Cartels could be easily taken care of

[Ostroeuropa]

You need to deal with the economic factors that lead to cartels or there's no point.

But once that's done, I wouldn't be opposed to someone serving notice to cartel kingpins that they are due in court and because of prior... incidents... they will be tried in absentia if they do not attend voluntarily. The issue at trial is whether:

1. Guilt can be determined

and

2. Whether a Kill Order can be placed that transfers responsibility for the issue to the military with an order to kill the target.

If they voluntarily attend trial they may contest their innocence, and regardless of outcome will not be issued with the kill order.

I think considering such orders should only be available for instances like this where a criminal is in custody, and then violent and armed insurrection is used to force the state to release them voluntarily (this is different to them escaping or convincing *individuals* who work for the state to release them to stop a rampage. State policy must be forced into backing down.) but provided those circumstances are there there is a public interest in kill orders being available provided at least some degree of due process is followed.

[Sovaal]

Only one that I can see being useful is the last one, civilian militias and the sort, because that has worked in real life, if on a small scale.

But the real problem in Mexico is that the political structure is rotten to the core, and frankly to solve it would require going after all causes which are spread out across the Americas.

[Costa Fierro]

The one thing the OP doesn't consider is how hilariously corrupt law enforcement and even parts of the military in Mexico are. Whole cities have had their police departments replaced with federal police because of corruption.

[Senkaku]

The one thing the OP doesn't consider is how hilariously corrupt law enforcement and even parts of the military in Mexico are. Whole cities have had their police departments replaced with federal police because of corruption.

Invasions the US could spend trillions of dollars and thousands of lives on:

Iraq - bogs us down in a multi-decade quagmire halfway around the world for oil we no longer really need thanks to fracking
Mexico - solves dire security and migration issues on our border and reestablishes us as a stabilizing force in our hemisphere

clearly Saddam is the more urgent priority tho ;-;

[Totenborg]

Nevermind the ineffectiveness against the cartels, what you're suggesting is a government able to act against its citizenry with no repercussions. You'd be replacing one evil with another. A fascist government is not a valid solution to drug cartels.

Lol...when going after well known murderers, rapists, and just plain utter scum is considered fascism.

No, cops with total unaccountable authority is fascism. What's to stop them from just labeling basic dissidents and folks they plain don't like as cartel members and executing said "cartel members"?

[Major-Tom]

Not at all - especially in countries where cartels have a chokehold over several regions, it's damn near impossible. The cartel in places like Sonora, Jalisco, and other Mexican States for example are so deeply ingrained in the region that they nearly have control over the area.

It's not like taking down a drug ring, but a well-funded, efficient and cutthroat militia that is often in cahoots with local police forces, local government etc etc. Now that's fucking tough.

Cartels cannot be easily taken care of, and to say that they can is an exercise in absurd simplicity and wishful thinking.

[Major-Tom]

The one thing the OP doesn't consider is how hilariously corrupt law enforcement and even parts of the military in Mexico are. Whole cities have had their police departments replaced with federal police because of corruption.

This especially. Anecdotally, I remember being arrested in Mexico. It wasn't because of a crime I or my friend committed, but rather, the cartel has such a grip in regions of Sonora that the local police will accuse tourists of various petty crimes and demand money. If the money cannot be provided for whatever reason, as it was in my place because my friend and I are broke, then the police detain you and repeatedly threaten to hand you over to the cartels until the bribe can be paid.

It's a caricature of corruption.

[Page]

Back when I was in college there were a few ex-military guys in my classes who would go on and on about how they wished the government would allow privateers to go kill ISIS like they did in the days of the Barbary Wars. Of course, I had serious doubts that they would have actually gone to Syria as privateers if given the chance.

And I'm even more doubtful that many people would sign up to hunt down cartel members, because things have changed since the days of the wild west. 1) A person can get to the other side of the world in less than a day and 2) The internet age makes it almost impossible to stay anonymous. What these two things add up to: Cartel hitmen killing your whole family with burning car tires. There are very, very few willing to risk that.

Bounty hunter fantasies are fun but there are real world consequences that will make most people back down.

[The Two Jerseys]

Yeah, I don't see how anything short of roving government death squads carrying out wholesale slaughter of cartel members and their families will work.

[Costa Fierro]

Yeah, I don't see how anything short of roving government death squads carrying out wholesale slaughter of cartel members and their families will work.

Besides, this happens in Mexico already.

[Lord Dominator]

Somewhat nice ideas OP, but fighting evil with a not-quite-as-great evil doesn't seem a good idea to me.

Step One: Legalize drugs
Step Two: Unilateral free trade

Problem solved

Note: Please do not do drugs! Drugs are bad! Just Say No!

Cartels have owning stakes in multiple Mexican companies, your free trade just increased their profit margin.

You could call it The War on Drugs.

Seriously the cartels only disappear when Americans stop buying drugs. Which is never.

No even if Americans stopped buying drugs they aren't going to stop buying Avocados, Auto parts, and other things made in Mexico that the Cartels now have a hand in.

Don't really see how that'd increase their profit margins - their illegal drug (among other illegal activities) have massive profit margins for a variety of reasons that wouldn't logically exist in legal markets outside of Mexico.

[Washington Resistance Army]

I do agree that cartels could be quite easily taken care of but you'd need a lot more drastic and cruel actions than what you proposed.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

Duterte probably thought it would be easy with more extra judicial killing too. He was wrong.

[Gormwood]

Legalization is the best way to destroy the cartels without throwing people into a long drawn out conflict.

[Gormwood]

Duterte probably thought it would be easy with more extra judicial killing too. He was wrong.

He saves the extra judicial killings for small potatoes. The big dealers are probably all snuggly with him.

[Cameroi]

Earlier saw that the cop that arrested el chapos son was gunned down in broad daylight. And I thinking why are these people even allowed to keep running around. Here is my solution allow the intelligence agencies, police, militias and the military to use force against them with no repucssion. One extra step further then what Brazil is currently exploring. This would be a temporary solution tasked by a coalition of people with different political views avoid claims of oppression until the cartels have been sufficiently wiped out.

Steps

1) intelligence agencies identify and post information about the cartels in local, regional and country wide bulletins

2) local/federal government create bounties, for every dead/alive cartel member bought in is given a credit

3) civilians get involved by getting rewarded or ratting out other civilians in authority who has been turned or a member of cartel in hiding

4) civilian militias or private contractors also should be involved

Rinse and repeat until their strangle hold is gone from the black and regular markets

Problem solved, what do you think?

its not that these things wouldn't work, its just that they wouldn't happen if the cartels were already running the government, and that's generally the problem, and i don't mean 'shadow' governments either, i mean when they get their people or people beholding to them, elected to public office. people like bows and arrows or don panoccio.

[Chan Island]

There has been a full on war against the drug cartels for almost 50 years now, maybe a different approach might be better than yet more killing?

How about legalising drugs instead? That demonstrably drains away drug gangs much faster, more efficiently and with no killing required.

[Ghost Land]

There has been a full on war against the drug cartels for almost 50 years now, maybe a different approach might be better than yet more killing?

How about legalising drugs instead? That demonstrably drains away drug gangs much faster, more efficiently and with no killing required.

This exactly. Shoving a big industry onto the black market almost never works out in the long run. I'm not advocating a complete lack of restrictions on all drugs, as I feel regulations on that kind of stuff are very important, but the whole "War on Drugs" has gone on for far too long.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

The problem lies in Mexico. Cartels are terrorist organizations and should be treated as such per our involvement in the Global War on Terrorism. The United States must invade Mexico in order to destroy the Cartels once and for all through our superior military might. Mexico has proven it is incapable of handling this problem; and the Cartels have proven they are much more than typical organized crime syndicates - they are insurgents, and should be combated as such.

Legalizing and taxing drugs will allow us to cripple them substantially while our armed forces move in for the kill. They won't be able to survive. Victory would be inevitable, and the benefits enormous: a chance to end the wide-spread corruption in Mexico by ensuring those linked to the Cartels will go down with them, reduction of immigration - both legal and illegal - as Mexicans no longer have to flee their country for their own safety to escape the Cartels, the end of the War on Drugs, and a chance for the US to finally stabilize it's southern neighbor. Both Mexico and the US would benefit greatly from treating the Cartels as what they are: domestic terrorist organizations.

Only drawback I can think of is rebuilding costs, but that's hardly a problem for the world's largest economy.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

There has been a full on war against the drug cartels for almost 50 years now, maybe a different approach might be better than yet more killing?

How about legalising drugs instead? That demonstrably drains away drug gangs much faster, more efficiently and with no killing required.

The War on Drugs was never a proper war; that is why it failed spectacularly. It was aimed at punishing drug users more than drug distributors. It treated insurgents as mere criminals, when that is demonstrably not the case. Like it or not killing is require when facing groups like the Cartels. These are organizations founded on greed, savagery, and power that terrorize the innocent. They will not cooperate, they will not negotiate. Take away their drugs and they'll find some other way to fund their Empires of Blood.

Violence begets violence. Legalizing drugs will only weaken the Cartels, it won't destroy them. That's why we should legalize them and then attack the Cartels in full military force. They'd be destroyed almost instantly, a precise surgical strike to hit them while they're down. They won't be able to get back up after that.

[Saiwania]

The cartels can probably be resolved with the right incentives. We need to make it so that their own family members will betray them. How to do this? Simple, I say allow the government to seize all of the property and assets that're involved in crime and use the proceeds to get the best equipment and resources. This is often done in the US to great success.

If a son or daughter's activities cause the entire family to lose all property/real estate/assets or having it held hostage by the state, they're going to turn the son/daughter over to get all that property/life savings back. If they're involved, many will turn themselves in to get the hardship off of their relatives and etc.

[Nakena]

The problem lies in Mexico. Cartels are terrorist organizations and should be treated as such per our involvement in the Global War on Terrorism. The United States must invade Mexico in order to destroy the Cartels once and for all through our superior military might. Mexico has proven it is incapable of handling this problem; and the Cartels have proven they are much more than typical organized crime syndicates - they are insurgents, and should be combated as such.

Legalizing and taxing drugs will allow us to cripple them substantially while our armed forces move in for the kill. They won't be able to survive. Victory would be inevitable, and the benefits enormous: a chance to end the wide-spread corruption in Mexico by ensuring those linked to the Cartels will go down with them, reduction of immigration - both legal and illegal - as Mexicans no longer have to flee their country for their own safety to escape the Cartels, the end of the War on Drugs, and a chance for the US to finally stabilize it's southern neighbor. Both Mexico and the US would benefit greatly from treating the Cartels as what they are: domestic terrorist organizations.

Only drawback I can think of is rebuilding costs, but that's hardly a problem for the world's largest economy.

There has been a full on war against the drug cartels for almost 50 years now, maybe a different approach might be better than yet more killing?

How about legalising drugs instead? That demonstrably drains away drug gangs much faster, more efficiently and with no killing required.

The War on Drugs was never a proper war; that is why it failed spectacularly. It was aimed at punishing drug users more than drug distributors. It treated insurgents as mere criminals, when that is demonstrably not the case. Like it or not killing is require when facing groups like the Cartels. These are organizations founded on greed, savagery, and power that terrorize the innocent. They will not cooperate, they will not negotiate. Take away their drugs and they'll find some other way to fund their Empires of Blood.

Violence begets violence. Legalizing drugs will only weaken the Cartels, it won't destroy them. That's why we should legalize them and then attack the Cartels in full military force. They'd be destroyed almost instantly, a precise surgical strike to hit them while they're down. They won't be able to get back up after that.

Thats by far the best analysis on the problem I've read so far. Important note here specifically on how they would resort to other sources of income in lieu of drugs. For example Taxation of controlled terretories specifically if they arent doing that already, and oil revenues etc.

[Merther]

Earlier saw that the cop that arrested el chapos son was gunned down in broad daylight. And I thinking why are these people even allowed to keep running around. Here is my solution allow the intelligence agencies, police, militias and the military to use force against them with no repucssion. One extra step further then what Brazil is currently exploring. This would be a temporary solution tasked by a coalition of people with different political views avoid claims of oppression until the cartels have been sufficiently wiped out.

Steps

1) intelligence agencies identify and post information about the cartels in local, regional and country wide bulletins

2) local/federal government create bounties, for every dead/alive cartel member bought in is given a credit

3) civilians get involved by getting rewarded or ratting out other civilians in authority who has been turned or a member of cartel in hiding

4) civilian militias or private contractors also should be involved

Rinse and repeat until their strangle hold is gone from the black and regular markets

Problem solved, what do you think?

Well, your first point is valid and probably already happening but the rest isn't really realistic. Bounties don't really work anymore unless you hire a private paramilitary company to do the job. Attacking a cartel isn't like attacking a street gang, those people have weapons, strongholds, vehicles and are already at war with other rival cartels, actually the most likely to put a bounty on a cartel member is someone from another group. Ratting to cops is also very, very dangerous and unless you have special witness programs it's tough to stay safe when you give a gang member away to the cops.

And finally, I wouldn't trust civilian militias for a million dollars. Civilians aren't cops, and they aren't soldiers.

Honestly so long as centralization efforts aren't increased the federal state will forever be too distant from those far away cartels to even try to dismantle their organization.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

Time for drug legalization. Breaking the monopoly of the cartels will weaken them.

[Saiwania]

Time for drug legalization. Breaking the monopoly of the cartels will weaken them.

No it won't. We don't need a bunch of people whose minds have been permanently ruined or addicted because they got to cocaine, heroin, meth,
(whatever other hard drug there is out there) just once. Besides which, a lot of illegal businesses branch out into legitimate businesses to get a cut of that, or for the purposes of luandering dirty money.

Nobody is afraid of the Mafia's "code of silence" anymore for example, because the alternative is being imprisoned for 40+ years which few people want to risk. And because within organized crime- nobody cares about you anyways, once you're no longer useful. Other criminals are more likely to try to kill you if you're a potential liability for any reason, even for stuff a person couldn't control. People don't owe loyalty to people whom when they really think about it- aren't loyal to them at all.

We need more of that. To systematically make the incentives people have to lean towards turning criminals in or betraying them because the alternative consequences for them are worse objectively speaking, and ideally, they can't be retaliated against because the witness protection programs are too strong or literally almost everyone else is doing so because they don't want to lose their genuinely held property/life savings because it is being held hostage by the state.