reaching than drugs. It goes to the very nature of the mexican state and its politics and governace over the past 100 years. Corporatism and one party rule for 70 years instituationalizes a lot of problems. And then a giant crackdown is going to lead to confrentations.
 

Amir0x

Banned
Good, so make sure you pray everyday and the drug war will surely end. I'm sure it will.

Bilbo Urethra Baggins said:
Bulbo Urethral Baggins

My solution has factually been proven to work in real world countries. But I'm sure praying would work better.
 

Lonely1

Unconfirmed Member
Fuck that. We don't need more military power (ours is good enough). We need way stronger local law enforcement. Stronger law enforcement North of the border would help wonders too.
 

Drkirby

Corporate Apologist
While that may be the truth, I think you could do a decent job at cutting off their revenue by legalizing drugs, and just heavily regulating them ("You can only buy X amount of this drug per week, the dosage produced must not exceed Y, to keep track of how much you can buy, you will be required to present a National Photo ID card with a Magnetic Strip, that checks with a Database to keep track")

ItAintEasyBeinCheesy said:
How good are satellites at finding crops/plantations?
They are actually pretty good at this point.
 
Amir0x said:
My solution has factually been proven to work in real world countries. But I'm sure praying would work better.

What other country has the problems mexico has? And where has it been solved?
 
Amir0x said:
Good, so make sure you pray everyday and the drug war will surely end. I'm sure it will.



My solution has factually been proven to work in real world countries. But I'm sure praying would work better.
I haven't heard your solution. Pray tell.
 

jchap

Member
AT-802U_3-thumb-560x381-37414.jpg


Air tractor fitted with armor plating and machine guns and bombs (in addition to its normal role of dispersing herbicides).

I knew a guy who flew unarmed versions of this plane in Columbia.
 
It's as if Perry doesn't want the nomination. It could have been handed to him on a silver platter, and he's throwing it away with these extremist views. A Mormon is going to trounce a hardcore fundamentalist governor from Texas for the republican nomination? Thing are a' changin
 

Amir0x

Banned
el retorno de los sapos said:
What other country has the problems mexico has? And where has it been solved?


Portugal was a test country for legalizing everything. In a few short years after this, Drug abuse/drug addiction was down by nearly 50%, violent drug-related crime was down nearly the same, etc etc. It was a radical, immediate shift.

The SCALE of Mexico's problem is far bigger, obviously, but I see no reason why it wouldn't work there too.

People don't understand drugs because there is a mystery around them. When you make something a mystery, people become curious. And then they use it without the proper respect or responsibility. When you remove the mystery, it becomes less desirable.

When you remove the black market, it also diminishes violence. No, it won't ever disappear - but it will make 50,000 deaths in 4 years no longer a problem.
 

Lonely1

Unconfirmed Member
jchap said:
AT-802U_3-thumb-560x381-37414.jpg


Air tractor fitted with armor plating and machine guns and bombs (in addition to its normal role of dispersing herbicides).

I knew a guy who flew unarmed versions of this plane in Columbia.
You need to know where to bomb first, though. And be sure to have no collateral damage. Unlike Colombia, we are not facing a full blowout insurgency.

Drkirby said:
They are actually pretty good at this point.
Then, just send the info... The plantations of Cocaine are still in Colombia, btw.
 
legalize drugs day 1

day 2: small drug dealers out on the streets
day 3: Drug cartels collapse
day 4: Mexico is free
day 5: Illegal immigrants return to Mexico
day 6: thousands of jobs available in USA
day 7: we come out of recession
 
Also people need to read what perry said. He wasn´t talking about an invation or anything. He said something like our efforts in Colombia.
 
Amir0x said:
Portugal was a test country for legalizing everything. In a few short years after this, Drug abuse/drug addiction was down by nearly 50%, violent drug-related crime was down nearly the same, etc etc. It was a radical, immediate shift.

The SCALE of Mexico's problem is far bigger, obviously, but I see no reason why it wouldn't work there too.

People don't understand drugs because there is a mystery around them. When you make something a mystery, people become curious. And then they use it without the proper respect or responsibility. When you remove the mystery, it becomes less desirable.

When you remove the black market, it also diminishes violence. No, it won't ever disappear - but it will make 50,000 deaths in 4 years no longer a problem.

QFT x a billion

The aggression against drugs has been tried for 30 years and this is where we are... a completely new approach is needed. Portugal seems to have shown a way there
 

jchap

Member
Lonely1 said:
You need to know where to bomb first, though. And be sure to have no collateral damage. Unlike Colombia, we are not facing a full blowout insurgency.

You don't use the weapons unless people come out to defend the fields of drugs you are spraying
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom