Sinaloa Cartel Spanks Mexican Police

It won't fix anything overnight but illegal narcotics is unique in the respect that it's probably one of the highest profit margin products in the world. Name me something else that can continually be produced, that only costs $1000 to buy in one place, that you can sell for $30,000 merely by moving it somewhere, with the only value add after the $1000 being "got it past a few prohibitive layers". Not too many products like that. I don't even think the DeBeers family gets to that level. The level of profit ensures that there will be lots of bad people wanting to feed at the trough along the way. Even if the US legalized most of this shit they would still sell plenty of it to other countries too dumb to do so, or perhaps move into other markets, like selling dirt farmers kidneys to chinese nationals or something like that... but even that would probably still have a worse profit margin than something like Heroin.

-Mike

The progeny of US politicians and politicians come close to the cartels. Hunter Biden made $1.5B that we know of from China and millions more from Ukraine just sitting on the BoD of corrupt companies and/or corrupt countries. No qualifications or experience needed. Same with Pelosi's son and Kerry's stepson. Those are only the ones we know about. The only difference between the US politicians and the cartels is that the cartel money usually goes to only one person.
 
When the criminals have Ma Deuce on their side, the cops don't stand a chance.
72540254_10219739968880854_7776892773151539200_n.jpg
 
The us probably sold em those

You mean "former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder" the illegal gun runner and company right?......not the U.S.

When referring to the United States( the country which billions of people in this world desire as their ultimate destination regardless of its flaws) it's U.S. in capital letters.
 
The us probably sold em those

That type of machinery was probably sold to the Mexican Military and THEY sold it to the cartels. M2's are all over the place outside the US, we left thousands of them all over the world. It's not like it's an impossible design to build, the AR 15 probably has 10x more parts to it.
 
If they legalize these drugs, don't you think the cartels would either take over the legal market, or use price undercutting, intimidation and violence to suppress it?
Either way it sounds like a win for the cartel.
They already have with legal drugs - names like Pfizer, Teva, Sanofi, and Sandoz come to mind. The difference is funds are transferred by check or wire; disputes are handled in courts; and the only guns involved are the CEO's security staff (pretty much standard for any Fortune 500 CEO ... imagine the loss of status at the country club if you don't have a protective detail).

When is the last time you heard of a legal pharma company protecting its turf with a gun instead of an attorney?

Legit pharma companies don't buy the police; they rent congresspeople and senators.

I can walk any street in the US with absolutely no worry I will be caught in ballistic crossfire as pharma companies negotiate a dispute.

So no, it will not be the same if legalized. Cartels will instantly lose the advantage that comes with forcing all transactions off the books. You won't find violence as tobacco, alcohol and firearm companies compete for turf.
 
They already have with legal drugs - names like Pfizer, Teva, Sanofi, and Sandoz come to mind. The difference is funds are transferred by check or wire; disputes are handled in courts; and the only guns involved are the CEO's security staff (pretty much standard for any Fortune 500 CEO ... imagine the loss of status at the country club if you don't have a protective detail).

When is the last time you heard of a legal pharma company protecting its turf with a gun instead of an attorney?

Legit pharma companies don't buy the police; they rent congresspeople and senators.

I can walk any street in the US with absolutely no worry I will be caught in ballistic crossfire as pharma companies negotiate a dispute.

So no, it will not be the same if legalized. Cartels will instantly lose the advantage that comes with forcing all transactions off the books. You won't find violence as tobacco, alcohol and firearm companies compete for turf.

I see, Rob. Just ask for no anesthetics next time when you will need some minor procedure. You, Charlie Baker and Pocahontas should share a tent.
 
They already have with legal drugs - names like Pfizer, Teva, Sanofi, and Sandoz come to mind. The difference is funds are transferred by check or wire; disputes are handled in courts; and the only guns involved are the CEO's security staff (pretty much standard for any Fortune 500 CEO ... imagine the loss of status at the country club if you don't have a protective detail).

When is the last time you heard of a legal pharma company protecting its turf with a gun instead of an attorney?

Legit pharma companies don't buy the police; they rent congresspeople and senators.

I can walk any street in the US with absolutely no worry I will be caught in ballistic crossfire as pharma companies negotiate a dispute.

So no, it will not be the same if legalized. Cartels will instantly lose the advantage that comes with forcing all transactions off the books. You won't find violence as tobacco, alcohol and firearm companies compete for turf.
Sounds de facto the same. You replaced cops with legislators, and guns with CEO security.
The cartel $ is more powerful than their government. But even with that, it does not change the fact that the cartels may just go "legit" if their is still a profit to be made... see Kennedy's above.
I am not missing your point on gunfire and violence. Really though, the throat slitting, just like the buying of authority, just happens differently with "legit" pharma.
The whole thing reminds me of choosing between a giant doosh and a turd sandwich.
 
I see, Rob. Just ask for no anesthetics next time when you will need some minor procedure. You, Charlie Baker and Pocahontas should share a tent.
lol what does that have to do with anything he said? [rofl] this is how it reads:

 
Really though, the throat slitting, just like the buying of authority, just happens differently with "legit" pharma.
True, but as an NPC in the pharma business, I do not feel an obligation to avoid areas near the regional HQs of such firms to avoid getting killed, and police officers families don't have to worry if Pfeizer has put out a hit on them because of some regulatory enforcement action.
 
I see, Rob. Just ask for no anesthetics next time when you will need some minor procedure. You, Charlie Baker and Pocahontas should share a tent.
Huh? I said nothing about banning anything. I am far more concerned about the person who needs narcs but is not given them by an MD fearful those who control his/her license than I am about those who choose to abuse.
 
True, but as an NPC in the pharma business, I do not feel an obligation to avoid areas near the regional HQs of such firms to avoid getting killed, and police officers families don't have to worry if Pfeizer has put out a hit on them because of some regulatory enforcement action.

"Big pharma" is a creation of the government. It is an excellent example of our government stepping in the field government does not understand, and it will never understand. It is government destroying business as usual. In other words, I envision El Chapo quitting his business and becoming a president of Mexico, for example, that is a better analogy.
 
True, but as an NPC in the pharma business, I do not feel an obligation to avoid areas near the regional HQs of such firms to avoid getting killed, and police officers families don't have to worry if Pfeizer has put out a hit on them because of some regulatory enforcement action.

I am not an expert in the pharma world, so it would be tough for me to say the risks for those who make a living in that world. It sounds like you do, so ok. That is fair.
Legalization is not just a fix all. It will most likely consolidate money and power. Which is bad.
Don't mean spending all the tax $ on fighting is working either.
Again, if demand go away so does the revenue.
Seems to me that decreasing demand is good for all the "people", but bad for both pharma and the cartel. So it will never happen .
 
On another note, their president is a naive joke. Further proof that no amount of evidence can convince some people they're wrong. From WSJ today: Mexican Cartel Rules City After Gunbattle
WSJ said:
The administration’s backing down to the cartel’s offensive was sharply criticized by many ordinary Mexicans and security analysts, who challenged Mr. López Obrador’s policy of using force only as a last resort in an attempt to pacify one of the world’s most violent nations. He has called the policy “hugs, not bullets,” promising to focus on attacking poverty rather than cartels.
-----
“Lopez Obrador was confident his call for peace and love—and not going after narcos—would lower violence,” said Raúl Benitez, an analyst at the Autonomous University of Mexico. Instead, he said the president has given free rein to gangs. “It shows the peace-and-love strategy is not working.”
-----
Mr. López Obrador campaigned on ending Mexico’s drug war. Since 2006, as cartels gained increasing power, successive presidents have used the armed forces to kill or capture cartel leaders and break up powerful gangs.

The strategy reduced the clout of the largest cartels, but it also led to growing criminal violence as cartels splintered into rival gangs and fought each other for control of drug-trafficking routes and territory. Hundreds of thousands have died in the carnage.

Mr. López Obrador said his government would no longer focus on capturing cartel leaders but work on alleviating poverty. “What happened yesterday was lamentable, but in no way does it mean our strategy has failed,” he told reporters during his morning news conference.

The president is also relying on the force of his personality to tamp down crime, calling on gang members to think of their mothers.

“We’re calling on criminals to tone it down, that we all start to behave better. To hell with criminals. Fuchi, guacala,” he said, using colloquial terms that mean “gross, yuck.”

Thursday, as word of the battles in Culiacán spread on social media, the phrase #Fuchi/guacala was trending on Twitter.
 
I am not an expert in the pharma world, so it would be tough for me to say the risks for those who make a living in that world. It sounds like you do, so ok. That is fair.
I assume if citizens were getting killed by the dozen, police were being ambushed and headless corpses showed up from domestic legal pharma companies fighting it out, we would have heard something about it by now.

It does not take inside knowledge of analytical genius to know that handing around cartel land in Mexico is more dangerous that hanging out near a pharma company HQ.
 
I assume if citizens were getting killed by the dozen, police were being ambushed and headless corpses showed up from domestic legal pharma companies fighting it out, we would have heard something about it by now.

It does not take inside knowledge of analytical genius to know that handing around cartel land in Mexico is more dangerous that hanging out near a pharma company HQ.

Maybe not headless corpses, but people are dying by the thousands in this country because of legal pharma.
It is daily news.
It is not about hanging around outside the Pfizer building. Or the cartel HQ. That is not where the real damage is done.
Ask a random person in this country what has had a greater impact on their life, legal pharma, or cartels?
 
Maybe not headless corpses, but people are dying by the thousands in this country because of legal pharma.
It is daily news.
It is not about hanging around outside the Pfizer building. Or the cartel HQ. That is not where the real damage is done.
Ask a random person in this country what has had a greater impact on their life, legal pharma, or cartels?
Being a victim of legal pharma is a choice. Being a victim of cartel related violence is not.
 
Being a victim of legal pharma is a choice. Being a victim of cartel related violence is not.

So,
Victims of legal pharma, is all victims fault?
Victims of cartel it is all cartel fault?
That logic is off the rails.
The cartel isn't handing out perks like candy when you get a tooth pulled. But legal pharma sure is.
Increased opioid prescriptions from "legal pharma" are the root cause of the major drug addiction problems we have to deal with now.
Not cartels.
Plenty of people victimized by legal pharma have little to no choice in the matter.
Plenty of people victimized by cartel have made those choices themselves.
And vice versa.
We are all responsible for our own choices, but those who are victimized by our choices often have no choice themselves. To overlook this is to say everything we do happens in a vacuum.

Just want to reiterate, i am not saying the war on drugs is working. Not saying legalization is a bad idea either.
I am saying that without demand, the problem, all these problems, go away.
And until then, whether it is legal, illegal, or whatever, doesn't matter. These problems will continue.
 
Last edited:
In this day and age there is zero excuse for not doing your own homework and understanding the risk when it comes to drugs full stop. Whether the legal or illegal ones.

Drugs being illegal is stupid. Either we believe in freedom and respect an individuals choice to make decisions, including poisoning themselves or we don’t.

The “War on Drugs” has been a complete an utter failure. Just drive down any major roadway in a city.
 
I'm talking about the danger of collateral damage caused directly by the vendors disputes killing third parties not part of the dispute. I suppose you could create a but-for chain proving big pharma caused some street level dealer to exist because of someone addicted to Rx drugs, but I'm talking about direct effects - like police being ambushed by the pharma company, NPCs being caught in the cross-fire, etc. I can go to any city in the US, any time day or night, and not being worried about being shot intentionally or accidentally by a Johnson & Johnson hit man.
 
In this day and age there is zero excuse for not doing your own homework and understanding the risk when it comes to drugs full stop. Whether the legal or illegal ones.

Drugs being illegal is stupid. Either we believe in freedom and respect an individuals choice to make decisions, including poisoning themselves or we don’t.

The “War on Drugs” has been a complete an utter failure. Just drive down any major roadway in a city.

Ya i respect others decisions to eff themselves up and die. And in my little world i would have it the exact way you describe, no rules, and let it fly.
But that is not how it would go down.
How many peoples tune changes when it hits their wallet though? Gov methadone clinics, rehabs, other programs that basically keep junkies alive? Or all the personnell who will be paid to regulate. They may as well just move everyone at the DEA over to those new jobs. Either way, non users pay $ to support others habits. And without much say in the matter.
At least when someone buys phentanyl from a cartel and dies it doesn't cost me any $.
Wait.. now I am defending drug cartels.........
This whole thing is a s*#t sammich

Rob, I hear you. If the only thing you are worried about is how frightening it is to be affiliated with a cartel or a pharma company, based on whether you will be shot on the street, then the the pharma co is safer. That is a no brainer.

However, for anyone who does not have an affiliation with either of these, I would say that the overall detriment to our society though has been greater from over prescription, through legal channels, than the negative impact cartels have had so far....
Legal, illegal...... as neither a user or provider, i will still end up "paying" for others choices somehow. Thats what really blows.
 
Last edited:
Ya i respect others decisions to eff themselves up and die. And in my little world i would have it the exact way you describe, no rules, and let it fly.
But that is not how it would go down.
How many peoples tune changes when it hits their wallet though? Gov methadone clinics, rehabs, other programs that basically keep junkies alive? Or all the personnell who will be paid to regulate. They may as well just move everyone at the DEA over to those new jobs. Either way, non users pay $ to support others habits. And without much say in the matter.
At least when someone buys phentanyl from a cartel and dies it doesn't cost me any $.
Wait.. now I am defending drug cartels.........
This whole thing is a s*#t sammich

You are paying for it now to fund police, prisons etc.
 
When the criminals have Ma Deuce on their side, the cops don't stand a chance.
72540254_10219739968880854_7776892773151539200_n.jpg


The cops - and by extension ... the government - don't have a chance because they have their heads firmly implanted in their asses.

To borrow an overused phrase - the government is playing checkers while the cartel is playing 3D chess:



===============

A recent event in Culiacan, Mexico should have drawn a lot of attention but didn’t: a Fourth Generation entity, the Sinaloa Cartel, took on the Mexican state and beat it, not just strategically but tactically. It did so by demonstrating a remarkably rapid OODA Loop, far faster than the state’s. This is a sign of things to come, not just in Mexico but in many places.


The most perceptive piece I have seen on these events was in the October 20 Cleveland Plain Dealer, “Gun battle involving El Chapo’s son highlights challenges to government” by Mary Beth Sheridan of the Washington Post. It states,


What happened this past week was unprecedented. When Mexican authorities tried to detain one of El Chapo’s sons, hundreds of gunmen with automatic weapons swept through the city, sealing off its exits, taking security officials hostage and battling authorities.
After several hours, the besieged government forces released Ovidio Guzman, who was wanted on U.S. federal drug-trafficking charges. . .
The offensive in Culiacan. . . exposed one of the country’s foremost problems: the government’s slipping control over parts of the territory.
There are an increasing number of areas “where you effectively have a state presence, but under negotiated terms with whoever runs the show locally,” said Falko Ernst, the senior Mexico analyst for the International Crisis Group. . .
Thursday afternoon’s attack came on the heels of several incidents highlighting the ability of organized crime groups to challenge the government. On Monday, gunmen ambushed a convoy of state police in the western state of Michoacan, killing 14. Last month, the Northeast Cartel ordered gas stations in the border city of Nuevo Laredo to deny service to police or military vehicles, leaving them desperate for fuel.

All this is happening not in the Hindu Kush but on our immediate southern border. That alone should have drawn greater attention from a defense establishment fixated on non-threats from Russia and China. But there is more here than meets the eye.


==================


The drug cartels represent the future in many respects. They do not seek to replace the state or openly capture it, which would make them vulnerable to other states; rather, they hide within its hollowed-out structures and are protected by its formal sovereignty. They make lots of money while states go begging. They provide social services the state is supposed to offer but does not. Their highly-motivated forces with flat command structures have a faster OODA Loop than the state’s. And locally, they often appear more legitimate than the state.


Again, all this is happening right next door. Why can our national security establishment not read the words already written on the border wall we so desperately need? Those words are, “Fourth Generation war.”
 
Back
Top Bottom