Putting out the fires south of the border
Saturday, 17. January 2009, 14:58:16
I noted that a report on CNN suggested that the U.S. border country, Mexico, may ‘collapse’ as a result of rampant corruption and the drug gang wars. There is a way to bring this all to a screeching halt, but there isn’t much time.
I think we had better act fast. California, who bears the brunt of the problems, faces bankruptcy by March and goes into next year with a $40 Billion deficit. It will have to reduce its law enforcement presence all over the state, especially along the border. The violence of Juarez and Tijuana could then easily spill over into the USA at San Diego, El Paso, and other border cities in Texas, Arizona and New Mexico.
In my view, the problem is soluble in the short-term at a reasonable cost, provided we are willing to discard our preconceptions and ignore propaganda regarding the use of drugs. So, instead of arguing about these issues, I’ll bring things into focus by proposing a solution, to be implemented as follows:
(1) The government of Mexico enters a contract with US-based Blackwater Corporation, wherein Blackwater takes over all Mexican drug law enforcement efforts, from the local level through the highest level of government. All Mexican military and police, would be reassigned to regular (non-profitable) law enforcement duties.
Under the terms of the contract, Blackwater would agree to have the US General Accounting Office track every penny going in and out of Blackwater and the individuals and/or support organizations involved in the operation, including Mexican agencies. Blackwater, in turn would be given immunity by Mexico for its conduct in carrying out the mandate, and a free hand as far as how the war is prosecuted by Blackwater. Let’s face it; these guys are honed like a razor after Iraq, and soon will have little to do unless they go to Africa or Pakistan.
(2) The US Government rescinds all laws related to the use of controlled substances by adults, and invokes an automatic life sentence or death penalty for conviction of illegal drug sales to minors. For current drug users of all ages, allow them to purchase a reasonable amount daily of their drug of choice, through state-controlled recreational drug outlets that offer affordable prices, discounts or free doses to heavy abusers, and ensured purity. These outlets also become part of the tax base, and would also offer free-or low cost enrollment in tax-funded rehab programs. Empowering the heavy abuser/addicts to get thoroughly wasted is a means of mercifully culling the herd of potentially dangerous people. They’ll be too stoned to rape, rob, and engage in other antisocial behaviors (drug-driven, or not).
(3) The Mexican Government contracts with the State of Arizona to turn over the jail and prison system to the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Department. Sheriff Joe would be given a lifetime appointment to be the administrator—sort of like J. Edgar Hoover in the bad old days. U.S. foreign aid would be used to co-fund any expenses, although Sheriff Joe usually produces a profit on jail operations.
There to do the dirty little jobs
I think we had better act fast. California, who bears the brunt of the problems, faces bankruptcy by March and goes into next year with a $40 Billion deficit. It will have to reduce its law enforcement presence all over the state, especially along the border. The violence of Juarez and Tijuana could then easily spill over into the USA at San Diego, El Paso, and other border cities in Texas, Arizona and New Mexico.
In my view, the problem is soluble in the short-term at a reasonable cost, provided we are willing to discard our preconceptions and ignore propaganda regarding the use of drugs. So, instead of arguing about these issues, I’ll bring things into focus by proposing a solution, to be implemented as follows:
(1) The government of Mexico enters a contract with US-based Blackwater Corporation, wherein Blackwater takes over all Mexican drug law enforcement efforts, from the local level through the highest level of government. All Mexican military and police, would be reassigned to regular (non-profitable) law enforcement duties.
Under the terms of the contract, Blackwater would agree to have the US General Accounting Office track every penny going in and out of Blackwater and the individuals and/or support organizations involved in the operation, including Mexican agencies. Blackwater, in turn would be given immunity by Mexico for its conduct in carrying out the mandate, and a free hand as far as how the war is prosecuted by Blackwater. Let’s face it; these guys are honed like a razor after Iraq, and soon will have little to do unless they go to Africa or Pakistan.
(2) The US Government rescinds all laws related to the use of controlled substances by adults, and invokes an automatic life sentence or death penalty for conviction of illegal drug sales to minors. For current drug users of all ages, allow them to purchase a reasonable amount daily of their drug of choice, through state-controlled recreational drug outlets that offer affordable prices, discounts or free doses to heavy abusers, and ensured purity. These outlets also become part of the tax base, and would also offer free-or low cost enrollment in tax-funded rehab programs. Empowering the heavy abuser/addicts to get thoroughly wasted is a means of mercifully culling the herd of potentially dangerous people. They’ll be too stoned to rape, rob, and engage in other antisocial behaviors (drug-driven, or not).
(3) The Mexican Government contracts with the State of Arizona to turn over the jail and prison system to the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Department. Sheriff Joe would be given a lifetime appointment to be the administrator—sort of like J. Edgar Hoover in the bad old days. U.S. foreign aid would be used to co-fund any expenses, although Sheriff Joe usually produces a profit on jail operations.
There to do the dirty little jobs















Dennis # 17. January 2009, 18:29
Anonymous # 17. January 2009, 19:49
From the moment Blackwater arrived in Iraq in 2003, on the heels of the American invasion, much about its operations has seemed tinged with an aggressive machismo that has led its critics, including many in the American military, to dismiss its operatives — and counterparts from at least 25 other private security companies, with a combined manpower estimated between 20,000 and 30,000 — as “cowboys,” “hired guns,” and other, still harsher, terms.
Partly, the disparagement stems from the contempt with which professional military men have traditionally viewed mercenaries — especially those who earn, like some contractors in Baghdad, as much as $1,000 a day for skills and risks that bring about the lowest-paid American soldier a tenth of that. Not even four-star generals earn as much.
The security contractors’ advocates counter by pointing to the guards’ expertise. The highest-paid learned their skills in units like the Navy Seals, the Army’s Delta Force, and equivalent units in the British, Australian, South African and other militaries.
With rare exceptions, the men look and sound the part, with tattooed forearms, close-cropped hair or shaven heads, and a taciturn manner that discourages any but the most cryptic exchanges with outsiders. The value of their skills, their proponents say, is indicated by the Pentagon’s willingness to pay Special Forces’ re-enlistment bonuses of as much as $150,000. But that much and more can be a single year’s salary with companies like Blackwater.
To those who have watched the private security companies’ operations for the past four years, the only real surprise was that the crisis was so long in coming. The seeds were sown in the first year of the American occupation, when a decree by the American administrator L. Paul Bremer III exempted security companies and their employees from accountability under Iraqi law for deaths and injuries caused in the execution of their duties. Although Congress in 2005 instructed the Pentagon to bring contractors under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, no action has been taken, leaving the contractors in a legal no-man’s land — in effect, at liberty to treat all Iraq as a free-fire zone.
No official records have been made public of how many innocent Iraqi civilians have been killed by contractors. But a glimpse at the scale was offered by one American general who kept his own tally, Brig. Gen. Karl R. Horst of the Third Infantry Division; he told The Washington Post in 2005 that he had tracked at least a dozen shootings of civilians in Baghdad between May and July that year, with six Iraqis killed.
“These guys run loose in this country and do stupid stuff,” the paper quoted the general as saying. “There’s no authority over them.”
Just why some contractors resort to such extremes is a study in war and the ways in which it plumbs the darker sides of human nature. In the military units where they acquired their weapons and tactical skills, the men who cause mayhem on the streets and highways of Iraq were subject to tight constraints — as one former soldier who does security work in Iraq and did not want to be identified expressed it in a private note to this reporter:
“Being motivated, and also somehow restrained, by the trappings of history, and by being part of something large, collective, and, one hopes, right,” this man wrote. “But being a security contractor strips much of this sociological and political upholstery away, and replaces it with cash.”
And taxpayer cash at that.
Stardancer # 17. January 2009, 20:26
David # 17. January 2009, 20:33
Anonymous # 17. January 2009, 20:51
There are a variety of ongoing controversies involving Blackwater Worldwide that are not in direct relation to their specific and individual operations for the U.S. government. However, their role in their work is the factor of these controversies. It has alternatively been referred to as a security contractor or a mercenary organization by numerous reports by the U.S. and international media. Critics consider Blackwater's self-description as a private military company to be a euphemism for mercenary activities. Jeremy Scahill points out that Chilean nationals, mostly former soldiers, whose country of origin does not participate in hostilities in Iraq, work for Blackwater in that country, thus those Chileans meet the definition of "mercenary." At least 60 Chilean Blackwater employees were trained during dictator Augusto Pinochet's regime. Author Chris Hedges wrote about the establishment of mercenary armies, referring to Blackwater as an example of such a force, asserting its existence as a threat to democracy and a step towards the creation of a modern day Praetorian Guard in a June 3, 2007 article in the Philadelphia Inquirer.
In January 2008, Marshall Adame, a Democrat running for Congress in North Carolina's 3rd District, took part in a live question-and-answer forum where he was asked a question about Blackwater. Adame, who had served as a State Department official in Iraq recounted, "I saw them shoot people, I saw them crash into cars while I was their passenger. There was absolutely no reason, no provocation whatsoever." He then stated, "There is no place in the American force structure, or in American culture for mercenaries, they are guns for hire; No more, no less." This led Blackwater executive vice president Bill Mathews to send an internal corporate email to staff:
There is a man named Marshall Adame who is running for congress in our district. He just put a quote online which says he wants this company and all of us to cease to exist. Do you like your jobs? Are you sick and tired of the slanderous bullshit going on in DC? If so, would you all mind joining me in reminding Mr. Adame that he is running for office in our backyard. Tell all your friends and family too. We welcome their assistance in making this point very clear to Mr. Adame.
Anyone who wants to send a letter may do so at the following address…....
His email is ....
He was too cowardly to put a phone number on the web. I ask that you keep your comments to Mr. Adame professional (well, mostly professional). We help him if our comments get threatening or too crass. Let’s run this goof out of Dodge….!
J. Cofer Black, vice chairman of BlackwaterIn March 2006, Cofer Black, vice chairman of Blackwater USA, allegedly suggested at an international conference in Amman, Jordan, that the company was ready to move towards providing security professionals up to brigade size (3,000–5,000) for humanitarian efforts and low-intensity conflicts. Critics have suggested this may be going too far in putting political decisions in the hands of privately owned corporations.The company denies this was ever said.
David # 18. January 2009, 00:25
If not Blackwater, who do we call, Wyatt Earp? The US Military would not be welcome in Mexico in any form, and the Mexican government may cease to exist if something is not done that also allows the government to retain some dignity and respect from its citizens. If we do nothing, and quibble about the niceties of eliminating those who murder without pity any who get in their way, Mexico may join the ranks of failed states, and become the biggest threat we face from beyond our borders.
How do you propose to deal with a problem that is about to come to your hometown? It is a fact that street distribution of Mexican-sourced drugs, is done by the gangs themselves. They have branches in every major American City according to the DEA and FBI, and they are exporting their violence as well. Ask the good citizens of Phoenix, Arizona. Throughout history, no war has ever been fought without the use of mercenaries and 'irregulars' (by both sides). However distasteful, it seems to me to be the best solution for this situation.
Anonymous # 18. January 2009, 16:10
Blackwater USA is another example of dysfunction in our societal discussion about the future of security: rather than an informed/constructive debate on the future of private military contractors in warfare (a big topic that WILL NOT go away), we end up demonizing Blackwater with hyper-ventilation from Scahill, Singer and the New York Times. If anything, Blackwater's current problems have everything to do with its (ill advised) super-macho image and anger over an unpopular/unsuccessful war. In truth, it's simply a security company with an excellent reputation for keeping its high value clients alive and a record of violent incidents in a dangerous war zone on par with the US military's experience. Were we expecting something different?
No, the real issues lie much deeper than this. It has to do with unease with the underlying shift from "defense" to "security."
Way too much Soldiers of Fortune magazines being read by the wrong people.
Like it or not - it's a brand new world.
David # 18. January 2009, 17:20
It would be of interest to my readers to have access to the article you have been quoting. Perhaps you can kindly provide a link to the source. I know this because of the reference to Marshall Adame (a Democrat running for Congress in North Carolina's 3rd District who hates Blackwater)
Anonymous # 18. January 2009, 19:08
Hi Anon (Ravo),
A quick google search using wikepedia should do the trick for you and "all of your readers" (All I see is you and me). :>
You will quickly find that mainstream America finds the Blackwater thugs contemptible. In the same category as Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter.
"...the times they are-a-changin'..." - Bob Dylan
David # 18. January 2009, 19:46
Anonymous # 18. January 2009, 20:01
Paranoia strikes deep.
Into your life it will creep.
It starts when you're always afraid and find yourself obsessing about the orgins of information.
The fact of the matter is, Anon (aka Ravo), Mainstream America is changing from the war-mongering Rambo mentality we've see the last 8 years towards the possiblitly of other solutions to our problems other than violence.
I think this is a good direction to take.
David # 18. January 2009, 20:12
By the way, don't waste time trying to comment. I've shut you off.
David # 24. January 2009, 16:30
Sheriff Joe Arpaio: Close Gitmo, I’ll Take ‘em!
by Gary Graham
THIS JUST IN: In a surprise move today, the outspoken and controversial Sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, stated that he’d be happy to take the inmates of Gitmo and provide for them “appropriate and hospitable accommodations.” When questioned in a press conference what those ‘appropriate’ accommodations would entail, the spirited Sheriff was quoted as saying, “Oh, you’ll find out. Our recidivism rate here is nearly zero. For some reason inmates, when released, are not too keen on coming back.”
Access the full article at: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.f0535773d1a3f8152cda2b8c05239f06.571&show_article=1