Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Special Report: Mexico's Zetas rewrite drug war in blood
Reuters ^ | 5/23/12 | Ioan Grillo

Posted on 05/23/2012 6:53:42 AM PDT by ruralvoter

Mexican government forces had bottled up a band of enemy fighters in this tiny village late last year, but feared they would escape into the dusty, rock-strewn hills. So more than 600 soldiers and federal police closed in from all directions with armored Humvees and helicopters.

The outlaws responded with a barrage of rocket-propelled grenades and AK-47 assault-rifle fire, tearing apart one federal police vehicle. For three days the fighting raged.

In the end, according to military accounts of the battle, 22 members of the Zetas drug cartel, two police officers and a soldier were dead, and 20 Zetas were in custody. Dozens more escaped to fight another day.

The battle could have been a scene from the war in Afghanistan, but it erupted just 45 miles south of the Texas border

(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: cocaine; drug; meth; mexico
Wow. $60 billion dollars a year. That is the estimated drug market in the United States. How many dollars are now a large part of business in your state? In Florida the money laundering business is thriving.
1 posted on 05/23/2012 6:53:47 AM PDT by ruralvoter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ruralvoter

The Feds never seem to prosecute the money launderers.

Ever wonder about that?


2 posted on 05/23/2012 7:00:07 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Venturer
Nope, not at all.

Our government is a criminal enterprise staffed by criminals serving the needs of criminals foreign and domestic.

But you knew that, didn't you.

3 posted on 05/23/2012 7:07:55 AM PDT by Aevery_Freeman (Typed using <FONT STYLE=SARCASM> unless otherwise noted)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ruralvoter

Just legalize drugs. Banning them on the federal level was an overreach anyway (violates the IX and X Amendments).

We could save hundreds of billions of dollars in one fell swoop.


4 posted on 05/23/2012 7:09:14 AM PDT by freedumb2003 ('RETRO' Abortions = performed on 84th trimester individuals who think killing babies is a "right.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
Just legalize drugs. Banning them on the federal level was an overreach anyway (violates the IX and X Amendments).

Then name your poison:

1. Better increase welfare for people who are going to be permanently unhirable because of drugs.

2. If you cut off welfare for drug addicts, expect a crime wave, the likes you've never seen before.

5 posted on 05/23/2012 7:11:47 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Legalize marijuana. Let our home grown potheads bring down the national debt.


6 posted on 05/23/2012 7:20:28 AM PDT by CaptainK (...please make it stop. Shake a can of pennies at it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

but wait, all i ever here is that we can have wonderful, happi shinning government run drug rehab centers, and wonder government run drug dispensaries so folks and grab a snort on the way home from work or on the way to pick up the kids from school...

it will all be so easy and well regulated, and make the drug wars all a thing of the past, right??????

wtf is wrong with people?


7 posted on 05/23/2012 7:21:20 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
1. Better increase welfare for people who are going to be permanently unhirable because of drugs.

Yeah, like the drug war is keeping people from becoming drug addicts. You don't really buy that crap, do you?

2. If you cut off welfare for drug addicts, expect a crime wave, the likes you've never seen before.

So you want your tax dollars to keep going to drug addicts?

8 posted on 05/23/2012 7:26:19 AM PDT by Ken H (Austerity is the irresistible force. Entitlements are the immovable object.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan

How about letting the states decide how to regulate intrastate drug policies? Or do you just ignore the Tenth Amendment when it gets in the way of a policy you like?


9 posted on 05/23/2012 7:30:36 AM PDT by Ken H (Austerity is the irresistible force. Entitlements are the immovable object.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan

And once the government starts getting their cut of that tax revenue from drugs, they will do anything to keep the gravy train going.


10 posted on 05/23/2012 7:40:04 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
Yeah, like the drug war is keeping people from becoming drug addicts. You don't really buy that crap, do you?

Do you think legalizing drugs will increase or decrease the number of people becoming addicted to drugs?

11 posted on 05/23/2012 7:41:09 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ruralvoter

Judging from the description of the confrontation, their mistake was getting into a conventional firefight with the cartel. Once they met resistence, they should have just bombed the compound from the air like a military target. Pulverize it into gravel, then go in and mop up.


12 posted on 05/23/2012 7:45:22 AM PDT by SpaceBar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ruralvoter

Oh, sorry. Misread the title.

13 posted on 05/23/2012 7:58:33 AM PDT by WakeUpAndVote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WakeUpAndVote

You should misread more titles.


14 posted on 05/23/2012 8:01:54 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
Do you think legalizing drugs will increase or decrease the number of people becoming addicted to drugs?

Probably little change. Drugs are readily available to anyone who wants them now. IMO, it is nonsense to argue that federal drug laws are keeping would-be addicts clean.

I don't think it is unreasonable to believe that addiction would actually decrease to some extent. There are big bucks to be had for drug dealers if they create addicts. That incentive would disappear if drugs were regulated in a manner similar to alcohol. Alcohol is probably the most widely abused drug in the US, but it does not fuel organized crime. There's a reason for that.

Now let me ask you. Do you think the Tenth Amendment should be honored and let the states regulate intrastate drug policies?

15 posted on 05/23/2012 8:05:29 AM PDT by Ken H (Austerity is the irresistible force. Entitlements are the immovable object.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

>>Then name your poison:

1. Better increase welfare for people who are going to be permanently unhirable because of drugs.

2. If you cut off welfare for drug addicts, expect a crime wave, the likes you’ve never seen before.<<

You pose a false dichotomy. Legalization of drugs<>additional usage. The current drug users will find them, legal or not. Legalized drugs won’t all of a sudden make them more attractive (we have both tobacco and alcohol as examples of how habits are formed and associated behaviors).

Legalization would give us the opportunity to target and help people who are addicted. Currently, they are “underground.”

That is just a tiny part of the practical argument — you completely ignore my Constitutional argument (and that is more compelling).


16 posted on 05/23/2012 8:07:21 AM PDT by freedumb2003 ('RETRO' Abortions = performed on 84th trimester individuals who think killing babies is a "right.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: WakeUpAndVote

>>Oh, sorry. Misread the title.<<

A most excellent misread... :)


17 posted on 05/23/2012 8:09:13 AM PDT by freedumb2003 ('RETRO' Abortions = performed on 84th trimester individuals who think killing babies is a "right.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

So what about the typical suburban user. Where do they do to get their fix......the hood, right?

Now, knowing that, how many potential users are discouraged from using simply because of this fact?

Now if they could get their fix in a more comfortable environment, I suspect that lowers the barrier a bit.

To quote Dennis Miller, “that’s just my opinion, I could be wrong.”

I would just conclude with two words, “Opium Dens.”


18 posted on 05/23/2012 8:14:48 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
IMO, it is nonsense to argue that federal drug laws are keeping would-be addicts clean.

It's not the laws per se, but moreso the stigma.....Legalizing drugs somewhat removes the stigma.

19 posted on 05/23/2012 8:17:03 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

>>So what about the typical suburban user. Where do they do to get their fix......the hood, right?<<

Nope — they get it in the suburbs.

>>Now, knowing that, how many potential users are discouraged from using simply because of this fact?<<

Zero.

>>Now if they could get their fix in a more comfortable environment, I suspect that lowers the barrier a bit.<<

You suspect wrong. Addiction is internally driven and external factors are all but meaningless.

>>To quote Dennis Miller, “that’s just my opinion, I could be wrong.”<<

And you are.

>>I would just conclude with two words, “Opium Dens.”<<

Up until the late 1960s, most drugs were perfectly legal. There may have been opium dens but those people would go after the drugs anyway.

You haven’t made any kind of a compelling argument and still skip the illegality of the WOD.

We lost the war — let’s stop throwing good money after bad.


20 posted on 05/23/2012 8:18:50 AM PDT by freedumb2003 ('RETRO' Abortions = performed on 84th trimester individuals who think killing babies is a "right.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

I would be in favor of legalizing drugs if:

1. Employers have the right to drug test...just because you do drugs, doesn’t mean you have the right to work.

2. Drug testing for welfare recipients, and denial of benefits for users...You want to partake, I am not going to pay for it.

Now I agree, if you do that, then you could legalize drugs and the number of users would fall.....but of course, you’ll never get them to pass 1 and 2.


21 posted on 05/23/2012 8:22:26 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

So do you think the Tenth Amendment should be honored and let the states regulate intrastate drug policies?


22 posted on 05/23/2012 8:26:30 AM PDT by Ken H (Austerity is the irresistible force. Entitlements are the immovable object.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]




Donate Just One Monthly
And Become a FR Hero


Sponsors will contribute $10
For each new monthly sign-up

23 posted on 05/23/2012 8:38:20 AM PDT by TheOldLady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: WakeUpAndVote
sorry sorry sorry
24 posted on 05/23/2012 8:40:42 AM PDT by tumblindice (Our new, happy lives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Aevery_Freeman

As dave would say , Yup.

They always get the Peons and let the big money boys go.


25 posted on 05/23/2012 8:54:48 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
2. If you cut off welfare for drug addicts, expect a crime wave, the likes you've never seen before.

Honestly, that would be a short term problem in areas that are not havens for anti-2nd Amendment zealots.

26 posted on 05/23/2012 8:56:41 AM PDT by Turbo Pig (...to close with and destroy the enemy...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan
>"wtf is wrong with people?"

Prohibition worked out pretty good. ...... for Al Capone.

It also brought us the wonderful Kennedy legacy.

On the positive side it did bring us NASCAR.


It all boils down to, are you FREE to do to yourself as you wish?

Either you're FREE or you are a PRISONER.

To deny some one else their FREEDOM, makes you a jailer, or SLAVER.

27 posted on 05/23/2012 9:02:52 AM PDT by rawcatslyentist ("Behold, I am against you, O arrogant one," Jeremiah 50:31)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Anyone who wants drugs can get them. Just go to your local high school.

If drugs were legalized, drugs could be heavily taxed, so that the legal price would equal the current street price.

Gang violence would drop dramatically, and drug-related law enforcement spending would vanish.


28 posted on 05/23/2012 9:18:52 AM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas (hViva Christo Rey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: rawcatslyentist

I have been reading the comments with some interest. In this land of the FREE and the home of the brave prior to about 1935 one could walk into you neighborhood drug store and buy cocaine and morphine (think Coca-Cola). Coca-cola was called it because it had coke in it. The country ran fine when a free person could buy what they wanted to.

Lets have a little rationality and a little less party line. The drug industry in the US is the 2nd or 3rd largest business. Consequently, you know that the senators, reps, judges, cops, federal agents, federal justice officials, and some military are all on the take. No large drug dealers get prosecuted. Watch the case and they all are small fish.


29 posted on 05/23/2012 9:19:52 AM PDT by Citizen Tom Paine (An old sailor sends)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

it was sarcasm ken, come on......fed or local feeding drugs to their citizenry is a ridiculous idea....


30 posted on 05/23/2012 9:27:09 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ruralvoter; Travis McGee; ATLDiver

Besides the “generate anti-2A sentiment” angle on Fast & Furious, I think it was very likely a way to help arm a favored drug cartel.


31 posted on 05/23/2012 9:30:53 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tumblindice

Uncle!


32 posted on 05/23/2012 9:32:16 AM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas (hViva Christo Rey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: rawcatslyentist

fine if you want to be ‘free’ to get trashed, i shouldnt have to pay for it.....when your ‘freedom’ to get trashed causes bodily harm to your or someome else, cause you are trashed government supplied drugs, or property damage as a result of you exercising your freedome, that then interferes with my freedoms to avoid such occurences, and that is where i draw the line....


33 posted on 05/23/2012 9:32:36 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan

Perhaps my sarca-meter is on the fritz. Just so I’m clear, are you for the states regulating intrastate drug policy under authority of the Tenth Amendment rather than fedgov?


34 posted on 05/23/2012 9:32:50 AM PDT by Ken H (Austerity is the irresistible force. Entitlements are the immovable object.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

Ken, im all for the tenth amendment, however, the government shouldnt be involved in dispensing recreational drugs of any kind, it is morally reprehensible to me.


35 posted on 05/23/2012 9:36:13 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan
Ken, im all for the tenth amendment,

So are you for the feds staying out, even if a state decide to legalize... YES or NO?


36 posted on 05/23/2012 9:44:37 AM PDT by Ken H (Austerity is the irresistible force. Entitlements are the immovable object.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
Then name your poison:

Your premise is false. Anyone who wants drugs can already get them. In most high schools, it's easier to get pot than beer. Legalization will not increase the number of hard-core druggies. It might increase casual usage a little, but who really cares about that, except drug warriors making a buck off the status quo?

37 posted on 05/23/2012 9:53:51 AM PDT by zeugma (Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan
Do you have ANY IDEA what the govt has taken from our citizens for their WOD?

Apparently you don't.

Go pay your govt health care before someone turns your argument back on you.

38 posted on 05/23/2012 9:53:55 AM PDT by rawcatslyentist ("Behold, I am against you, O arrogant one," Jeremiah 50:31)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
We lost the war — let’s stop throwing good money after bad.

The war is not "lost". Do you think the intention of the war was to stop drug use? That is pretty funny. The intent of the war was to increase the power and scope of government. It is working out just fine for the statists in both parties.

39 posted on 05/23/2012 9:58:35 AM PDT by zeugma (Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: WakeUpAndVote

Well, if a thread is going to get hijacked, I can’t think of a better way for it to happen.


40 posted on 05/23/2012 10:01:50 AM PDT by houeto (FReepathon 2Q! https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

if this passes legal muster in state houses, so be it, i would still find it morally wrong, and i have a hunch, so would most folks.....and it would nvr come to fruition....


41 posted on 05/23/2012 10:06:45 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: rawcatslyentist

and you dont seem to have a grasp on sarcasm either.....im as conservative and christian as you can get....im a pure Reagan/Palin, tea partier......and have no interest whatsoever in anything having to do with our bloated ineffectual government.....


42 posted on 05/23/2012 10:10:03 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: rawcatslyentist

and you dont seem to have a grasp on sarcasm either.....im as conservative and christian as you can get....im a pure Reagan/Palin, tea partier......and have no interest whatsoever in anything having to do with our bloated ineffectual government.....except to get rid of it.


43 posted on 05/23/2012 10:10:24 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

I hate to be the one to tell you this, but your speculation is derived from ignorance, IMO. Your beliefs do not reflect reality. The “hood” is not a primary hub for illegal drugs. In fact, your belief is actually backwards in some respect. In any case, suburban users do not have to leave their neighborhoods to find what they need, most likely. Distribution is widespread amongst all levels of society and it’s always more of a matter of who you know.


44 posted on 05/23/2012 10:26:21 AM PDT by Pox (Good Night. I expect more respect tomorrow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

>>I would be in favor of legalizing drugs if:

1. Employers have the right to drug test...just because you do drugs, doesn’t mean you have the right to work.

2. Drug testing for welfare recipients, and denial of benefits for users...You want to partake, I am not going to pay for it.<<

Those both exist now. Thanks for signing up!


45 posted on 05/23/2012 11:24:12 AM PDT by freedumb2003 ('RETRO' Abortions = performed on 84th trimester individuals who think killing babies is a "right.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: zeugma

>>The war is not “lost”. Do you think the intention of the war was to stop drug use? That is pretty funny. The intent of the war was to increase the power and scope of government. It is working out just fine for the statists in both parties. <<

*DING!! DING!! DING!! DING!!*

I hereby declare you the winner of the thread!


46 posted on 05/23/2012 11:26:27 AM PDT by freedumb2003 ('RETRO' Abortions = performed on 84th trimester individuals who think killing babies is a "right.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan; rawcatslyentist

>>fine if you want to be ‘free’ to get trashed, i shouldnt have to pay for it.....when your ‘freedom’ to get trashed causes bodily harm to your or someome else, cause you are trashed government supplied drugs, or property damage as a result of you exercising your freedome, that then interferes with my freedoms to avoid such occurences, and that is where i draw the line....
<<

I have 2 comments on this:

1) People use welfare now to buy drugs. That is happening whether you like it or not.

2) Why do so many on this thread equate decriminalization with subsidization? The proposal is to make drugs legal. In one single stroke of a pen we could save untold billions and many lives put in prison. Something like 70%+ of all crime is drug related. We can’t completely get rid of that part but I would wager we could cut that number down to 25%


47 posted on 05/23/2012 11:31:59 AM PDT by freedumb2003 ('RETRO' Abortions = performed on 84th trimester individuals who think killing babies is a "right.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ruralvoter

Most replies to this thread are about the drug connection to the Zetas, BUT it’s important to undeerstand that these guys are developing a full-service criminal enterprise.

They are also into the protection racket and prostitution. Even with the Mafia in its hey-day, there was nothing as vicious and dangerous to ordinary citizens as the Zetas.


48 posted on 05/24/2012 6:45:36 AM PDT by wildbill (You're just jealous because the Voices talk only to me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson