Russia: U.S. Aiding Afghan Drug Trade

[cory777]

Source: Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty

(edited for copyright purposes-proud patriot moderator Democratic Underground)

March 28, 2010
Russia has accused the United States of "conniving" with Afghan drug producers by not destroying opium crops as U.S. troops advance in Helmand Province, one of the major opium growing regions.



Read more: http://www.rferl.org/content/Russia_Says_US_Colluding_With_Afghan_Drug_Trade/1995972.html

[madeline_con]

1. We need moral admonitions from Russia

like we need another butthole.

[Webster Green]

2. yeah, and we really need their advice on how to suceed in Afghanistan

:rofl:

[Flaxbee]

6. actually, we should have paid very close attention to the

Soviet experience in Afghanistan. And asked them for advice - the only people who knew Afghanistan better than the Afghanis was the Russians.

If the Russians couldn't do it, we can't do it.

[Webster Green]

7. I din't know about advice, but we should have learned from their mistakes.

I agree with your conclusion though.

Let's see, isn't that where we armed and trained Bin Laden and his buddies? Why, yes...it is.

[dipsydoodle]

11. They led the way on how to succeed

They pulled out and kept all of the geological surveys for future use when the USA has the sense to pull out too.

[jakeXT]

23. Obama says US won't quit war in Afghanistan

'The United States of America does not quit once we start on something,' Obama told the US soldiers in his speech, which was aired on Afghan TV.

http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/southasia/news/article_1544345.php/Obama-says-US-won-t-quit-war-in-Afghanistan-3rd-Roundup


good luck with that

[dipsydoodle]

27. Yup - they pretended to pull out of Beirut in 1984

as a follow up to the 1983 barracks bombing.

[ConcernedCanuk]

32. Exactly

.
.
.

Get the fuck out!

[No Elephants]

14. What's relevant is whether they are lying or not.

[Cirque du So-What]

3. CIA's black ops ain't gonna finance themselves, yunno!

During the early stages of the invasion of Afghanistan, I recall reading that the Taliban had nearly eradicated opium crop in that country, as they believed its production ran counter to the proper practice of Islam. After the US invasion, however, the northern alliance of tribes (under the aegis of coalition forces) encouraged the replanting of opium poppies in earnest, and it's been that way ever since - even in lands that the Taliban has regained.

My memory could be faulty, however, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

[Proletariatprincess]

4. Thats my recollection too.

War on drugs...war on terror...they are convenient and interchangeable now that the Cold War is over and their aren't any Commies under our beds. It is all pretext for criminal foreign policy.

[No Elephants]

15. Just think how many jobs have been created by those 2 fake wars, though.

It's like FDR's New Deal, only pure evil.

[EFerrari]

8. That's what I heard or read, too, but for all I know, that could have been

BushCo airbrushing the Taliban while it looked like they would negotiate the pipeline deal.

[reggie the dog]

12. Your memory is correct

The first war after 911 was for heroin, the second for oil.

[Rapier09]

5. Yeah but then we'd be achieving something

We don't want to do that.

[dmr]

9. cory777

Please be aware that DU copyright rules require that excerpts of copyrighted material be limited; and in this case to only a brief excerpt., It must also include a link to the original source.

Thank you.
DU Moderator

[superconnected]

10. And Russia is right.

[madrchsod]

13. bbc newsbeat...may 1 2008

http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/newsbeat/newsid_7376000/7376269.stm




discussing payment over ruined crop





http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/British-Troops-Destroy-Huge-Afghan-Drug-Factory/Article/20080241306802?lpos=World_News_Article_Related_Content_Region_8&lid=ARTICLE_1306802_British_Troops_Destroy_Huge_Afghan_Drug_Factory

[No Elephants]

16. Why don't we just buy the poppy crops, or pay them to grow something else?

And do the same elsewhere in the world.

Too sane?

It would be much cheaper than the war on drugs, not to mention preventing so much damage to our kids, adults, property, etc. And prison costs.

But, it wouldn't serve the purposes stated in Reply #4.

[melm00se]

17. I remember

a novel with that as the central premise. The end result was that rather than having the drugs destroyed they were smuggled into the US and resold with the profits lining the pockets of an evil cabal of rogue intelligence agents.

I could see that happening in this real world case.

[pjt7]

18. Forget thet Russis is pointing this out

it's true.

[think]

24. No need for morphine in the medical world?

I realize it's a can of worms and a very simplistic idea but paying for the poppy crop and making medical morphine for third world hospitals would seem like a great humanitarian compromise.

This is from Wikipedia:


Access to morphine in poor countries

Although morphine is cheap, people in poorer countries often do not have access to it. According to a 2005 estimate by the International Narcotics Control Board, six countries (Australia, Britain, Canada, France, Germany, and the United States) consume 79 percent of the world’s morphine. The less affluent countries, accounting for 80 percent of the world's population, consumed only about 6 percent of the global morphine supply. Some countries import virtually no morphine, and in others the drug is rarely available even for relieving severe pain while dying.

Experts in pain management attribute the under-distribution of morphine to an unwarranted fear of the drug's potential for addiction and abuse. While morphine is clearly addictive, Western doctors believe it is worthwhile to use the drug and then wean the patient off when the treatment is over.<53>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphine

[Robb]

29. I can just see the posts on DU if we went this route.

"The CIA is getting women and children in developing nations hooked on morphine, under the guise of medical treatment!!11!" :D

[Romulox]

31. Because the logic of prohibition doesn't work that way.

If the government will pay you X for your Opium (or for the privilege of you not growing opium, for that matter,) then the opium is worth X + Y on the open market. If the government doubles what it will pay to 2X, then the opium is worth 2X + Y. In both cases, Y = the premium that purchasers are willing to pay for the stuff on account of its illegality.

Long story short, being a heroin addict is already illegal in virtually every country on earth. And yet there are heroin addicts (and the people who supply them) among us still. There is no evidence whatever that yet another round of prohibitionist fervor will do the trick. :hi:

[Robb]

19. Russia burned crops, we're trying a different approach.

...Now all of a sudden we're meant to follow Russia's advice on Afghanistan?

[newfie11]

20. This wouldn't surprise me at all n/t

[Odin2005]

21. And we should believe the idiots in the Kremlin WHY?

[Robb]

22. It's 100% true that we're not burning the crops any more.

...The only question is how it benefits Russia to point it out. I'm not sure.

Edited to add: good discussion of the issue toward the end of this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/21/world/asia/21marja.html

[Flaneur]

25. Russia is suffering rising heroin addiction rates.

And 30,000 dead junkies a year, if I recall correctly.

Iran is having the same sorts of problems with Afghan heroin. And so is Pakistan.

[AlphaCentauri]

28. Becouse we have the experience, Oliver North

[yurbud]

33. Britain's government ran the opium trade in the 19th century--remember the Opium War?

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Romulox]

30. Let Russia fight it's own War on Drugs; we've already lost ours. nt

[yurbud]

34. some background on the drug trade, governments, & Wall Street

A former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, which borders Afghanistan described the open production of opium, open manufacture into heroin, and open export from the country.

That is about the only good thing you can say about the Taliban; there are plenty of very bad things to say about them. But their suppression of the opium trade and the drug barons is undeniable fact.

Now we are occupying the country, that has changed. According to the United Nations, 2006 was the biggest opium harvest in history, smashing the previous record by 60 per cent. This year will be even bigger.

Our economic achievement in Afghanistan goes well beyond the simple production of raw opium. In fact Afghanistan no longer exports much raw opium at all. It has succeeded in what our international aid efforts urge every developing country to do. Afghanistan has gone into manufacturing and 'value-added' operations.

It now exports not opium, but heroin. Opium is converted into heroin on an industrial scale, not in kitchens but in factories. Millions of gallons of the chemicals needed for this process are shipped into Afghanistan by tanker. The tankers and bulk opium lorries on the way to the factories share the roads, improved by American aid, with Nato troops.

Murray doesn't go into detail about which US and UK officials and ultimately banks that launder the drug money might be benefiting from the drug trade, but he does give a helpful analogy of what happened to a Russian whistleblower on their part of the drug trade:

http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2010/03/who-profits-from-afghanistans-opium.html">The rest of the story...

http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2009/02/were-fighting-to-hold-afghanistan.html">More on our pipeline & poppies war