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

Skip to comments.

Latest hypocrisy on subject of drugs
Daily Herald ^ | 21 August 2002 | none given

Posted on 08/21/2002 11:45:42 AM PDT by JediGirl

Teenage boys might be forgiven if the government's mixed drug message comes off as just more adult hypocrisy.

"Don't do drugs" and "don't do steroids" are among the powerful admonitions aimed at young people in general and young men in particular. Baseball players already have confused the steroid issue, but now the government, too, is looking for "a better warrior through chemistry."

It seems the nation's military services are doing serious research into how they can better produce drug-enhanced warriors, the sort who can go for days under extreme conditions with limited supplies and no sleep.

What the Pentagon's Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency has in mind is a "radical approach" meant to achieve "continuous assisted performance" for up to a week. That, for those young people not yet familiar with government legalese, means better and longer performance through drugs.

The military has a long history of combat-induced use of amphetamines followed by "downers" that force sleep. This was a cycle that some U.S. pilots say they used to their benefit during the Persian Gulf War. But other observers are skeptical. They warn that the risks of drug use by military personnel - even controlled use - differ little from the potential hazards that face civilian users. Those risks include unwanted side effects, such as paranoia or misdirected aggression, and possible addiction.

Moreover, there is little doubt the military's promotion of "assisted performance" is a far cry from "Just Say No." For young men, then, the message from the government is "don't do this" or we will continue to fill prisons with your drug- abusing kind. Unless of course, you abuse them for us.

It probably has young people shaking their heads. But, in fact, this is not the only time the U.S. government has said one thing and done another.

For years, it propped up Southern tobacco farmers with price supports. Now it is suing them for having promoted an unhealthy product, conveniently forgetting it was government itself that helped make those sales possible.

That very same government has long paid farmers not to grow certain crops, despite the fact that kids go to bed hungry in America every night. Other examples are easy to cite.

Thus, teens are not the only ones who have been confused by the government.

The warrior enhancements are sometimes couched in odd phrases - "ergogenic substances," for example, rather than the plainer "drugs." But sometimes not. In one part of a memo outlining military objectives, blood doping is a suggested method.

Just say no, then, until we tell you to say yes. Now that's clarity.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: drugs; wod

1 posted on 08/21/2002 11:45:42 AM PDT by JediGirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: WindMinstrel; realpatriot71; Dane; philman_36; Wolfie; SheLion; Hemingway's Ghost; vin-one; ...
bong
2 posted on 08/21/2002 11:47:07 AM PDT by JediGirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JediGirl
"Ergogenic substances" bump.

I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning!

It smells like Victory! lol
3 posted on 08/21/2002 11:51:10 AM PDT by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JediGirl
bong back at ya, you are a busy little bonger today...

Tick tock tick tock.......

Good luck....

4 posted on 08/21/2002 12:12:02 PM PDT by vin-one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JediGirl
Nothing new in there for me. "Been there, knew that."
5 posted on 08/21/2002 12:26:02 PM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JediGirl
Maybe the government's trying reverse psychology. Tell a kid TO use drugs and maybe he won't. They never listen to authority.
6 posted on 08/21/2002 12:34:02 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JediGirl
I wonder why they use amphetamines, when something like modofinil can achieve the same result safer?
7 posted on 08/21/2002 12:40:52 PM PDT by WindMinstrel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JediGirl
"Scots, wha hae wi' Wallace bled;
Scots, wham Bruce has aften led,
Welcome to your gory bed,
Or to victory!"

---The Forever War, Joe Haldeman

The phrase used to trigger a post-hypnotic suggestion in the soldiers of the United Nations Exploratory Force. The Taurans were slaughtered by Strike Force Alpha.

8 posted on 08/21/2002 1:03:03 PM PDT by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WindMinstrel
Or maybe even Ibogaine ;^)
9 posted on 08/21/2002 1:03:24 PM PDT by Dakmar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
Thanks, I had wondered where those lines were originally from. I only knew them from the song "Scots, wha hae" by the Real McKenzies.
10 posted on 08/21/2002 2:05:49 PM PDT by Britton J Wingfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: JediGirl
Better life through chemistry?
11 posted on 08/21/2002 3:16:00 PM PDT by realpatriot71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Britton J Wingfield
I'd be curious myself to find the origin. The Forever War takes place in the future (actually 1997, but you know how that goes) and is like a Starship Troopers type of story.

The post-hypnotic suggestion was to "psych" the troops into battle -- it worked too well, and was not used again due to the after-battle reaction.

12 posted on 08/22/2002 7:29:56 AM PDT by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JediGirl
The greatest hypocrisy on the subject of drugs is the libertarian insistence that when dope is legalized, state involvement--including state coercion--in the lives of citizens will be lessened.

Libertarians who still have functioning brain cells must know that drug legalization or decriminalization will only replace one form of government involvement and coercion with another. Whereas before the coercion was targeted against drug users and dealers, the new coercion will be targeted against ordinary taxpayers

The nanny state will become larger and more suffocating when the costs of drug abuse have been socialized to the same extent that the costs of alcohol abuse have already been socialized. More and more taxes will be coerced from the rest of us to coddle drug abusers as they line up to collect supplemental social security, Medicaid, and Medicare on account of their "disability."

Pro-dope libertarians are nanny government's most zealous allies.

13 posted on 08/22/2002 7:45:40 AM PDT by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
It's a poem by Robert Burns. I should have thought of that before, since he seems to have written just about anything Scottish.
14 posted on 08/22/2002 8:49:19 AM PDT by Britton J Wingfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
Agree to an extent. The nanny state is a big problem. It would be better to dismantle the nanny state before legalising drugs. But I don't think enough citizens want to get rid of it.

And legalising? I'm all for decriminalisation really. There are virtues and downsides in both. What's most important is that people are free to do as they choose as long as it doesn't hurt others.
15 posted on 08/22/2002 8:53:52 AM PDT by JediGirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
will only replace one form of government involvement and coercion with another.

Alas, that could be true -- there are a lot of big-government liberals in power. You're being dishonest when you assert that Libertarians like big government, of course, but we're used to that from you. The point is, however, that government involvement in post-WoD America would be less. The WoD itself is very damned expensive. How much does locking someone up for 1 year?

How much do you think drug use would increase if all drugs were legalized? Would they double? Triple? What's your guess? How much do you think the expense to the American people for this drug use?

Keep in mind that the WoD has a lot of expenses that go beyond high taxes. The innocent victims of drug users -- the people who are mugged by junkies, or tossed onto the street because their grandkids use drugs in their housing project -- are costing us an awful lot now.

I realize that you don't care about those costs, because you're making personal profit from the War on Drugs. You've already sold your soul to this futile war, so you don't want to lose your income as well. I pity you.
16 posted on 08/22/2002 9:04:10 AM PDT by WindMinstrel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | 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