| ▲ | nessbot 6 hours ago |
| Murdering buses of people doesn't bring the full force of the US military on them. The difference is the risk not the depravity. |
|
| ▲ | p-e-w 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| This is the answer. The cartels would have to be insane to poke that particular bear. They would get crushed like a bug. IIRC they murdered a single US undercover officer in the 90s and the retaliation was so bad that they themselves handed over the perpetrators. |
| |
| ▲ | ChrisMarshallNY 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > They would get crushed like a bug. Much as I despise them, I'm not so sure that would be the case. I seem to remember folks saying the same about the Taliban, and the cartels have a lot more money and high-tech kit, than the Taliban. Asymmetric warfare is a tough gig, on all sides. | | |
| ▲ | janalsncm 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | I don’t think the technology matters nearly as much as the asymmetry. Iraq had better technology than the Taliban and their military didn’t last a week. | | |
| ▲ | ChrisMarshallNY 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | True enough, but the cartels are also experts at running what is basically guerrilla warfare, against each other. Not sure if the Mexican Army has ever tried to take them on. A lot of cartel soldiers come from the army. |
|
| |
| ▲ | BoredPositron 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | You are right rationality is their strongest character trait. | | |
| ▲ | 542354234235 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | How are they not rational? Violence is a tool. They operate an illegal business so they can’t sue other parties for breach of contract. They can't call the police if they are robbed or file an insurance claim for what was taken. Even the over-the-top violence has a rationale. They aren't punishing the victims as much as they are attempting to broadcast that there is a higher price to be paid than any gain from giving information, to reduce their future losses and enforcement efforts. It isn’t moral or ethical, but I wouldn’t say it is irrational. | | |
| ▲ | mikkupikku 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Lots of organized crime around the world manages to operate without cutting all the limbs off somebody then arranging them like flowers in a "vase" made out of the poor soul's ribcage. The cartels take violence far beyond what is pragmatically necessary. Their system of crime breeds excessive violence and insanity. | | |
| ▲ | AlotOfReading an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | This stuff mostly followed after the zetas. It was a very deliberate strategy to compete in a hostile landscape that others eventually copied to survive. | |
| ▲ | xkcd-sucks an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Marketing, if you don't know the answer it's always marketing |
| |
| ▲ | coolhand2120 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > How are they not rational? It's the meth. |
| |
| ▲ | the_sleaze_ 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The cartels are incredibly rational - what they lack are morals and ethics | |
| ▲ | colechristensen 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It's a business not an ideology. | |
| ▲ | KPGv2 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Do you have much evidence of them behaving irrationally? | |
| ▲ | mmh0000 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I would recommend reading the Freakinomics book or listen to their podcasts on drugs. TL;DR: drug cartels are run like businesses. They are very rational. But, unlike your boss, their boss can also shoot you in the face if you annoy them too much |
|
|
|
| ▲ | Noaidi 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| How did that full force of the US military work out in Vietnam? |
| |
| ▲ | antonymoose 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Millions of dead Vietnamese. In any case that was a war against a hardened, experienced, determined enemy fighting for its freedom from any form of colonial occupation, both as a formal military and as an insurgent force in South Vietnam. I scarcely think the Mexican population would rise up in defense of the cartels here. | | |
| ▲ | boringg 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I think a lot of people would be cheering on the destruction of the cartels. | | |
| ▲ | ryandrake 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | They'd probably quickly stop cheering as their own homes and families were destroyed as collateral damage, which is what would happen if the "full force of the US military" were deployed against the cartels. | | |
| ▲ | TitaRusell 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | The last time America invaded Mexico City it created martyrs. It's a fascinating story that they do not teach at US highschools lol. |
| |
| ▲ | colechristensen 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The destruction of cartels would involve careful policing and corruption controls, the best American administrations have been bad at this. The worst... can barely put its pants on much less dismantle foreign organized crime. You can't shoot a missile at a cartel and poof it's just gone. |
| |
| ▲ | adolph 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | A non-aligned population will look out for their own interests and are aware that the attention of the US is temporary but the cuadillismo that lead to cartels are a durable cultural artifact. The Battle of Culiacán, also known locally as the Culiacanazo and Black
Thursday, was a failed attempt to capture Ovidio Guzmán López, son of Sinaloa
Cartel kingpin Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán, who was wanted in the United States
for drug trafficking.
Around 700 cartel gunmen began to attack civilian, government and military
targets around the city, despite orders from Ovidio sent at security forces'
request. Massive towers of smoke could be seen rising from burning cars and
vehicles. The cartels were well-equipped, with improvised armored vehicles,
bulletproof vests, .50 caliber (12.7 mm) rifles, rocket launchers, grenade
launchers and heavy machine guns.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Culiac%C3%A1n |
| |
| ▲ | randallsquared 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It was never used, there. | |
| ▲ | kgermino 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Pretty badly for both sides | |
| ▲ | boringg 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I don't really think you thought through that one. It sounds like what your saying is that the Vietnamese won and thats the outcome that matters. It does matter but that isn't the issue - it is the cost that everyone is talking about: the amount of destruction that was brought upon the country and people was terrible. |
|