this post was submitted on 06 Jan 2024
171 points (99.4% liked)

World News

39032 readers
2843 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 20 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Doubtful. 20 years in Afghanistan bought us nothing. Half a century of meddling in the rest of central America has produced refugee waves. While we could, theoretically, try to assist the Mexican government with funds we’d probably fuck that up too.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago

Afghanistan was fighting an ideological enemy, that won their last war by waiting it out. Waiting out the Soviets worked and the same approached worked on the US coalition forces.

The cartels in Mexico are businesses. They aren't the same type of enemy. You only have to make the business unprofitable for it to stop.

Remove the market in the US for drugs. Legalisation of the okay ones and social support for the harder drugs would reduce the size of the market.

If you improve opportunities for people, these gangs have less recruitment leverage.

The rest is just eroding the financial ability of the gangs. Detailed targeting of their finances would reduce the gangs liquidity and thus ability to operate. Continued military engagement would require them to spend more money of weapons and salaries hurting their bottom line. Capturing more of the members would also limit their ability to operate.

These do require long term commitments of a large amount of resources. If the gangs think they can wait it out 2-20 years it won't work.

In Afghanistan they thought the could win in a few weeks and it would all be sorted. In part they were correct. Afghanistan was defeated before all the troops turned up. It was establishing a long term new order that was the issue. Mexico already has a recognised government that just needs support.

The big issue is this all depends on investing in people and public service. That's the real solution the military action would just be an accelerant. Neoliberals think investing in people isn't necessary. However, the free market sells them drugs and encourages murder in pursuit of selling these drugs. The free markets is in the way here, neoliberalism isn't the answer.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

"It didn't work once, so now it's impossible."

It's like you people forget about: Vietnam, Taiwan, South Korea, Hawaii, and every other nation where the US successfully spread its dominance.

The reason why we don't invade Mexico is because we want Mexicans to be poor and desperate so they can be our new China.