JR wrote: Messing up your head is another matter and you don't even need chemicals to that or you can get them for free licking a toad or whatever. I'm not happy about that but it is better than funding organized crime which gives incentive to gangs etc. to start turf wars for profit in which innocents get killed and wounded and property wrecked. So there is that incentive for the people to limit spreading the ill effects beyond medical issues of digesting harmful substances. 1 Most get killed by a bullet much more likely than from alcohol or MJ if you get hit by a bullet. And that is just one method of criminals hurting people so even if it might be rare in many places it is a real problem in some places. There is a drug war going on right now and nations have fought over drugs in the 19th century. One could argue that Iraq was invaded for oil and 2 Afghanistan for poppies. Securing supply and making the profits yourself instead of the locals. People make money oil and poppies and economists in the 19th century described what a capitalist is willing to do for x amount of profit. Some oil companies tripled their stock worth within two years of the occupation of Iraq by a country lead by a president whose family and he himself was in oil business. Interestingly triple profit was described in the 19th century to be the limit where a capitalist would do anything to get that return on investment. Hmm. Coincidence? If it is it is ironic. Or the scientist found out something telling of people and their behavior and the factors that led to the usual numbers of expected profits and what people are wiling to do to obtain it. People ingesting different harmful substance for non medical issues might calculate some return from that but there are probably a lot of different reasons to consume anything.
i'll play, jr. you're losing it a little. i'm surprised you didn't take the opportunity to pepper your rant with nazi analogies.
1) you're arguing a person getting shot has a higher probability of dying than from using an undetermined amount of alcohol or marijuana? the probability of dying from being hit by a metal projectile traveling at speeds over 1200 mph fired from a weapon designed to maximize the accuracy of the user cannot be compared to probability of dying from the unspecified use of alcohol or marijuana. outside the fact there are millions of variables that go into the probability of dying from being shot, you're comparing the probability of a person ideally using a weapon designed to kill
another person in a single use while guaranteeing their own life to dying from the variable negative biological affects and social consequences of the personal consumption of alcohol or marijuana. the only reasonable way to compare the two is a 100% guaranteed kill shot and being able consume enough alcohol or marijuana to shutdown your brain, body, and central nervous system down before it is able to instinctively react to being poisoned. that's the only way to compare the probability you have created is to have the same outcome occur, death. it's impossible to compare the probability of getting shot which ranges from a shooter determined to kill you at execution style to being grazed and the probability of dying from using marijuana or alcohol which is completely dependent on biology and context. you can have one drink and die from an accident or be a chronic alcoholic with what is medically consider a lethal BAC of .627 and survive. http://iowacity.patch.com/articles/poli ... ol-content
or steal a van and pass out safely on the highway with a BAC of .7 http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/articl ... 03286.html
2) it is impossible to argue the united states invaded afghanistan to control the country's ability to grow poppies for the production of heroin as a source of profit. there is no evidence that america cares about controlling poppy production in afghanistan. tony blair claimed that he supported the U.S invasion of afganistan as means of stopping the flow afghan heroin into england. afghan heroin, depending on the source and the year, accounts for 85-99% of the heroin in england. after the soviet union pulled out of afghanistan, the U.S, which had been ignoring the poppy and opium production in the country and pakistan, stopped funding the afghanistan resistance through aid to pakistain. a struggle for control of afghanistan and the capital of kabul occurred among leaders of the mujaheddin and a civil war broke out dividing the country. former mujaheddin leaders, now dependent of poppy production for money, battled for control of the country and its poppy production.
financed by pakistain, the taliban lead by mullah mohar seized control of afghanistan through promising the end of opium corruption to the public and the establishment of shari law, while he promised local tribal leaders he would not stop poppy production. in 1996, oasam bin laden flew to afghanistan and aligned himself and al qaeda with the taliban leaders. bin laden helped finance the taliban's control of afganistian. in 1997, in order to gain global legitimacy and to seek relief from UN sanctions for poppy production, the taliban declared to the international community that afghanistan was ruled by shari law and prohibited poppy farming. instead of fighting with tribal leaders that grew poppy and to fiance the country, the taliban taxed all farmers 10% and each shipment from a farm for refinement 20% under shira law. the formation of the federally administered tribal areas of pakistain pushed morphine refining plants into southern afghanistan creating a new source of revenue for the taliban. by 1999, the taliban controlled 99% of afghanistan and which produced 75% of the worlds poppy supply for heroin. the taliban placed a $50 a kilo tax on morphine exported and $75 tax on heroin exported from the country. haji bashar noorzai, a heroin smuggler serving a life sentence in the united states, forged a deal with the taliban to pay $230 for each kilo of heroin exported through the state's two owned airports. in 1999, after indicting bin landen for his role in the 1998 bombing of three US embassies in east africa, the US and the UN sanctioned the taliban with united nations security council resolution 1267 demanding the taliban to turn over bin landen and close all terrorist bases. in 2000, the UN sanctioned the taliban by forbidding their state run airline to travel because of its suspected use in the transportation of terrorists, weapons, and heroin. the U.S government, on 30 occasions between 1996-2000 contacted taliban leaders to exile bin laden and al qaeda.
after extensive pressure and threat of greater sanctions, the UN along with muslim legal experts from pakistan convinced mullah mohar to stop all poppy farming in july 2000. in 2001 taliban had almost eliminated all poppy farming in afghanistan. the the un-affiliated narcotics control board estimated that afghan's major producers, taliban officials, al qaeda, and their distribution networks had stocked piled enough opium and heroin to meet demand for the next four years. despite the complete stoppage of poppy production, the taliban continued collect taxes from afghanistan's refinement factories that remained in operation and made no effort to stop the exportation of heroin. the international price for a kilo of herion remained stable until the attacks of 9/11. UN officials estimated the wholesale value of opium and heroin in possession of the taliban, al qaeda, and major suppliers at 1 billion dollars in pakistan at the time of the 9/11 attacks. after the attacks 9/11, DEA records show export the price of heroin at an all time high of 731 a kilo. with the looming U.S invasion, the export price of a kilo dropped to 95 dollars as suppliers liquidated. http://www.usip.org/files/resources/taliban_opium_1.pdf
on october 7, 2001, the u.s carried out air attacks against strategic targets to kill high ranking taliban and al qaeda members and capture osama bin laden. many high ranking taliban officials fled to pakistan. 5 days after the first air attacks, U.S./NATO forces and the northern alliance had captured kabul. despite the occupation of kabul, the taliban returned to controlling poppy production. after the u.s invasion, poppy production quickly returned and afghanistan became the world's number producer again. "the un international narcotics control board (incb) report, released on 26 february 2003, said that afghanistan produced 3,400 tonnes last year, up from 185 tonnes in 2001. while the US report praised US-backed afghan president hamid karzai for the measures he has introduced to cut heroin production, the UN report said his two executive orders had no practical impact." http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2814861.stm
. In 2003 afghan poppy production had returned to the level of the year before the ban. in 2004, afghanistan farmers grew more poppy than it had in the last ten years. production dropped slightly in 2005 to 3800 tons. this is from a 2008 report of on taliban and their role in heroin production "the smugglers claimed they are "untouchable" because their bosses include cabinet-level officials in the government. british officials suspect senior government insiders are involved in the drugs trade, but they have struggled to get the support from mr karzai, or the evidence, to arrest them." http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 17230.html
obama phased out poppy eradication efforts in 2009 and the america-russia joint task force on controlling opium refinement into heroin has had little success because the afghan military tips off the refinement facilities ahead of time. afghanistan will be in charge of its own security in 2014 and it's still the worlds leader in opium production?
how is the almost 4 trillion dollar invasion of afghanistan about controlling poppy production for profit?