re CAMP in Vineland and Today's Mexican Drug Cartels

[Wasted Words]

--- pynchonoid <pynchonoid at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> At higher levels, of course, Vineland got it right,
> by
> including the folk knowledge of Bush I's drug
> involvement -- and this remains true:  Bush II,
> Slayer
> of Evildoers intervened in Afghanistan in a way that
> makes it possible for some big drug dealers to
> profit
> from opium and heroin sales, at the expense of
> others.
> 
> 
> -Doug

Doug, 


The economy in drug dealing was unavoidable once Bush
II got involved in Afghanistan. He couldn't simply let
the terrorists alone. He had to do something. What
could he do? No matter what course of action he chose,
including doing nothing at all, he would still be
accused, by some, of taking sides in the Afghan drug
economy. Alliances, even temporary ones, with any of
the peoples in Afghanistan means getting involved in
the drug economy there. I don't see how Bush II had
any good choices. He had to go into Afghanistan. What
would you have done?  Some say he should have gone in
with a much larger US military force. I'm not sure
that would have been smart. So far, Bush II has
managed to do serious damage to the terrorists and the
drug industry in Afghanistan. Of course, war is a
bloody business.  Many innocents have been killed in
Afghanistan, but I don't think sitting back waiting
for another 9-11 was an option. By exploiting the
existing conflicts and by extension the drug economy
in Afghanistan, Bush II has saved thousands of lives.
He has also helped put a structure, albeit a loose
one, where there was none but terror and this has and
will continue to improve the lives of millions. Not
sure the former mayor of NYC will have the same sucess
in Mexico City. 


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com