Friday, September 09, 2011

Great. The FBI too.

Watergate was peanuts compared to this. Add Solyndra and the MSM will have no news at all to talk about till next November.
Posted by at

8 comments:

Tecumseh said...

Yes, it's a very bad and frightening story (talking only about Fats and Furious now). And the rot goes high.

Yet, yet. It's extremely unlikely any of this would have happened if there wasn't a drug war south of the border--a terrible, terrible war that has resulted in upwards of 40,000 people killed in the past 4-5 years.

And, no, no matter how much you don't like it, you can't blame what is essentially a civil war (fought between the Mexican Army and police on one side, and drug cartels on the other) on Amerikkka, George W. Bush, or whoever. Yes, there are bad people in this country who fuel this war indirectly by consuming those illegal drugs, though you're in a weak position to criticize them, having consistently approved and encouraged other types of illegal behavior, to wit, crossing the border illegally.

Having said all that, the US Government should in no shape way or for take the side of the drug cartels in this ongoing civil war, but support the federales as much as it can. Providing arms to the zetas is beyond absurd.

9/09/2011 7:05 PM
Mr roT said...

The US could shut down the drug trade quickly and unilaterally in two ways.

1) It could legalize most drugs as libertarians suggest, or

2) It could make possession a serious crime, as it is in Singapore.

My point is not that what goes on in Mexico is the fault of the US government, but in the discussions here, you seem to be putting forth the idea that a lot of problems in the US come from outside when in fact, the rot is there too, and probably worse.

You go all moralist about illegals breaking immigration law and McDonalds hiring them because they're better workers than the locals, but then how do you suggest that McDonalds operate?

In fact, no one in the US has ever believed that the law has a moral value. Where you get this is completely foreign and must be a throwback to the time when the power of royalty descended legitimately from God.

In the US, and in democracies, we think of law as having been written by ordinary people with flaws, the Constitution included.

The Tea Partiers that constantly the role of government as defined by the Constitution don't know what they are talking about 98% of the time. They're tolerable because they err in the right direction.

You need not. You can read.

9/09/2011 7:20 PM
Tecumseh said...

(1) I don't think the civil war in Mexico would magically stop if the US would stop cold turkey using drugs. That war has its own internal dynamics, only partly dependent on the US market.

(2) you seem to be putting forth the idea that a lot of problems in the US come from outside. Where and when did I say that? It's your own projection/interpretation, with little or no basis in fact.

(3) Of course, I take in (2) that by "outside" you meant "Mexico", since that's you current idée fixe. Now, of course, there are other countries that either potentially or in actuality create bigger problems to the US. But I don't know if you can both walk and chew gum at the moment, when discussing this subject, so let me not get into that.

(4) You go all moralist about illegals breaking immigration law

Yes, I do. As I said umpteenth times, I just can't stand the idea of people sneaking in this country. I for one did not do that, and it would have never have
crossed my mind to do it. It just go against my sense of morality. And, of course, I'm consistent with that -- I don't condone illegal immigration in any other country, by anyone. You want to condone and glorify such an immoral (and almost universally illegal) act, that's your choice. It's not mine.

(5) and McDonalds hiring them because they're better workers than the locals

I never talked about McDonald, or its hiring practices. Not my problem -- I don't care. Also, I almost never eat there, unless I'm in a panic, and there is no food in a radius of a mile.

but then how do you suggest that McDonalds operate?

Again, why would this be my problem? Ask them. Presumably, with unemployment stuck at 9.1%, they can find people to hire. Why would I waste my time thinking about this? I have only finitely many things I can think about at any given time, and that's not on my to do list.

(6) In fact, no one in the US has ever believed that the law has a moral value. Where you get this is completely foreign..
Well, I'm in the US, and I believe the law has a moral value, and that it ought to be based on some moral principles, at least, in broad outlines. Was this really "completely foreign" to the Founding Fathers? I very much doubt that, and I'm sure even a cursory reading of their writings will reveal that. At any rate, I guess I am a counterexample to your conjecture, which, characteristically, you stated as a theorem.

9/09/2011 10:52 PM
Mr roT said...

That war has its own internal dynamics, only partly dependent on the US market. Qui bono? You know you have no leg to stand on here so you mutter.

a lot of problems in the US come from outside. Where and when did I say that? What in the heck do you go on about drunk Mexicans killing Bridgewater students about? Shit happens. If it wouldn't have been a drunk Mexican, it would have been a drunk Irishman. You don't hear me bitching about the Eastern Europeans that make parts of Rome and Vienna into hellholes do you?

It's part of the way that the world works.

You want to condone and glorify such an immoral (and almost universally illegal) act, that's your choice. I don't condone illegal immigration. I think laws, if they're honestly passed, are to be respected. However, there is nothing immoral about breaking laws that have zero moral content and many laws are immoral themselves.

For example, I think that it is perfectly defensible (morally) for a devout Christian to refuse to pay taxes if they'll be used for abortion. Also, I don't think there is a moral value to laws that force institutions to discriminate according to race and gender.

About McDonalds, the purpose of law is the better functioning of society. McDonalds provides a necessary and valuable service, and if they cannot find workers that will not rob them blind, then the community will suffer from their absence when they are forced to leave. That Guatemalan guy is right to hire who can do the job and the libertarian in me says that the government has no fucking business getting in the way.

That's moral too. It's one of the unenumerated rights that Will mentioned, and it's the right to make contracts, which antedates any goddamned immigration law or law against hiring foreigners by centuries.

The Founding Fathers were mostly interested in Republican Rome, a place not too swuft when it came to morals.

9/09/2011 11:10 PM
Mr roT said...

Indian rosewood.

9/09/2011 11:54 PM
Tecumseh said...

From wiki: U.S. authorities are reporting a spike in killings, kidnappings and home invasions connected to Mexico's cartels, and at least 19 Americans were killed in 2008. More than 200 Americans were killed in Mexico between 2004 and February 2009. Another 92 Americans were killed between June 2009 and June 2010.

For the U.S. Joint Forces Command, in terms of worst-case scenarios, Mexico bears some consideration for sudden collapse in the next two decades as the government, its politicians, police, and judicial infrastructure are all under sustained assault and pressure by criminal gangs and drug cartels.

The Joint Forces Command are concerned that this internal conflict will have a major impact on the stability of the Mexican state over the next several years, and therefore would demand an American response based on the implications for homeland security alone. In March 2009, the United States Department of Homeland Security said that it is considering using the National Guard to counter the threat of drug violence in Mexico from spreading to the US.

The governors of Arizona and Texas have asked the federal government to send additional National Guard troops to help those already there supporting local law enforcement efforts against drug trafficking. The call for National Guard on the border greatly increased after the 2010 murder of Arizona rancher Robert Krentz, possibly at the hands of Mexican drug smugglers.

Ah well, shit happens. "It's part of the way that the world works" -- the Rotter argument in a nutshell.

So, what's the logical conclusion? That we should sit on our hands, and let the Zetas run roughshod on US soil, kill wantonly whoever they feel like killing, since "that's the way the world works", and that, alone among basically all other countries in the world, the US should refrain from doing anything to defend its national territory against armed incursions, and various illegal entries?

Like General McAuliffe said at Bastogne in December 1944 to some random Kraut general (Heinrich Freiherr von Lüttwitz, to be precise), I say, NUTS! to that.

9/10/2011 12:55 AM
Mr roT said...

Drug war.

9/10/2011 6:28 AM
Tecumseh said...

Non sequitur. As usual.

9/10/2011 9:29 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)