The Drug Free Families Act of 2008

[buckthesystem]

Okay, but drugs is still a noun?

Yep....

So okay...

WHAT am I missing?

So Not!

I meant "taking drugs" which would be a verb, i.e. "taking" = verb (although strictly speaking "drugs" or "drug" is a noun".

[buckthesystem]

Okay, but drugs is still a noun?

Although to be exact, the word "drugs" is a noun. What would be the point of making war on drugs themselves? We need drugs as some of them are actually beneficial. If there really was a "war on drugs", there would be soldiers and police out destroying drugs all the time, and society would be in chaos with sick people having no drugs to take.

Strictly speaking, what Axxman was referring to was "the war on (the taking, manufacture and trading of illegal) drugs". which is a verb.

[Axxman]

We don't have to make drugs disappear to win the war.

I'm curious. How would you win the war on drugs without making them disappear?

And please don't say education.

The same way we won World War 2 without making evil disappear. Overwhelming force and resolve. But...as I already pointed out...I don't think this country has that type of resolve anymore. In WW2 the Allied forces sacrificed over 50 million lives to win that war. The casualties in Iraq are 0.00813% of what they were in WW2 and half the country wants to quit! Winning the war on drugs would probably require a higher death count than the Iraq war...so I'm sure that most Americans don't have the stomach for defeating evil anymore.

[Guest man]

We don't have to make drugs disappear to win the war.

I'm curious. How would you win the war on drugs without making them disappear?

And please don't say education.

The same way we won World War 2 without making evil disappear. Overwhelming force and resolve. But...as I already pointed out...I don't think this country has that type of resolve anymore. In WW2 the Allied forces sacrificed over 50 million lives to win that war. The casualties in Iraq are 0.00813% of what they were in WW2 and half the country wants to quit! Winning the war on drugs would probably require a higher death count than the Iraq war...so I'm sure that most Americans don't have the stomach for defeating evil anymore.

So you're talking about going in and blowing people away.

Who would be the targets? The users or suppliers?

And lets just say that everyone you felt had to die, was killed. Then what?

You still have the source of the addictions. The drugs themselves. There's always someone out there that's gonna want to get high. How do make that go away?

[buckthesystem]

We don't have to make drugs disappear to win the war.

I'm curious. How would you win the war on drugs without making them disappear?

And please don't say education.

The same way we won World War 2 without making evil disappear. Overwhelming force and resolve. But...as I already pointed out...I don't think this country has that type of resolve anymore. In WW2 the Allied forces sacrificed over 50 million lives to win that war. The casualties in Iraq are 0.00813% of what they were in WW2 and half the country wants to quit! Winning the war on drugs would probably require a higher death count than the Iraq war...so I'm sure that most Americans don't have the stomach for defeating evil anymore.

So you're actually talking about making war on PEOPLE, people who are SUSPECTED of being involved in the illegal supply or taking of drugs, and KILLING them ("... a higher death count ....")?

[Guest man]

We don't have to make drugs disappear to win the war.

I'm curious. How would you win the war on drugs without making them disappear?

And please don't say education.

The same way we won World War 2 without making evil disappear. Overwhelming force and resolve. But...as I already pointed out...I don't think this country has that type of resolve anymore. In WW2 the Allied forces sacrificed over 50 million lives to win that war. The casualties in Iraq are 0.00813% of what they were in WW2 and half the country wants to quit! Winning the war on drugs would probably require a higher death count than the Iraq war...so I'm sure that most Americans don't have the stomach for defeating evil anymore.

So you're actually talking about making war on PEOPLE, people who are SUSPECTED of being involved in the illegal supply or taking of drugs, and KILLING them ("... a higher death count ....")?

Isn't it strange how some peoples minds work?

[Axxman]

So you're actually talking about making war on PEOPLE, people who are SUSPECTED of being involved in the illegal supply or taking of drugs, and KILLING them ("... a higher death count ....")?

NO! I've never said make war on people...I said "war on drugs." Getting people off of drugs, making them quit, is actually GOOD for people. We make wars against ideologies...not people. The war against communism was to free people from an ideology...and yet it required that people pay a price. We didn't fight against Germany because we hated Germans...we fought to save people from flawed thinking. We don't fight against drugs because we hate people...we want to save them from a destructive thought process. Now, in fighting those wars people died. It is an unfortunate side effect of fighting for the right thing. The reason we are losing the war on drugs is because we are trying to fight it with kid gloves. We want to win, but we don't want anybody to get hurt. Well sorry, but history has shown again and again..winning wars requires sacrifice.

Sometimes it takes an "atomic bomb" (or two) to turn the tide of a war. Taking drugs should be akin to playing Russian Roulette. If you put a gun, with a bullet in it, to your head and pull the trigger then you should be ready to die...so it should be for those who choose to take drugs.

[Guest man]

Sometimes it takes an "atomic bomb" (or two) to turn the tide of a war. Taking drugs should be akin to playing Russian Roulette. If you put a gun, with a bullet in it, to your head and pull the trigger then you should be ready to die...so it should be for those who choose to take drugs.

Killing the drug user is the way to win the war on drugs.

Who would've thought?

[Axxman]

Sometimes it takes an "atomic bomb" (or two) to turn the tide of a war. Taking drugs should be akin to playing Russian Roulette. If you put a gun, with a bullet in it, to your head and pull the trigger then you should be ready to die...so it should be for those who choose to take drugs.

Killing the drug user is the way to win the war on drugs.

Who would've thought?

Again...your emphasis is all wrong. Kill the drug...not the person. Nobody plays Russian Roulette with a loaded gun. Well, when it comes to drugs we need to load the gun.

Did you know that Osama bin Laden wanted to poison the US cocaine supply? For some reason he thought that would make America weaker. However...the cocaine distributers wouldn't go for it. Guess why? People won't take drugs if they know they will die from it...and the ones that are stupid enough to take it anyway are not repeat customers. Even drug cartels know that ruining the drug supply would work.

[Guest man]

Kill the drug...not the person.

Explain to me how that's done.