Can drug warfare in Mexico be controlled?

[RSS News]

Mexico is offering a reward of $2 million for informers who help arrest drug lords. Do you think this will work?

(Feed provided by BBC News | Have your Say (http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/2/hi/talking_point/default.stm))

[black magick hustla]

the destruction of the narco requires probably a complete overturn of the social order. its so entrenched in every aspect of latin american society that is not even funny

[Psy]

Mexico is offering a reward of $2 million for informers who help arrest drug lords. Do you think this will work?

(Feed provided by BBC News | Have your Say (http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/2/hi/talking_point/default.stm))

$2 million is chump change when it comes to the illegal drug industry, you are talking about organizations that uses armoured BMW and Mercedes luxury cars as APCs so I don't think it is possible to bribe anyone in these organization that has useful knowledge.

[Bright Banana Beard]

Only the social revolution or fascist-hardcore on drugs policy can stop it. Money won't do such thing.

[StalinFanboy]

The only problem is that because the narcos don't have any accountability (in the same way the state does), they can pretty much do whatever they want. This means that groups like the Zapatistas and such can't do a whole lot to fight them, or else the narcos could come in and gun down everyone. This drug war has also spilled over into places like Arizona that now has the highest kidnapping rate in the US.

[mykittyhasaboner]

Whoever rats on drug lords for 2 mil, will probably just go buy more drugs with it.


The only problem is that because the narcos don't have any accountability (in the same way the state does), they can pretty much do whatever they want.Well, I'd say that drug lords are pretty accountable, on their own terms anyways. You think they can just do whatever they want?

[JimmyJazz]

Or we could just decriminalize drugs.

I'm sorry, that was silly, carry on.

[black magick hustla]

The only problem is that because the narcos don't have any accountability (in the same way the state does), they can pretty much do whatever they want. This means that groups like the Zapatistas and such can't do a whole lot to fight them, or else the narcos could come in and gun down everyone. This drug war has also spilled over into places like Arizona that now has the highest kidnapping rate in the US.

the mexican state has no accountability whaotsoever. a family member got his nails ripped off by the federales for being accused of forming part of an organized criminal organization (which he was not). the mexican state is a criminal organization by itself that has probably murdered more people than the narcos. the narcos are just the illegalist wing of the bourgeosie.

[black magick hustla]

Also as I was discussing in the left communist group the narcos are a symptom of capitalists condition of decomposition, its final phase of decadence: http://en.internationalism.org/ir/117_decompo.html , where social relations suffer an ever increasing state of putrefaction. in the 60s, the armed groups who fought the state talked about che guevara and emiliano zapata. Today, the biggest anti-state groups have no political or ideological program and make crystal clear their purpose.

[black magick hustla]

Just to add a few things. A lot of folks think that the whole theory of decadence is bs. I think it has a lot to do with people living in the first world where this symptoms, although present, dont seem as bad. The peripheral states are in constant state of barbarism and decadence is really noticeable. A lot of us are getting fucked really badly, so to speak.

[Psy]

Also as I was discussing in the left communist group the narcos are a symptom of capitalists condition of decomposition, its final phase of decadence: http://en.internationalism.org/ir/117_decompo.html , where social relations suffer an ever increasing state of putrefaction. in the 60s, the armed groups who fought the state talked about che guevara and emiliano zapata. Today, the biggest anti-state groups have no political or ideological program and make crystal clear their purpose.

It is worse then that, corruption has made many state institutions self-serving, this came apparent in the 1980's early in the "war on drugs" when organized crime was easily able to bribe the FBI, custom officials, the coast guard and local law enforcement, the FBI only cracked down rivalry between drug cartels was getting so out of hand that Miami was becoming a war zone.

[StalinFanboy]

Whoever rats on drug lords for 2 mil, will probably just go buy more drugs with it.

Well, I'd say that drug lords are pretty accountable, on their own terms anyways. You think they can just do whatever they want?
The things I say come from anarchists in Arizona. Pheonix right now is pitted in the middle of the drug war. Arizona has some of the most lax gun laws, and the narcos often pay people to go to gun fairs and buy a ton of guns. Journalists can't really speak out about it because there is the danger that they will be killed.

The Zapatistas are basically forced to allow the narcos to travel through the liberated land because of how powerful the narcos are. When I say they have less accountability than the state, I mean that if the state went in and slaughtered the Zapatistas, people around the world would be pissed. Shit would happen. But the narcos could do it and not face the same reprocussions.

I'll get more information on this from my buddy.

[mykittyhasaboner]

Ah, OK I misunderstood your use of the word 'accountable'. I actually watched an hour long report about this situation, I'll see if I can find it online.

Edit: here (http://current.com/items/89845362/narco_war_next_door.htm) it is, I think some might find it useful.

[Comrade_XRD]

That would do absolutely NOTHING. People are so hungry over there, they'll be ratting out their innocent neighbors left and right. The only thing that'll change the drug situation is if America would REALLY have a war on drugs and stop the bullshit. If America would stop buying the crack, then maybe Mexico would see a change in its rampant crime. It's cause and effect here folks.

[Revulero]

That would do absolutely NOTHING. People are so hungry over there, they'll be ratting out their innocent neighbors left and right. The only thing that'll change the drug situation is if America would REALLY have a war on drugs and stop the bullshit. If America would stop buying the crack, then maybe Mexico would see a change in its rampant crime. It's cause and effect here folks.

No, the war on drugs made the problem worser because now the narcos feel threatened and will use force on anyone including innocent people. The narcos combined together have an army bigger than Mexico, they are also well trained by Israel and the US since a lot of them defected from the Mexican Army to join the better paying Narcos. So fighting them would result in an ultimate defeat and several innocent deaths. The only solution I see that wont likely work is decriminalizing drugs. Even if they do decriminalize drugs the narcos still have power because they also do prostitution, loan sharking, and etc.

[cyu]

Mexico is offering a reward of $2 million for informers who help arrest drug lords. Do you think this will work?


Anybody that actually gets the $2 million will end up spending $3 million on personal security for the rest of his (perhaps short) life. Once the big shots are gone, they will just be replaced by their underlings, who have been itching to take the top spot. So no, it won't work.

It's really just a human resource issue. If you have a society where a lot of people are poor and don't have good legal ways to make a decent living, then more and more of them will resort to illegal ways to make a living. If you are both trying to solve this problem and still preserve capitalism at the same time, then you will fail, since it's capitalism that causes the initial conditions for this problem to fester.

If Mexico were really serious about solving this problem, it will just have to throw out capitalism. I doubt Mexico is very serious about it. It may not be as bad as Colombia, but I'm sure a good number of the politicians are getting a cut of the drug money.

[Voice_of_Reason]

MEXICO CITY – Soldiers captured one of Mexico's most-wanted smugglers, a man accused of controlling the flow of drugs through the northern city of Monterrey for the powerful Beltran-Leyva cartel, the Mexican army said Wednesday.
The announcement came hours before U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrived in Mexico promising to do more to help Mexico crack down on drug violence that is spilling over into the U.S.
Gen. Luis Arturo Oliver said Hector Huerta was detained Tuesday in a Monterrey suburb, along with four men identified as his bodyguards. Soldiers also seized assault rifles and four grenades.
Huerta was arrested on an outstanding homicide warrant; the other four suspects were being held pending charges.
Huerta is the first most-wanted trafficker to be captured since the government on Monday published a list of top suspects. The list identified him as a top Beltran-Leyva cartel lieutenant, with a $1 million reward offered for information leading to his capture. It was not clear if a reward was paid in this case.
Two men on the list had already been captured by the time it was published.
The mustached, chubby-cheeked Huerta is nicknamed "La Burra," or female donkey. "Burro," or male donkey, is a common slang word for the people, usually poor and desperate, paid by the cartels to transport drugs across borders.
But Huerto is no peon — Mexican authorities say he oversaw the cartel's operations in Monterrey, an industrial hub and Mexico's third-largest city. They say he met with the rival Gulf cartel to divide territory between the gangs, two of Mexico's most powerful criminal organizations.
"We have information that as the representative of the Beltran Leyva cartel he held meetings with members of the Gulf cartel with the aim of agreeing on drug distribution zones, in order to avoid clashes between the rival gangs," said Marisela Morales, the federal deputy attorney general for organized crime.
Mexican cartels have been known to engage in such temporary alliances or truces when violent turf battles sap their ranks and draw too much attention from law enforcement, and this may be one of those moments. A federal police report last week said executions due to cartel power struggles and arrests of traffickers have diminished their labor force and capabilities.
Others questioned the timing of Huerta's arrest, and the detention of another Monterrey trafficker, Gulf cartel hit man Sigifrido Najera Talamantes, in the days leading up to Clinton's visit to Monterrey.
"It is quite something, that as soon as Mrs. Clinton confirms her visit, by coincidence the government starts making big arrests of drug traffickers," the newspaper Reforma wrote in an editorial. "Maybe the authorities think, naively, that this woman doesn't have information of her own about the reality of Mexico's situation, and that by sweeping the garbage under the rug they can convince her that nothing is happening here."
Mexico intensified its fight in Monterrey after traffickers grew so bold that they paid demonstrators to block streets in protests demanding that the army withdraw troops from the city.
Soldiers have made the biggest arrests, including detention on Friday of Najera Talamantes, who is suspected in an Oct. 12 attack on the U.S. consulate in Monterrey. One man opened fire and another threw a grenade that failed to explode, but nobody was hurt.
Talamontes also is suspected in a similar gunfire and grenade attack Jan. 7 the Televisa network's station in Monterrey.
While Mexico is eager to show results to the United States, it also remains wary of criticism from the north, and comments made during U.S. Senate hearings Wednesday could threaten the good will generated by Clinton's visit.
Sen. John McCain described Calderon's struggle with the cartels as "an existential threat to the very fabric of the government of Mexico," a statement Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said she agreed with.
The Mexican government heatedly denies that cartels are threatening to take control of the country, and Clinton supported that position on the eve of her visit. In interviews with Mexican media, she disagreed that Mexico is becoming a failed state, and said the U.S. is responsible for consuming the drugs and selling the weapons that fuel the cartel violence.


Original Post: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090325/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/lt_mexico_most_wanted;_ylt=AqDi.VNvlgJK7l8vcmfUJsx vaA8F

Efforts are being made, but whether they will help in the long run is currently unclear.

[YSR]

Means nothing. You can kill a snake by cutting off its head, but the narcos aren't a snake. Anecdotally, the narcos are a standard conversation piece here, almost referred to like a political party. The phenomeon is simply something that is part of life.

I think Marmot's definition of them as the illegalist bourgeoisie is spot on. And the repression that the Mexican state is using to fight the narcos is only going to be used against social movements. It's basically impossible to seperate oneself from the influence of narcotrafficking. I'm a college student and I probably am involved in something that touches narco money just by buying food and beer. By making everyone a potential enemy of the state, repression can be called down on anyone by evoking the narco threat.

Which isn't to say that the narco threat is as fake as the U.S.'s usage of terrorism against any opponent. They certainly are real, dangerous, and have enormous amounts of power. (See Ciudad Juarez for an example.)

At the risk of being accused of being "ultraleftist," ultimately the problem is one of capitalism itself, and particularly has a great deal to do with the balance of economic power between the working classes of Mexico, the United States, and producer countries in Latin America.