Depends what you mean by 'We' I suppose. I'm guessing you know why the military are there but the other 'We' (FCO/DFIDetc) are supposed representing the UK as the lead nation on Anti-narcotics. Well at least we used to be, don't know whether we handed that little hot potato over to someone else who can actually do something

Well seeing as DfID and the FCO are about as much use as a fish on bicycle...

(My bold in your quote). You state that as if it's a done deal, whereas long-term observations in Switzerland and Holland prove exactly the opposite. It's thus logical to assume that much the same process would happen in the UK.

I also disagree that the incidence of HIV and hepatitis would radically increase. Needle and syringe swaps are very effective in that respect.

MsG

We do not have sufficient troops in place to do the fighting. To ensure that farmers do not grow poppies and to get in and destroy these would reduce the fighting capability. This monitoring would also soak up heli frames and hours

I seem to remember the FCO PUS visiting the embassy and out of all the problems that we faced out there what do you think was their No 1 priority ? The one message they wanted him to take back to the UK ?

Their swimming pool was not completed We (the military bods) were absolutely astounded.

MSR is bang on on this one: The British Army has used similar tactics in the past to defeat terrorists and with the right assets being deployed, could be done again:
'We' buy the Heroin from farmers in selected areas at a higher than market price in return for stationing troops in firebases in or near the farms to provide protection. The Talibs lose a source of income and the farmers get to earn a living whilst enjoying good security. As each area comes under our protection the Talibs are forced out further and further, all the while being harried and killed by our forces. Local population sees benefit of being on the side of the Brits/ NATO and, as has been said previously on this thread, after a while, we encourage/ pay the farmers to grow other crops/ use their land for other means (solar power/ whatever, it doesn't really matter).

We could call it something catchy... I know, hearts and minds! Bravo MSR

It's not my idea: www.poppyformedicine.net/

I've just been banging on about it for a long time.

I realise that as have I to anyone who will listen but, its good to see it on a thread and even better to see it on the BBC where it might, just might, gain enough support to get someone to take it seriously

It certainly sounds doable on that basis. The problems could conceivably start due to a lack of manpower. I doubt very much that you could carry out the process effectively with fewer than about 100,000 bods. And that's just for Helmand province.

That would mean getting the Septics to sign up to the deal. And we all know what they're like with dope.

MsG

Inject them with the product first! SORTED!

So if we had prohibition it would work? I thought you'd already argued that it wouldn't and I agreed with you. Sorry I think you may have got your wires crossed a bit - or I have.

If we have prohibition I would imagine that there would be few if any needle and sryinge exchanges and where this happens people use dirty needles and share them.

I can see where this went a bit awry now. My apologies for the misunderstanding, mucker, I made a right bollix of explaining that.

I disagree completely with prohibition. It doesn’t work and neither does any “War on Drugs”. My references to Switzerland and Holland were in the context of both these countries allowing free access to smack, and the consequent fall in the incidence of its use and the number of addicts. Both countries also have comprehensive syringe and needle exchange programmes.

There’s no reason to suppose that the UK would be any different. There have been many statements made on the subject of making drugs legal and also maintaining their illegality. I, personally, believe that they should be legalised. Those who’re against legalisation invariably categorically state that things would be much worse based on nothing more than something they’ve heard or read. The positive experiences recorded in Switzerland and Holland on a long-term basis suggest that this wouldn't be the case.

MsG

I guess going back to victorian times when you could buy Morphine from the grocers whatever laws must have been changed as it became a problem. I can't imagine the problems are the same as what we have now though and the massive cost to the tax-payer for either treating these people or locking them up. I wonder how many people would ever inject if they could go and buy morphine from the chemist?
If people used morphine and it was readily available would people use heroin at all? I imagine they may just use more Morphine and get constipated.
We have a lot of people addicted to over the counter preparations (and prescribed) Codeine products, they may also do less harm to their bodies if they didn't have to consume massive amounts of paracetamol/ibuprofen.

I tend to vary on my thoughts about legalising such drugs today I think it's an excellent idea and i'd be able to go and look after mentally ill people again or in palliative care. Tommorrow I might worry that we might have very naive people starting to take opiates and die through lack of tolerance.

I fear we have moved a bit from the topic but it's all related, what we do here effects what happens in Afghanistan.

Today I saw a 17yr old girl who has been using Heroin for two years and for all the people who would like to kill addicts it could happen to anyones child. This girls parents don't know, she's got all her life ahead of her and is due to start college. I don't think killing her is a good option. This girl has been on Methadone for two weeks and only used Heroin once over the weekend due to mixing with friends her age and younger who had got heroin.

f it was a nephew or neice of mine i'd want to help them not make things worse.

It was mentioned earlier that some ex-forces peope use drugs, we know it's true and I have a few such patients. I cannot condemn someone for 'self-medicating' under some circumstances, when we see many people let down by the powers that be.

I'm sorry, but excusing junkies because they are ex-soldiers is an insult to the vast majority of ex-squaddies who DON'T chase the dragon.

I guaruntee you that for every vetran who takes drugs to help him deal with what he has been through, there will be many others who find far less distructive methods of coping.

The effects of heroin have been well known for at least a generation. I'm afraid I have no sympathy at all for those who are stupid enough to indulge in it. A junkie who OD's or dies from HIV etc is a perfect example of Darwinism in action.

I don't think i've really excused anything more offerring an opinion and treatment without being judgemental. I don't see how I insulted anyone, we have had recent threads on the number of ex-forces who have spent time in prison, should we deny them help?
A person who overdoses or dies from HIV leaves behind a family and i'm sure many site members have families.

Let’s be clear about this. Drugs are only still illegal because they were once banned and no gobment wants to "lose face", or admit it got things wrong by repealing prohibition. This, of course, throws up the question: why were these drugs banned? In a word? Christianity! Of the fire and brimstone variety! It was carried out by those miserable folks who get pimples all over their grids, cramps in their calves and internal bleeding at the mere thought of others actually getting a bit of fun out of life. They like to call themselves "god-fearing", which in itself is a very revealing description. Why would you fear god?

Prohibition of drugs (or even booze) never had anything at all to do with maintaining the health of the population and everything to do with conserving the waning power of the Christian church. Well now we’re much more educated and enlightened, so the thing to do is to leave such decisions to us in future. That’s assuming that gobments are mature enough to actually repeal all these nonsensical laws and return to us the personal responsibility that’s ours by birthright.

Even if drugs were legalised, there are bound to be a few folks here and there who succumb to them. But it's like cars on the road. We’re prepared to accept thousands of folks killed and maimed on the roads every year in return for the mobility cars give us. All it needs is a realistic programme explaining in detail what different drugs do so that folks can make up their own minds about them.
I’m always surprised at the lack of knowledge of some who maintain that they “know all about drugs”.

I've been around drugs for something like 45 years. I've made them, flogged them and also taken them. I've also seen what they can and can’t do. That’s why I say that all drugs should be removed from any sort of legislation.

MsG