Why do you think America is so willing to wage wars with phantom threats in places like Afghanistan and Iraq, but completely unwilling to engage the real, immediate threat of Mexican and South American cartel violence spilling onto US soil?

18  2014-07-25 by [deleted]

Why do you think America is so willing to wage wars with phantom threats in places like Afghanistan and Iraq, but completely unwilling to engage the real, immediate threat of Mexican, Central, and South American cartel violence spilling onto US soil?

It seems as though every story about border security, cartel violence, or the ongoing crisis is either pushed to the back burner or swept under the rug altogether. I realize that sort of thing might be omitted or downplayed by the media in order to avoid a potentially disruptive public dialog on larger issues (race relations, national security, etc.), but I have a feeling there's quite a bit more to it. This seemed like the perfect place to ask the question and I'm really interested in what you guys think.

The US has gone to war over much less than this, so what gives?

Why does the US allow this to happen year after year and never say or do anything about it?

28 comments

From an economic standpoint, we can see that large power structures benefit from this apparent moral inconsistency.

Banks benefit from wars, and they make profits from the drug trade.

The Military Industrial Complex loves having endless war, hence the full scale invasions against 'phantom' threats.

The DEA benefits from drug cartels by getting bigger budgets each year. They have zero incentive to actually end the drug war.

The FBI benefits from terrorism and drug cartels by expanding their power and budget each year.

Politicians benefit from war by looking patriotic to voters, and many of them are corrupted by the organized drug trade.

Its all quite logical. The goal is to never actually solve problems, but to increase power and wealth.

Good points. Thanks for replying. Couldn't the US gain quite a bit of power and wealth if it decided to put the spurs to 'em? Seems weird they'd pass up such a convenient opportunity.

I think its not so much as the US acting as one cohesive entity, but rather powerful institutions and people within the US acting in their own self interest.

Because the cia is the one profiting off the drug cartels.

Absolutely. The main cause of the problems in Mexico and S. America are the drug cartels, which the CIA are funding.

The Zetas cartel, the most bloodthirsty cartel, shows the exact same tendencies that School of the Americas' graduates have been displaying for the last 50 years. Sandanistas, Iran-Contra, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Panema; same tactic of extreme violence and terrorizing populations with large influxes of CIA money to gain political control of areas.

Same with MS-13, bloodthirsty Satanic ritual murdering criminal organization involved in human and drug trafficking. It's all funded and controlled by the same beast, the slimy octopus that must be sistematically purged from this planet.

Why wouldn't they just eliminate the middlemen then? It'd be a more profitable venture if the money were split among fewer parties. The US has done it with Afghanistan's opium trade and would probably not have a hard time doing the same with Latin America.

Divide and conquer. The want the region to be unstable with those countries fighting each other while they reap the rewards.

Plausible deniability?

That could definitely be, but where's the need for plausible deniability in the information age when you control the information?

Maybe (im speculating here) because control of the information is only in respect to our own populace. The plausibility would be more useful for the world political theatre than the domestic political theatre. You have to remember other countries have their own media outlets and propaganda mediums. So any overtly illegal actions would be picked up on by some foreign news outlet or something, and as you said, due to the information age, we the people would eventually learn about it.

Having plausible deniability, our government can then just straight up call the other outlets "liars" or "uninformed" or something. Plausible deniability allows this. Overt operations do not.

This could explain it, i think.

yeah i dunno why they don't invade and annexe mexico already tbh

I don't know about annexation, I'm thinking more along the lines of doing what needs to be done -- what their governments and police cannot or will not do to contain the problem. At very least, the National Guard could be deployed to hot spots in the Southwest. They seem hell-bent on refusing to protect their own citizens on their own soil.

The texas governor actually just recently called up the national guard to help protect the border...

I think his motive for activating the NG is to assist in processing the massive influx of "migrant children" and "refugees" at the border right now. The fact is, brutal cartel-style executions were occurring with Arizona, California, Texas, & New Mexico long before the current crisis, so Rick Perry's NG move is a day late and a dollar short. His action isn't about protecting US citizens, it's about whatever facilitating whatever endgame the White House has planned.

What's sad is people actually work these jobs and know there bosses make illegal money and there okay with it. Instead of blasting it all over news stations like what every American should do to start breaking down all this corruption.

I think the vast majority of Americans have been declawed. The ones who haven't been are either oblivious to reality or too afraid to act. It would be nice to see the corrupt officials and entities held accountable, but I won't hold my breath.

I'm sure they will be caught my friend it may just take a while, but they will slip real bad where people will realize maybe we weren't so crazy after all.

I hope so.

Because the corporate media still drives the primary narrative in the US. Thankfully, people are turning to independent media in droves.

Well, this may be a stretch, but sometimes i wonder if the potus and friends actually want more trouble here at home. Maybe to call martial law or something? Like i said, a bit of a stretch, but i dont give credibility to the idea that they are stupid enough to ignore the issues here at home because they are too busy or stupid. They are intentionally ignoring these issues. Some signs point to martial law.

Not crazy at all. They probably need social unrest. It keeps the peasants squabbling amongst themselves. Divide and conquer. That's one way for a few people to keep multitudes in line.

Getting ready for the north American.union

That's probably not far off. Good point.

Yea. Sadly thats what i see. I've heard of American troops in Canada and Mexico. Mexican troops in America and Canada. Canadian troops in America and Mexico. This is unreal. That'd part of the reason why they are letting all these people in.

Seriously, do you think they will bring us to their level or we will bring them up to our level

We need to conquer/annex our way down to the Panama canal. Only then will our southern border be somewhat secure.

Cause there ain't no oil here (like Iraq) and you can't grow opium in Texas like you can in Afghanistan.

Get it?

There are plenty of drug sources in that region. Get it?