The Pentagon has traditionally played a major role in monitoring U.S. borders and assisting the Coast Guard in intercepting drug shipments, but the burden of Iraq has forced the military to scale back its efforts, opening holes for drug smugglers to exploit.
Los Angeles Times
Internal records show that in the last four years the Pentagon has reduced by more than 62% its surveillance flight-hours over Caribbean and Pacific Ocean routes that are used to smuggle cocaine, marijuana and, increasingly, Colombian-produced heroin. At the same time, the Navy is deploying one-third fewer patrol boats in search of smugglers.
The Defense Department also plans to withdraw as many as 10 Black Hawk helicopters that have been used by a multi-agency task force to move quickly to make drug seizures and arrests in the Caribbean, a major hub for drugs heading to the United States.
And the military has deactivated many of the high-tech surveillance “aerostats,” or radar balloons, that once guarded the entire southern border, saying it lacks the funds to restore and maintain them.
The Department of Defense defended its policy shift in a budget document sent to Congress in October: “The DOD position is that detecting drug trafficking is a lower priority than supporting our service members on ongoing combat missions.”
Members of Congress and drug-control officials have said the Pentagon’s cuts and redeployments have hamstrung the U.S. drug interdiction effort at a time when an estimated 1,000 metric tons of inexpensive, high-quality cocaine is entering the country each year.
If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.
By NeoCon, January 23, 2007 at 12:41 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
“Eliminate them, and there will be no more drug related crime”
Yeah, right. You let us know when this extremist policy finally pays off for China…
By felicity, January 23, 2007 at 9:30 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
This is going to make big Pharma plenty irate. They’ve been the major force for years in support of nice, cheap and often home-grown drugs to be made illegal - wipe out the competition is the name of the corporate game.
Far out thought but maybe they’ll be a force in pressuring the madman in the WH to get the hell out of Iraq and get the hell back to protecting their profits. Afterall, big Pharma got us Medicare Part D - a giant giveaway to them and no small feat getting passed. Besides, they’re money machines and the candidates for the ‘08 election are going to need $500,000,000.00 EACH to fund their runs. Not a good idea to piss off big Pharma.
By Boggs, January 23, 2007 at 7:29 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
There is no war on drugs. There was always a lot of money to fight a war on drugs which dissappeared down some rathole while the drugs flourished.
Right now, this administration is fully backing the drug runners from Mexico. They put border patrols in the pen while they protect the drug runner.
Is there an incentive for our government to harbor and protect drug runners??? Hmmmm.
By Chiang Zhi, January 23, 2007 at 7:21 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Americas illegal narcotics users finance this drug traffic and the murderous cartels, street gangs, and terrorist organizations that profit from it. Users are the problem. Eliminate them, and there will be no more drug related crime or any need for a war on drugs.
Forget expensive jail time or rehab for hard-core drug users. China had the right approach with a bullet to the head and a bill sent to the family.
By DennisD, January 22, 2007 at 8:59 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Chalk up another lost war for Bu$h. No one can say he hasn’t been consistent. Even a blind squirrel is supposed to be able to find an acorn once in awhile. I’m not so sure anymore.
By george S Semsel, January 22, 2007 at 7:03 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
The so-called war on drugs is obviously a hoax at taxpayer expense. If a country can brazenly and arrogantly destroy any other country in the world, it is difficult to believe it cannot bring drugs under control around and within its own borders. Someone is turning a buck somewhere along the line.
By Rodney Matthews, January 22, 2007 at 3:20 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
If they can smuggle in drugs to get us high, They can smuggle in weapons to kill us. The war in Iraq has diverted much of our resources that should be devoted to protecting us at home. The big lie about fighting them there so we don’t fight them here is a Bush scare tactic. You can’t fight a suicide bomber that’s going to kill himself, How about securing the borders so he doesn’t in. 100,000 foreign Al-Quaeda troops don’t have the equiptment to take over our country.
Does Anything Change in Los Angeles With Election of New Mayor?
 . '/' . substr('9783981484205',-6,3) . '/' . '9783981484205' . '.jpg'; ?>)
Email 
Print
Share
Email to a friend
Newsletter 
Like Us
Follow Us
Get Our Feed
By NeoCon, January 23, 2007 at 12:41 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
“Eliminate them, and there will be no more drug related crime”
Yeah, right. You let us know when this extremist policy finally pays off for China…
You can not stop a garden from growing weeds.
Report thisBy anonymous, January 23, 2007 at 10:27 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
two uses of troops that demonstrate we have too many troops
Report thisBy felicity, January 23, 2007 at 9:30 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
This is going to make big Pharma plenty irate. They’ve been the major force for years in support of nice, cheap and often home-grown drugs to be made illegal - wipe out the competition is the name of the corporate game.
Far out thought but maybe they’ll be a force in pressuring the madman in the WH to get the hell out of Iraq and get the hell back to protecting their profits. Afterall, big Pharma got us Medicare Part D - a giant giveaway to them and no small feat getting passed. Besides, they’re money machines and the candidates for the ‘08 election are going to need $500,000,000.00 EACH to fund their runs. Not a good idea to piss off big Pharma.
Report thisBy Boggs, January 23, 2007 at 7:29 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
There is no war on drugs. There was always a lot of money to fight a war on drugs which dissappeared down some rathole while the drugs flourished.
Report thisRight now, this administration is fully backing the drug runners from Mexico. They put border patrols in the pen while they protect the drug runner.
Is there an incentive for our government to harbor and protect drug runners??? Hmmmm.
By Chiang Zhi, January 23, 2007 at 7:21 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Americas illegal narcotics users finance this drug traffic and the murderous cartels, street gangs, and terrorist organizations that profit from it. Users are the problem. Eliminate them, and there will be no more drug related crime or any need for a war on drugs.
Forget expensive jail time or rehab for hard-core drug users. China had the right approach with a bullet to the head and a bill sent to the family.
Report thisBy DennisD, January 22, 2007 at 8:59 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Chalk up another lost war for Bu$h. No one can say he hasn’t been consistent. Even a blind squirrel is supposed to be able to find an acorn once in awhile. I’m not so sure anymore.
Report thisBy george S Semsel, January 22, 2007 at 7:03 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
The so-called war on drugs is obviously a hoax at taxpayer expense. If a country can brazenly and arrogantly destroy any other country in the world, it is difficult to believe it cannot bring drugs under control around and within its own borders. Someone is turning a buck somewhere along the line.
Report thisBy Rodney Matthews, January 22, 2007 at 3:20 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
If they can smuggle in drugs to get us high, They can smuggle in weapons to kill us. The war in Iraq has diverted much of our resources that should be devoted to protecting us at home. The big lie about fighting them there so we don’t fight them here is a Bush scare tactic. You can’t fight a suicide bomber that’s going to kill himself, How about securing the borders so he doesn’t in. 100,000 foreign Al-Quaeda troops don’t have the equiptment to take over our country.
Report this