The Fentanyl Crisis is finally solved....

[Markk]

Scratch: Oh, yeah? How? They can just stroll over to the local branch of the bank and seize the cartel's assets? Is that how it works?

These explain it well, at least well enough in my opinion. By Trump designating them terrorists, the FTO, and SDGT come into effect, as explained below.

https://www.paulhastings.com/insights/c ... nstitution.

https://tennesseestar.com/news/u-s-set- ... 025/02/20/

Scratch: That's one way of looking at it. But my recollection is that he already served an entire 4-year term as president where his main claim was that he was going to build a "big, beautiful wall" all along the entire US/Mexico border, and that he was going to "force" Mexico to pay for it. But that never happened, did it? And he had 4 whole years to get it done.

I think he did pretty well considering Covid and being impeached twice on trumped up non-sense. Scratch, we will see, if he fails, I will certainly be sad, and not for his failing personally, but because I believe we have a mess and we need to clean it up.

So what's your timeline this go-around? 2 years to get the border locked down and the fentanyl crisis under control? 3 years?

LOl, this is not my plan, it is our Presidents, yours and mine. I have not idea just how effective it will be or how long it will take. But what I do know we are doing something instead of just doing nothing making it worse, and in Bidens case, again our President, he helped it get worse.

Scratch: That's really my only point here: you won't ask these same types of skeptical questions about your own guy's proposals.

Why are you so butthurt that I asked questions about Gads plan. I field questions about Trump from multiple people here all the time. I get he is a narcissistic a-hole. He was a billionaire man whore, and that he manipulated the system to gain wealth. Scratch, It's not like we have multiple choices for President scratch....do you really think that either Biden or Harris could manage the mess we are in? Neither could even communicate without a script to us. They were pawns, and for who knows who.

Trump is going to screw up plenty, every president does. But hopefully he will do some very good things....right or wrong I believe we have a chance with him.

Honest question, who was running our country as President the last two or three years under Biden?

[Markk]

I will do nothing, other than support those I believe are moving forward.

Exactly my point. And you will offer that support devoid of any skepticism or question-asking.

Scratch, you do realize that they are in our Urban Areas, big time.

Indeed! It sure will be interesting to see how all those troops along the border are going to address this problem.

Lol....Scratch, I have answered all your questions and addressed the same ones over and over here.

You believe troops on the border will be moving to urban areas? Please expound on that one. You guys have like one or two talking point answers, and that is pretty much it. And in my opinion a big reason why the left lost. It is easy to criticize and do nothing, which is what happened in the last four years. Identity politics might be a plan, but not one that will last.

[Gadianton]

Doctor Scratch; quite a surprise to see you pop up in this thread. I'm a bit embarrassed, to be honest. Well, to your first point about the context of the disagreement, I think I should point a couple things out. If I knew elite faculty members were reading perhaps I'd have been less reckless.

So, if Trump himself or another authoritarian right-wing leader were to announce that the US government had infiltrated the cartel inside our borders and were taking over their supply lines, and we're getting close to moving into a phase of tossing all the drug addicts into FEMA camps, right-wing media from Tucker Carlson to the average Rumble tuber would be in such a state of perpetual orgasming that it might be several days before any of them could broadcast their reactions over the Internet. I mean, my plan is project 2025 on steroids. The Trump pastors calling for a monarchy and a return to Levitical law would have tears in their eyes over the civil rights violations of this plan.

You would think my interlocutor would see that I'm basically talking his own language from start to finish. Yet, virtually every sentence I've written has been rejected as utter hogwash and an example of several different logical fallacies. It's perplexing in two ways. The first is that the plan is very much in line with the ideals and tactics of his party, and the second is that most of his rebuttals to my plan would naturally be rebuttals to Trump's plan. For instance, any and all criticisms suggesting that Fentanyl users simply can't be cured because the addiction runs too deep, and they will always be able to drum up another supplier; the same would hold true in Trump's plan, in fact it's much worse as he has zero initiatives tackling demand at all.

Infiltrating the cartel within our own border is in principle unthinkably impossible, yet it makes tons of sense to march our military throughout all of Mexico and South America to shut down every last Cartel hideout.

You did ask good questions regarding the logistics of Trump's plan. That's where I drew the final line. Even though I'd mentioned FEMA several times, I got goaded with questions about the large number of tents that would be required, and pics of tents were posted to show how dumb I was being. When I finally responding noting the staggering capacity of FEMA, he went into a fluster but-but-okay FEMA is impressive for some things, but how specifically can you make it work in your plan!? Have you considered every line item down the the last folding chair!? How are you going to get congress to authorize the money for it?!

Interestingly, there were some obvious contradictions in my arguments that were free for the taking but never considered. One of those was that on another thread, I mentioned Fentanyl as a synthetic drug could easily be produced in garages in the US; it's not like harvesting cocoa in the tropics. And so if that's an argument against Trump's plan, it's also valid against my plan.

But anyway, as I've said, this is basically a right-wing fascist solution; so was I just being facetious? No, I'm totally serious. So here's where I'm coming from. I've been having a lot of second thoughts about the efficacy of democracy lately. I've noted those on this board. I'd also been reading about China shutting down the Opium trade long ago, and success is generally credited to the CCP's authoritarianism. So here we are, descending into a dictatorship, is it worth considering how to make the best of it? China is pretty evil no doubt, but at the same time, they have a broadly mature vision of transitioning into the future. There are certain things like climate change and easy drug use that will (in my view) never be resolved by democratic capitalism. So when my interlocutor brought the subject up, I figured okay, how could we more effectively use the tools of authoritarianism to tackle a legit problem?

I'm pretty sure it's all how I sold it as an alternative to what Trump is doing. Had I registered a pro-Trump sock-puppet I'll bet I could have got a better reaction to the same plan.

[canpakes]

(Trump) is doing more like designating the cartel as a terrorist organization.

But did he get them matching vests and name tags?

… if he fails, I will certainly be sad, and not for his failing personally, …

Of course. Trump is never at fault for his decisions.

[Markk]

Doctor Scratch; quite a surprise to see you pop up in this thread. I'm a bit embarrassed, to be honest. Well, to your first point about the context of the disagreement, I think I should point a couple things out. If I knew elite faculty members were reading perhaps I'd have been less reckless.

So, if Trump himself or another authoritarian right-wing leader were to announce that the US government had infiltrated the cartel inside our borders and were taking over their supply lines, and we're getting close to moving into a phase of tossing all the drug addicts into FEMA camps, right-wing media from Tucker Carlson to the average Rumble tuber would be in such a state of perpetual orgasming that it might be several days before any of them could broadcast their reactions over the Internet. I mean, my plan is project 2025 on steroids. The Trump pastors calling for a monarchy and a return to Levitical law would have tears in their eyes over the civil rights violations of this plan.

You would think my interlocutor would see that I'm basically talking his own language from start to finish. Yet, virtually every sentence I've written has been rejected as utter hogwash and an example of several different logical fallacies. It's perplexing in two ways. The first is that the plan is very much in line with the ideals and tactics of his party, and the second is that most of his rebuttals to my plan would naturally be rebuttals to Trump's plan. For instance, any and all criticisms suggesting that Fentanyl users simply can't be cured because the addiction runs too deep, and they will always be able to drum up another supplier; the same would hold true in Trump's plan, in fact it's much worse as he has zero initiatives tackling demand at all.

Infiltrating the cartel within our own border is in principle unthinkably impossible, yet it makes tons of sense to march our military throughout all of Mexico and South America to shut down every last Cartel hideout.

You did ask good questions regarding the logistics of Trump's plan. That's where I drew the final line. Even though I'd mentioned FEMA several times, I got goaded with questions about the large number of tents that would be required, and pics of tents were posted to show how dumb I was being. When I finally responding noting the staggering capacity of FEMA, he went into a fluster but-but-okay FEMA is impressive for some things, but how specifically can you make it work in your plan!? Have you considered every line item down the the last folding chair!? How are you going to get congress to authorize the money for it?!

But anyway, as I've said, this is basically a right-wing fascist solution; so was I just being facetious? No, I'm totally serious. So here's where I'm coming from. I've been having a lot of second thoughts about the efficacy of democracy lately. I've noted those on this board. I'd also been reading about China shutting down the Opium trade long ago, and success is generally credited to the CCP's authoritarianism. So here we are, descending into a dictatorship, is it worth considering how to make the best of it? China is pretty evil no doubt, but at the same time, they have a broadly mature vision of transitioning into the future. There are certain things like climate change and easy drug use that will (in my view) never be resolved by democratic capitalism. So when my interlocutor brought the subject up, I figured okay, how could we more effectively use the tools of authoritarianism to tackle a legit problem?

I'm pretty sure it's all how I sold it as an alternative to what Trump is doing. Had I registered a pro-Trump sock-puppet I'll bet I could have got a better reaction to the same plan.

Lol, Gad....even scratch at first thought your plan was a fantasy, which I do give him credit for being correct on at least that one. And I give him credit for trying to protect you, he is your friend.

In regard to using FEMA camps, my questions remain on how you would adjust these camps designed to house folks mostly in case of an emergency into tiered detention camps for the different levels of chronically addicted drug addicts all across the country, and have it ready in a few short years.

You guys crack me up in that in your mind you are some kind of elite intellectuals that are above reproach here. Just being here on a site like this believing that, shows how untrue that is. Also, I believe that the evidence here that folks thought you were kidding, or as Scratch thought, you are promoting a plan that is a fantasy..... says it all, and I would also be embarrassed, big time. I have said some dumb crap here like all of us do, but your plan here may take the cake. Your hatred for Trump, Conservatives, and Christians forced you to take a ride in the stupid bus. I would double down on it any more.

[Marcus]

You guys crack me up in that in your mind you are some kind of elite intellectuals that are above reproach here. Just being here on a site like this believing that, shows how untrue that is. ... take a ride in the stupid bus...

You guys?? And you're here because...? Pronouncements like this are always fascinating. There are no mirrors on Markk's "stupid bus", apparently.

[Markk]

You guys crack me up in that in your mind you are some kind of elite intellectuals that are above reproach here. Just being here on a site like this believing that, shows how untrue that is. ... take a ride in the stupid bus...

You guys?? And you're here because...? Pronouncements like this are always fascinating. There are no mirrors on Markk's "stupid bus", apparently.

Marcus this goes back to the beginnings of this board, where "these guys".....Gad, Scratch and a few others appointed themselves as some sort of elite intellectuals of an imaginary university. It was funny at first, but Gad and these few others started to actually believe it, and it became an identity for a few of them and they imagine themselves as elites here. The more you talk with these guys, the clearer it becomes they are dumb craps just like the rest of us.

I have no issues here saying I take rides on that stupid bus, we all do, and on this one Gad's ride has been a long one. Lol. you even thought he was joking with his plan, and were pushed onto the bus at not fault of your own.

[Marcus]

You guys?? And you're here because...? Pronouncements like this are always fascinating. There are no mirrors on Markk's "stupid bus", apparently.

Marcus this goes back to the beginnings of this board, where "these guys".....Gad, Scratch and a few others appointed themselves as some sort of elite intellectuals of an imaginary university. It was funny at first, but Gad and these few others started to actually believe it, and it became an identity for a few of them and they imagine themselves as elites here. The more you talk with these guys, the clearer it becomes they are dumb craps just like the rest of us.

I have no issues here saying I take rides on that stupid bus, we all do, and on this one Gad's ride has been a long one. Lol. you even thought he was joking with his plan, and were pushed onto the bus at not fault of your own.

Sounds like you are the one who fell for something.

[Gadianton]

Wow, elitist? Driver of a stupid bus?

I don't think those insults are warranted. I was hardly elitist, submitting myself to Markk's rapid-fire questions without being insulting. Markk took the position of an inquisitor, demanding lots of answers. I wrote fairly long answers as if I owed the answers to him; and he certainly received them that way, though I was constantly accused of avoiding questions.

At the very first, Markk's questions were fine; decent questions but he quickly went over the rails, becoming frustrated and really letting me have it. I felt like he was looking to find fault quickly and be done with it rather than understand my position.

The transition came at the point where Markk asked me what would prevent the cartel from simply copying my formula for Fentanyl, which would take away my advantage. It was, let's face it, a question that revealed great lack of understanding. I tried to be cordial about it, explaining that it's not the formula, but that you'll never get Pfizer's precision from a network of loosely connected garage operations in Mexico (We're talking about a drug measured in micrograms. Which, by the way, Markk repeatedly misrepresented as Milligrams, and I let that go). But that really triggered him. He (intentionally?) missed the point of the response, and came right at me for daring to suggest that the cartel was producing tiny amounts of Fentanyl. How on earth did he get that out of my response? At that point, I should have bowed out. But I continued and tried my best to answer his increasingly demanding and berating, and illogical questions.

[Doctor Scratch]

I admit I was surprised as well, Dr. Robbers. Mark immediately began crowing with glee about the “absurdity” of a purely hypothetical plan. I mean, unless you actually are running for office, and stand a chance of being elected to the presidency, actually *get* elected, and then somehow have practically omnipotent dictatorial powers, then it’s unclear why he would think that your plan deserves the same level of scrutiny as the one currently being out in place by the guy he helped to elect. He declares that the completely hypothetical approach to the fentanyl issue somehow seems like the “stupid bus,” and yet when he is presented with the actual, current president’s actual, real approach —I.e., sending troops to the border, he begins frantically backpedaling and making excuses: “It’s only been a coupla months! Give him more time!” (The previous term apparently doesn’t count.) He also says he expects there to be many flaws in Trump’s plan, and that Trump will make mistakes. How, one wonders, will all those troops at the border really wind up helping the addicts in West Virginia coal country, or in the alleys of downtown Portland?

Gee: maybe that’s what you should have said at the outset? “There will be flaws in this plan, and I’ll make mistakes”?