The Taliban have done it again: implementing a nearly complete ban against cultivation of opium poppy

1srelluc

Diamond Member
Nov 21, 2021
51,479
74,135
3,488
Shenandoah Valley of Virginia

Afghanistan's most important agricultural product repeating their similarly successful 2000-2001 prohibition on the crop. But the temptation to view the current ban in an overly positive light as an important global counter-narcotics victory must be avoided.

This is particularly true given the state of Afghanistan's economy and the country's humanitarian situation.

Indeed, the ban imposes huge economic and humanitarian costs on Afghans and it is likely to further stimulate an outflow of refugees. It may even result in internal challenges for the Taliban itself. And, in the long run, it will not have lasting counter-narcotics benefits within Afghanistan or globally.


WTF?

It just proves we have not been serious on the war on drugs. We were not willing to chop a few hands off to win.

Of course it could be the neocon's wet dream, re-invade to reestablish opium production......Yeah, they are that messed-up.
 
Hurray for the Taliban!
However, the war on drugs should begin by detaining the addicts. That cuts off the major money supply for the drug trade. We can also arrest the street gangs that peddle the drugs using the 'racketeering' laws.
 

Afghanistan's most important agricultural product repeating their similarly successful 2000-2001 prohibition on the crop. But the temptation to view the current ban in an overly positive light as an important global counter-narcotics victory must be avoided.

This is particularly true given the state of Afghanistan's economy and the country's humanitarian situation.

Indeed, the ban imposes huge economic and humanitarian costs on Afghans and it is likely to further stimulate an outflow of refugees. It may even result in internal challenges for the Taliban itself. And, in the long run, it will not have lasting counter-narcotics benefits within Afghanistan or globally.


WTF?

It just proves we have not been serious on the war on drugs. We were not willing to chop a few hands off to win.

Of course it could be the neocon's wet dream, re-invade to reestablish opium production......Yeah, they are that messed-up.
A lot of American politicians are gonna be missing their monthly cartel checks. Watch for Ukrainian poppy fields next.
 
Hurray for the Taliban!
However, the war on drugs should begin by detaining the addicts. That cuts off the major money supply for the drug trade. We can also arrest the street gangs that peddle the drugs using the 'racketeering' laws.
Hell the GDP of the county would collapse.....Besides, RICO laws are only for Trump and his lawyers. ;)
 
Hurray for the Taliban!
However, the war on drugs should begin by detaining the addicts. That cuts off the major money supply for the drug trade. We can also arrest the street gangs that peddle the drugs using the 'racketeering' laws.
Treat the street gangs and dealers for what they are violent subversives and enemies of the American people.
 
Drug wars are useless for actually ending drug use. That's not their goal anyway. A big internal threat is necessary for the expansion of a police state.
 
Man's inventions trumps god's. Fentanyl is a good example. And god (knew [italics]) fentanyl was going to happen.
 

Afghanistan's most important agricultural product repeating their similarly successful 2000-2001 prohibition on the crop. But the temptation to view the current ban in an overly positive light as an important global counter-narcotics victory must be avoided.

This is particularly true given the state of Afghanistan's economy and the country's humanitarian situation.

Indeed, the ban imposes huge economic and humanitarian costs on Afghans and it is likely to further stimulate an outflow of refugees. It may even result in internal challenges for the Taliban itself. And, in the long run, it will not have lasting counter-narcotics benefits within Afghanistan or globally.


WTF?

It just proves we have not been serious on the war on drugs. We were not willing to chop a few hands off to win.

Of course it could be the neocon's wet dream, re-invade to reestablish opium production......Yeah, they are that messed-up.
17iek1.jpg
 

Afghanistan's most important agricultural product repeating their similarly successful 2000-2001 prohibition on the crop. But the temptation to view the current ban in an overly positive light as an important global counter-narcotics victory must be avoided.

This is particularly true given the state of Afghanistan's economy and the country's humanitarian situation.

Indeed, the ban imposes huge economic and humanitarian costs on Afghans and it is likely to further stimulate an outflow of refugees. It may even result in internal challenges for the Taliban itself. And, in the long run, it will not have lasting counter-narcotics benefits within Afghanistan or globally.


WTF?

It just proves we have not been serious on the war on drugs. We were not willing to chop a few hands off to win.

Of course it could be the neocon's wet dream, re-invade to reestablish opium production......Yeah, they are that messed-up.
afghan opium production was green lighted soon after the invasion in 2002. given the cia side business of drug importation, i have thought that the taliban ban was bad for business, necessitating the events of 9/11 and invasion to restore the source.
 
afghan opium production was green lighted soon after the invasion in 2002. given the cia side business of drug importation, i have thought that the taliban ban was bad for business, necessitating the events of 9/11 and invasion to restore the source.

Obama Ben Laden opposed opium poppies.
 

Forum List

Back
Top