Re: virus: resolute in defense

Tue, 23 Feb 1999 12:54:48 -0800

joe dees wrote:

> As I previously stated, it is a strategy of defence, not attack (which is why the Vietnamese were able to rid themselves of us; they employed it). This is also why the US "War on Drug Users" fails. The US, in both instances, was/is attacking, not defending.

You think the Drug War is a failure?

The War on Some Drugs has been a smashing sucess in terms of demoralizing the black community, dismantling a lot of the gains of the civil rights movement, fomenting racial antipathy, creating a burgeoning prison population which is used by US corporations as virtual slave labor, weakening civil liberties, turning a supposedly free and liberal (ha!) press into a complicit partner in the government's propaganda campaign, and finding a new justification for a bloated military in the post-cold-war era by creating a new enemy out of thin air. It's only a failure if you believe that the intended goal is or ever was to reduce illicit drug use.

How should the besieged communities at whose doorstep the war is fought present a resolute defense? What means of defense would you advocate?