Mr PVRds solution to the vexing Afghan problem....

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by MrPVRd, Jun 30, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. 1839-42: 16,000 British troops could not occupy Afghanistan.

    2006: 5,000 troops for UK-led ARRC in Afghanistan. 80


    1. There weren't enough troops to "police" Afghanistan during 1839-42.
    2. There aren't enough now.


    How much does it cost to fight the "wars" on terror and drugs? A lot. Instead of sending troops and dropping expensive bombs, give the Afghans subsidies. The withdrawl of subsidies directly contributed to the First Afghan War and the introduction of subsidies could prevent a new insurrection. It might be worth considering the purchase of opium direct from the farmers. The opium could be converted into medicinal products or destroyed, and the cost would be far less than equipping and deploying military power and paying for the crime and health costs created by the activities of domestic junkies.
  2. There is much mileage in what you say.

    If we paid more than the dealers are paying for the product market forces would take over and the price on the streets would either rocket or be out of the price range of many. The farmers would have a cash crop and if the purchase of opium was linked to the farmers having a % of their land to grow food or other legitimate farming we could slowly wean them off the reliance on the drugs trade and save us Bns of cash.

    But is that too simple?

    How would it play in the US at elections, “US pays farmers to grow drugs”?

    Could the US public understand the difference between the mailed fist and the gloved hand?
  3. Considering there was actually a shortage of a pharmacticial type of morphine last year .Think factory broke or something .might as well buy
    the bloody stuff off the farmers must be cheaper than the war on drugs .
    could always dump it on the spams and start a new opium war :)
  4. Or an Afghan version of "set aside" could be employed, where farmers are paid NOT to grow poppies. However I believe MrPVRd has a good idea...
  5. Excellent idea, although I'm not sure the spams would understand it, as others have mentioned. Also, there would still be a demand on the streets which would be met by other sources. However, if this were to be addressed simultaneously - by the provision of decent jobs, entertainment, etc., for the dispossessed - both supply and demand would be reduced. An expensive approach, perhaps, but who on these boards thinks that soldiers' lives are cheap?
  6. Better still, buy the opium at above market rate, refine it then give it away to addicts in the UK. This will at a stroke put drug dealers out of business - after all, why pay if it's free ? That scum only have power as they have money, so take it away. Also addicts won't need to mug grannies or nick your video to fund their habit so that'll improve life. Sure, a few may OD who wouldn't otherwise but frankly that's evolution in action.
  7. Touché, One. I realise my plan may be flawed. And pricey ;)
  8. Sounds a good idea in theory, but in practice...?

    As the current govt is so obsessed with PR, spin et al., I can't see it get off the ground- the government giving away drugs? :roll:
  9. And how long would it be before the farms were taken over by the drug cartels? Thus allowing dealers to again sell to the users who are now paying an inflated price for their habit.
    The addict can never afford hard drugs so it really doesnt matter what they cost, they will have them at any price, crime etc rises again.
  10. yes but if the addicts are getting smack from free from the nhs wheres the market.
    dealers are not going to target the uk with smack if theres no market for it
    crack maybe.
    but if smack heads are getting free smack they won't be going to dealers who at least down in london were offering free rocks of crack with every bag of smack as a loss leader :(
  11. I thought they got a substitute not the real thing on prescription.
  12. they get methadone harder to kick than smack when you decide to get off and not so popular with addicts
    conside the number of addicts I worked with had no problem thieving 3 to 4 hundred quid each day average maybe get knicked once a month no addict ever said damm I can't get any illegal drugs today ever
    I guess you can say the war on drugs has been lost big time
  13. I seem to remember that the varnish I used on my fingernails to stop me biting them tasted absolutely disgusting, my nails tasted better without it on, I still used it though as I wanted to kick the habit.

    Not exactly the same I know but it seems to me that most addicts are quite happy to be just that, addicted.
  14. It was suggested round our way (albeit in the pub one night) that the invasion of Afghanistan was never about pipelines, but drugs.
    The Krauts invented Methodone in case supplies of sufficient opiates were disrupted during wartime. Opiates are the basis for pretty much all pain-killers. These come from Afghanistan (to the tune of 90% of H sold in UK.) Thats a pretty dominant market share.

    Now if we know for a fact that there is a war on drugs, who is winning? Clearly not our Governments, it must be the Users!
    Ok, they win, they get free drugs....anything you like as long as its Heroin (which we buy from Afghan farmers to keep them out of trouble) Everybody wins. The Afghans become our little Gurkha-like police force against 'terror', Junkies give up theiving for drugs, governments save millions on police and the legal system and prisons. No more fighting in Afghanistan, the little violence-loving freaks can clear up whenever there is trouble, for us. Dont need sophistcated wpn systems (fought the Russians with rifles and RPGs) So both war and the demon of drugs demolished in oooh, about a year. And something like heaven dawns.

    Alright, what do you think, have a white-only concert stuffed with the coke-fuelled diseased-ego has-been 'superstars' of knicker-wetting 14 yr olds and 'abolish' poverty. Now who's the dreamer???
  15. This is actually a good idea. A morphine/ heroin addiction doesn't prevent a person from being able to work etc.. Back in the early 20th century there were a lot of doctors, who were morphine addicts, but since they had a legal supply of the stuff, they still could function in their profession.
    The problem arrived when the opiates became ilegal drugs, e.g. the addict couldn't just get himself a prescription and go to the chemist to get himself a vial. Now he was forced to buy from the mobsters, who demanded hugely infalted prices for stuff of dubious quality and ever changing concentrations (this means the addict is never sure what quality stuff he will get, so it is very easy to OD by accident, also the stuff doesn't qualify to hygienic standards). To meet the demands set by the gansters, the addicts had now often to raise several hundred dollars a day, which is almost impossible with a legal job, leading to crime committed by addicts.

    I would suggest to set up a government monopoly to manufacture and sell medical grade heroin or morphine to addicts on prescription. The prices would cover manufacture and distribution and would still be much cheaper than the black market prices.