MemeStreams | MemeStreams Discussion

Create an Account

This page contains all of the posts and discussion on MemeStreams referencing the following web page: The Lure of Opium Wealth. You can find discussions on MemeStreams as you surf the web, even if you aren't a MemeStreams member, using the Threads Bookmarklet.

The Lure of Opium Wealth
by noteworthy at 8:08 am EDT, Jun 2, 2005

The State Department recently called the Afghan drug trade "an enormous threat to world stability." The UN estimates that Afghanistan produces 87% of the world's opium.
The opium trade is booming, partly the result of the US strategy for overthrowing the Taliban and stabilizing the country after two decades of war.
As long as the Taliban pay cash, the warlords are pleased to let bygones be bygones.
"The idea is not to leave them in the provinces anymore, but to bring them on board in official positions in order to better control them."

Of course, this is known as the Dilbert principle of counter-narcotics.

The United Nations estimates that Afghan opium, morphine and heroin feed the habits of 10 million addicts, or two-thirds of the world's opiate abusers. Afghan narcotics kill about 10,000 people a year, it says.
One Kunduz trafficker estimated that there was enough opium stashed in village wells and other hiding places to keep labs and smugglers working for 10 to 15 years, even if poppy cultivation stopped entirely. Schmidt said that was probably an underestimation.
"Trying to get rid of drugs in Afghanistan is like trying to clear sand from a beach with a bucket," said an American counter-narcotics agent.
He predicted that the government crackdown would be good for business. Increased arrests and interdiction would cut competition and reduce the glut that forced down prices by two-thirds last year.
"The more restrictions, the more the business will boom," the trafficker said. "The price will go high, the number of dealers will go down, and my income will go up. The professional businessmen will remain. They have good connections. Whoever works hard in a business wins."

So, how's your liberal democracy doing in the war on drugs?

RE: The Lure of Opium Wealth
by flynn23 at 3:44 pm EDT, Jun 3, 2005

noteworthy wrote:
The State Department recently called the Afghan drug trade "an enormous threat to world stability." The UN estimates that Afghanistan produces 87% of the world's opium.
The opium trade is booming, partly the result of the US strategy for overthrowing the Taliban and stabilizing the country after two decades of war.
As long as the Taliban pay cash, the warlords are pleased to let bygones be bygones.
"The idea is not to leave them in the provinces anymore, but to bring them on board in official positions in order to better control them."
Of course, this is known as the Dilbert principle of counter-narcotics.
The United Nations estimates that Afghan opium, morphine and heroin feed the habits of 10 million addicts, or two-thirds of the world's opiate abusers. Afghan narcotics kill about 10,000 people a year, it says.
One Kunduz trafficker estimated that there was enough opium stashed in village wells and other hiding places to keep labs and smugglers working for 10 to 15 years, even if poppy cultivation stopped entirely. Schmidt said that was probably an underestimation.
"Trying to get rid of drugs in Afghanistan is like trying to clear sand from a beach with a bucket," said an American counter-narcotics agent.
He predicted that the government crackdown would be good for business. Increased arrests and interdiction would cut competition and reduce the glut that forced down prices by two-thirds last year.
"The more restrictions, the more the business will boom," the trafficker said. "The price will go high, the number of dealers will go down, and my income will go up. The professional businessmen will remain. They have good connections. Whoever works hard in a business wins."
So, how's your liberal democracy doing in the war on drugs?

This dynamic is going to be one of those things that I believe will highlight the folly of the war in Iraq years from now. If we would've deployed those troops to Iran, N. Korea, Saudi Arabia, or hell, even Pakistan, I think we would've had a much greater effect on terror organizations than Iraq. Instead, we got (are?) mired down in Iraq, while nukes proliferate and Afghanistan got it's drug economy back online. Awesome.