Quote Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
The War on Drugs uses the same rhetorical convention, I admit, but was always winnable if the correct target had been attacked. That is, of course, the market. In addition to a thorough explanation of the pitfalls of illegal drugs, were all third time users were imprisoned for life without parole -- no exceptions for stories/conditions'connections -- then the market would deteriorate. Attacking suppliers without curbing demand is stupidity -- all it does is enhance the profits for the suppliers. Alternatively, legalizing any such substances -- but penalizing harshly any resulting harm to others -- would probably be more efficient. Let the addicts weed themselves out.
Quite right; the war on Drug and Terrorism won't be won with rhetoric or half measures (narco-terrorism isn't a new phrase). Every nation needs to determine if it is in their national interest to combat such problems and to what extent. I know that sounds rather selfish, (wrong is wrong, right? Sometimes I don't like English ). The problem is, as you say, how do you define it?