Skip to content
Subscribe

Hawks Lost the War on Drugs -- Get Over It

Published:

While the news is focusing on the newly-elected Republican Congress wrangling with whether or not to overturn Washington, D.C.'s decriminalization of marijuana, the "War on Drugs" continues to be lost on all fronts.The

National Institute on Drug Abuse reports heroin use is on a dramatic rise since 2007,  with numbers reaching all-time highs. The cause of the problem: cheap street heroin due to a large market supply.

The sad reality, though, is that our War on Terror in Afghanistan is the sole cause of this glut of heroin.

For all the Taliban's faults, to their credit, they had almost completely eradicated the production of opium (the source of heroin) in Afghanistan prior to the American invasion. With NATO forces continuing to leave, opium production is at all-time highs with Afghanistan producing over 80 percent of the world's opium supply.

When we invaded Afghanistan in 2001, only 50,000 acres (78 sq. miles) of opium were grown in the entire country. In 2014, after 13 years of U.S. and NATO control, there are 22.5 million acres (35,156 sq. miles) of opium production -- almost 15 percent of the total landmass of Afghanistan!

What's worse, this is the number of acres cultivated AFTER the U.S. spent $7 billion trying to eradicate production.

How can they be doing this badly? It's not like they are hunting for a stray patch here and there; we're talking about 1 out of every 7 acres in the entire country under opium cultivation.

What is this money being spent on? If so much of the drug remains in production, how much did U.S. forces actually destroy? Something smells fishy.

If the full weight of our military in a country roughly the size of Texas can't stop 15 percent of the total land area from being used to cultivate opium, what makes us think that we can ever win the war on drugs at home?It's time for everyone to accept that the war on drugs is a lost cause.

I personally don't get it -- the Republicans are wholly against the "nanny state" except when they have to protect people from themselves by outlawing street drugs. Especially when studies have shown that most drug users are happy, successful people, and not poor criminals abusing the welfare system.

In general, every single state that has implemented drug testing for welfare recipients has experienced the same phenomenon -- they aren't finding very many drug addicts using welfare and it is costing the state more to test than it's worth.

It's time we change our attitudes on drugs. Winners will be winners, losers will be losers, regardless of their drugs of choice: alcohol, marijuana, and/or prescription or street drugs.

Photo Credit: vetkit / shutterstock.com

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

Hawks Lost the War on Drugs -- Get Over It

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us