Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman the leader of the Sinaloa Cartel in Mexico has escaped from a Mexican maximum security prison, but this isn't the first time. After his capture in Guatemala in 1993 he escaped from custody in 2001 after being sent to Mexico. Reports say 'El Chapo" can control his empire; which has been reported as far as Australia and Europe, from outside of prison. What does this mean for the relations between the US and Mexico. Guzman is currently charged with numerous drug trafficking and organized crime charges in both Mexico and the US. With the Sinaloa Cartel already taken over 100k lives what does this mean for the public in Mexico. Guzman is reported to have a hand in the political corruption in Mexico.

 

Tell me how you feel about this below. Also post where your from and what crime is like their and the measures taken to prevent it.

For god sake... AGAIN...

That's awful, he is one sneaky criminal. I'm from Canada, and I guess youcould say it is average. It depends on the area. There are many immigrant gangs in the cities, that an be quite notorious. Of course we have police as well. Our police structure is somewhat different to America's though. first, there are the provincial sheriffs. Then the RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) which have detachments in the more rural communities (Or any community that does not have there own police force.) Then the bigger cities have there own police department. Also, in Canada, we have CSIS (Canadian Security Intelligence Service) which is kinda like the CIA. And the Border people.

For god sake... AGAIN...

Apparently he opened a trap door? That escape must have been aided by prison officials.

That's awful, he is one sneaky criminal. I'm from Canada, and I guess youcould say it is average. It depends on the area. There are many immigrant gangs in the cities, that an be quite notorious. Of course we have police as well. Our police structure is somewhat different to America's though. first, there are the provincial sheriffs. Then the RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) which have detachments in the more rural communities (Or any community that does not have there own police force.) Then the bigger cities have there own police department. Also, in Canada, we have CSIS (Canadian Security Intelligence Service) which is kinda like the CIA. And the Border people.

Apparently he opened a trap door? That escape must have been aided by prison officials.

more corrupt prison guards? not sure if that is the best word but whatever 

Apparently he opened a trap door? That escape must have been aided by prison officials.

I think I read from news reports he escaped by a 1.5km tunnel out?

Execution is probably the best option here.

The police in Mexico are corrupt. Even a "maximum security prison" wasn't able to contain him.

Instead of sticking its nose where it shouldn't, for example in the Middle East, USA (or as they call themselves "the world police") should help their fellow neighbours Mexico with the army fighting corruption and gang wars related to drug cartels.

Not only would that benefit USA, as Mexicans wouldn't immigrate so often to the country (legally but specially illegally, and that would shut Donald Trump up) but also because it would help Mexico as the country would be safer and people would have a better life etc.

But then again, there's no interest from the USA to do that... they rather go ruin people's lives in the Middle East.

If you want to reply to my comment, please do so without hate. I'm just stating my opinion.

Instead of sticking its nose where it shouldn't, for example in the Middle East, USA (or as they call themselves "the world police") should help their fellow neighbours Mexico with the army fighting corruption and gang wars related to drug cartels.

Not only would that benefit USA, as Mexicans wouldn't immigrate so often to the country (legally but specially illegally, and that would shut Donald Trump up) but also because it would help Mexico as the country would be safer and people would have a better life etc.

But then again, there's no interest from the USA to do that... they rather go ruin people's lives in the Middle East.

If you want to reply to my comment, please do so without hate. I'm just stating my opinion.

I do agree with this. Not to say that the USA, with there extensive military shouldn't help with global efforts, they should help there neighbours. However, I can't help but think, what if the president of Mexico is just putting on a show? he wants to reassure everyone he is a good guy, but he is corrupt? Who knows, I sure hope not. Maybe the pres wanted to do this whole act, arrest Shorty, throw him in prison, then he "mysteriously" escapes. I don't know, just speculation.

Instead of sticking its nose where it shouldn't, for example in the Middle East, USA (or as they call themselves "the world police") should help their fellow neighbours Mexico with the army fighting corruption and gang wars related to drug cartels.

Not only would that benefit USA, as Mexicans wouldn't immigrate so often to the country (legally but specially illegally, and that would shut Donald Trump up) but also because it would help Mexico as the country would be safer and people would have a better life etc.

But then again, there's no interest from the USA to do that... they rather go ruin people's lives in the Middle East.

If you want to reply to my comment, please do so without hate. I'm just stating my opinion.

I do agree with this. Not to say that the USA, with there extensive military shouldn't help with global efforts, they should help there neighbours. However, I can't help but think, what if the president of Mexico is just putting on a show? he wants to reassure everyone he is a good guy, but he is corrupt? Who knows, I sure hope not. Maybe the pres wanted to do this whole act, arrest Shorty, throw him in prison, then he "mysteriously" escapes. I don't know, just speculation.

Mexico's war on drugs has killed hundreds of thousands of people. Carrying on with a war against drug cartels isn't going stop anything. Decriminalization and legalization is the answer. The impact of marijuana legalization efforts alone has taken millions, if not billions from the cartels. 

Instead of sticking its nose where it shouldn't, for example in the Middle East, USA (or as they call themselves "the world police") should help their fellow neighbours Mexico with the army fighting corruption and gang wars related to drug cartels.

Not only would that benefit USA, as Mexicans wouldn't immigrate so often to the country (legally but specially illegally, and that would shut Donald Trump up) but also because it would help Mexico as the country would be safer and people would have a better life etc.

But then again, there's no interest from the USA to do that... they rather go ruin people's lives in the Middle East.

If you want to reply to my comment, please do so without hate. I'm just stating my opinion.

A few corrections to your post:

We don't consider ourselves the world police, it's a name that the world has given us; since we supposedly try to act like the world's police. It isn't a self-acclaimed title, and most Americans aren't proud of that title either. The fact that you think this is a title that Americans are proud of just proves that you should do a little more research on things like that, before posting. Just a suggestion of course.

Secondly, no, I really hope you aren't suggesting that America puts boots on Mexican grounds to help fight gangs. If that's what you're suggesting, words can't describe how I feel about that. And I'll tell you it's a new level of ignorance.

Thirdly, Mexicans would still immigrate. It's clear that you don't understand why Mexicans immigrate, or anyone immigrates to the United States. This is an entirely different topic though, so let's stay on subject here please.

Hard to respond to a comment without hate when the comment has such ignorance in it. Everyone has the right to an opinion, but that doesn't immediately make the opinion valid, or sensible.

 

Edited July 14, 201510 yr by TheDivineHustle

Instead of sticking its nose where it shouldn't, for example in the Middle East, USA (or as they call themselves "the world police") should help their fellow neighbours Mexico with the army fighting corruption and gang wars related to drug cartels.

Not only would that benefit USA, as Mexicans wouldn't immigrate so often to the country (legally but specially illegally, and that would shut Donald Trump up) but also because it would help Mexico as the country would be safer and people would have a better life etc.

But then again, there's no interest from the USA to do that... they rather go ruin people's lives in the Middle East.

If you want to reply to my comment, please do so without hate. I'm just stating my opinion.

First off, I do agree with your point that the US should help with Mexico's efforts to eliminate the drug cartels. As a Texan, living this close to the border has shown me the damage these people can do when the infiltrate the US. It has also shown me just how easily they are able to do this. So, what I'm saying is, yes the US should help improve relations with Mexico and also aid them in their efforts. Definitely not by sending US troops but by other means. However, on your point involving the US's "sticking it's nose where it shouldn't" in the Middle East, I completely disagree. On September 11, 2001, over 3000 innocent American citizens were killed while just doing their daily jobs. This terrorist act is now known as 9/11. This attack was planned out by Osama Bin Laden along with various other members the group known as al-Qaeda. al-Qaeda also being the group to carry out the acts. This provoked many American citizens and government officials to the point where it infuriated them so much that many demanded war. Thus, the war in the Middle East began. There have also been various other attacks on US citizens and allies since then by various different terrorist groups in the Middle East. Some say the US went there for oil. However, if you look at the cost of the war (1.6 Trillion) and the return from assets in the Middle East, it is absurd to make such a comment. Others say we went there to establish a US-run government in Iraq. This is also not true as almost all US assets have pulled out of the region. The only remaining assets being those training Iraqi soldiers. Plus, you can see how well the Iraqis can fend for themselves with ISIS now controlling a decent amount of the country, including many oil reservoirs.  What I'm getting at is that, in my opinion, the US was fully justified in beginning a campaign in the Middle East.

 

My apologies for spouting off and going off-topic.

Edited July 14, 201510 yr by LoneStarrr

First off, I do agree with your point that the US should help with Mexico's efforts to eliminate the drug cartels. As a Texan, living this close to the border has shown me the damage these people can do when the infiltrate the US. It has also shown me just how easily they are able to do this. So, what I'm saying is, yes the US should help improve relations with Mexico and also aid them in their efforts. Definitely not by sending US troops but by other means. However, on your point involving the US's "sticking it's nose where it shouldn't" in the Middle East, I completely disagree. On September 11, 2001, over 3000 innocent American citizens were killed while just doing their daily jobs. This terrorist act is now known as 9/11. This attack was planned out by Osama Bin Laden along with various other members the group known as al-Qaeda. al-Qaeda also being the group to carry out the acts. This provoked many American citizens and government officials to the point where it infuriated them so much that many demanded war. Thus, the war in the Middle East began. There have also been various other attacks on US citizens and allies since then by various different terrorist groups in the Middle East. Some say the US went there for oil. However, if you look at the cost of the war (1.6 Trillion) and the return from assets in the Middle East, it is absurd to make such a comment. Others say we went there to establish a US-run government in Iraq. This is also not true as almost all US assets have pulled out of the region. The only remaining assets being those training Iraqi soldiers. Plus, you can see how well the Iraqis can fend for themselves with ISIS now controlling a decent amount of the country, including many oil reservoirs.  What I'm getting at is that, in my opinion, the US was fully justified in beginning a campaign in the Middle East.

 

My apologies for spouting off and going off-topic.

I just like to make a small correction, it was 2,996 people that died on 9/11, not over three thousand. Also I agree it was completely justified to go into the Middle East, don't you think we've been there long enough and that we should just let them deal with their own problems now? 

I just like to make a small correction, it was 2,996 people that died on 9/11, not over three thousand. Also I agree it was completely justified to go into the Middle East, don't you think we've been there long enough and that we should just let them deal with their own problems now? 

Apologies, I knew the number was around 3000. It is true, we have been there for AGES now however, we pulled out when we had them up against the wall. They were falling apart and just needed a few more blows. Now, with the Iraqi "Army" (If you can even call it that) in charge for the most part, they have pushed back and taken much of their territory. Yes, I do know that we are helping with airstrikes and a raid on some high-profile terrorist every now and then, but that just isn't enough. The chain of command barely matters to them. You kill one commander, there's a new one just as fearsome as the last. In my opinion, we need to get in there and stamp them out for good or else they will come back at us again. You can already see from the attacks in France, Denmark, and the US (Shooting in Texas at a Mohammad drawing contest) that the amount influence these guys have is very high. We need to let our soldiers get in there and get to work and show these ISIS amateurs what a REAL military can do. I feel as if we are letting them get too much confidence and also too much influence. However, this is all just my opinion. I know many others feel different and I mean no hate nor anger towards them.

I do agree with this. Not to say that the USA, with there extensive military shouldn't help with global efforts, they should help there neighbours. However, I can't help but think, what if the president of Mexico is just putting on a show? he wants to reassure everyone he is a good guy, but he is corrupt? Who knows, I sure hope not. Maybe the pres wanted to do this whole act, arrest Shorty, throw him in prison, then he "mysteriously" escapes. I don't know, just speculation.

Yeah, we can't accuse anyone without knowing enough. Thanks for agreeing. Obviously the Americans here are brainwashed by jewish mainstream media...

 

Mexico's war on drugs has killed hundreds of thousands of people. Carrying on with a war against drug cartels isn't going stop anything. Decriminalization and legalization is the answer. The impact of marijuana legalization efforts alone has taken millions, if not billions from the cartels. 

War on drug cartels would just cause destruction and more deaths but legalizing marijuana would make these drug lords legit and therefore their fortunes would be considered legit as well? I don't think so.

A few corrections to your post:

We don't consider ourselves the world police, it's a name that the world has given us; since we supposedly try to act like the world's police. It isn't a self-acclaimed title, and most Americans aren't proud of that title either. The fact that you think this is a title that Americans are proud of just proves that you should do a little more research on things like that, before posting. Just a suggestion of course.

Secondly, no, I really hope you aren't suggesting that America puts boots on Mexican grounds to help fight gangs. If that's what you're suggesting, words can't describe how I feel about that. And I'll tell you it's a new level of ignorance.

Thirdly, Mexicans would still immigrate. It's clear that you don't understand why Mexicans immigrate, or anyone immigrates to the United States. This is an entirely different topic though, so let's stay on subject here please.

Hard to respond to a comment without hate when the comment has such ignorance in it. Everyone has the right to an opinion, but that doesn't immediately make the opinion valid, or sensible.

 

Some people do think USA is the world police, no need to do extra research (I am friends with some Americans who do think their country is world police), and the world has only given you that name because of your foreign imperialistic policy.

I'm not suggesting USA to "invade" Mexico, all I'm saying is USA should do more efforts to maybe, just maybe try and help them with advisors, etc.

Of course Mexicans would still immigrate but what I'm saying is much less people would just because they don't feel safe in their own country.

If you have hate, that's your problem. :)

It's hard to like a country that has sticking its nose in my country in the 70s just for the "commies" not to win the election because that could be dangerous to us joining USSR. Maybe you're the one who should do some research.

First off, I do agree with your point that the US should help with Mexico's efforts to eliminate the drug cartels. As a Texan, living this close to the border has shown me the damage these people can do when the infiltrate the US. It has also shown me just how easily they are able to do this. So, what I'm saying is, yes the US should help improve relations with Mexico and also aid them in their efforts. Definitely not by sending US troops but by other means. However, on your point involving the US's "sticking it's nose where it shouldn't" in the Middle East, I completely disagree. On September 11, 2001, over 3000 innocent American citizens were killed while just doing their daily jobs. This terrorist act is now known as 9/11. This attack was planned out by Osama Bin Laden along with various other members the group known as al-Qaeda. al-Qaeda also being the group to carry out the acts. This provoked many American citizens and government officials to the point where it infuriated them so much that many demanded war. Thus, the war in the Middle East began. There have also been various other attacks on US citizens and allies since then by various different terrorist groups in the Middle East. Some say the US went there for oil. However, if you look at the cost of the war (1.6 Trillion) and the return from assets in the Middle East, it is absurd to make such a comment. Others say we went there to establish a US-run government in Iraq. This is also not true as almost all US assets have pulled out of the region. The only remaining assets being those training Iraqi soldiers. Plus, you can see how well the Iraqis can fend for themselves with ISIS now controlling a decent amount of the country, including many oil reservoirs.  What I'm getting at is that, in my opinion, the US was fully justified in beginning a campaign in the Middle East.

 

My apologies for spouting off and going off-topic.

I agree with the first part. But saying that USA was entitled to begin a war in the Middle East just because of 9/11... that's just wrong. I'm ashamed my country followed yours like a puppet (among with Spain and UK in the famous Azores summit in 2003...) Not to mention Iraq was invaded BASED ON A LIE!!! Where are the mass destruction weapons? LOL!  

And who was the enemy? Al-Qaeda has no country whatsoever. Who would you be invading or killing? And can you compare 2996 people to more than 15000? I don't think so... American lives are not worth more than Iraqi ones. And Iraq back then was safer than it is now. Americans have this complex that all the world must be like them, they can't see that there are some countries where democracy can't be implemented. Imperialism at its best. Such as Lybia (great work taking down Gaddafi, we see how safe Lybia is now... not to mention Gaddafi made Lybia the richest in Africa), Syria (great job the "arab spring", I bet my aunt wouldn't visit the country now) and Iraq, mainly these 3.

I just like to make a small correction, it was 2,996 people that died on 9/11, not over three thousand. Also I agree it was completely justified to go into the Middle East, don't you think we've been there long enough and that we should just let them deal with their own problems now? 

Completely justified based on a lie... and sure the countries now are much safer! And yeah their own problems were drastically increased by USA's presence! Who trained and armed the talibans??? Right, the CIA!

Apologies, I knew the number was around 3000. It is true, we have been there for AGES now however, we pulled out when we had them up against the wall. They were falling apart and just needed a few more blows. Now, with the Iraqi "Army" (If you can even call it that) in charge for the most part, they have pushed back and taken much of their territory. Yes, I do know that we are helping with airstrikes and a raid on some high-profile terrorist every now and then, but that just isn't enough. The chain of command barely matters to them. You kill one commander, there's a new one just as fearsome as the last. In my opinion, we need to get in there and stamp them out for good or else they will come back at us again. You can already see from the attacks in France, Denmark, and the US (Shooting in Texas at a Mohammad drawing contest) that the amount influence these guys have is very high. We need to let our soldiers get in there and get to work and show these ISIS amateurs what a REAL military can do. I feel as if we are letting them get too much confidence and also too much influence. However, this is all just my opinion. I know many others feel different and I mean no hate nor anger towards them.

USA has the moral obligation of saving Iraq of ISIS. They took down Saddam for what? More misery? I hope Europe open its eyes one day and see that USA is not a country to be followed. Not to mention all the spying on France, Germany, etc... The difference between Russia and USA is that Russia isn't hypocrite. They never say they respect human rights because it's a fact they don't. But USA is always talking about human rights and yet they have a maximum security prision called Guantánamo in another country in which they torture prisioners.

 

Edited July 14, 201510 yr by Hugo_Agante

War on drug cartels would just cause destruction and more deaths but legalizing marijuana would make these drug lords legit and therefore their fortunes would be considered legit as well? I don't think so.

 

That wouldn't be the case. Look at Colorado. Gangs aren't supplying weed shops, honest farmers are.

The difference between Russia and USA is that Russia isn't hypocrite. They never say they respect human rights because it's a fact they don't. But USA is always talking about human rights and yet they have a maximum security prision called Guantánamo in another country in which they torture prisioners.

 

I have to say, in a very deep rooted way that is true. But no country is perfect, however, the US probably is up there with imperfections.

The difference between Russia and USA is that Russia isn't hypocrite. They never say they respect human rights because it's a fact they don't. But USA is always talking about human rights and yet they have a maximum security prision called Guantánamo in another country in which they torture prisioners.

 

Please, please, please, don't speak about things you have no idea about. I'm Russian, I work in the law enforcement field, and I am familiar with all the hypocricy our beloved goverment pours on us. Today they decided not to obey the ECHR decisions because they violate human rights guaranteed under Russian constitution.

BTW, how easily a crime topic degraded to a national argument,

All I can say is that war on drugs can't be won if the government (American, Mexican, Russian) profits from it. There're enourmous money in that game, so... It's either "escape from any jail" or "untouchable".

That wouldn't be the case. Look at Colorado. Gangs aren't supplying weed shops, honest farmers are.

Yeah Colorado made marijuana legal but the gang culture related to drugs in Mexico is just so deep that gangs wouldn't easily dissapear.

I have to say, in a very deep rooted way that is true. But no country is perfect, however, the US probably is up there with imperfections.

Obviously no country is perfect. Mine killed and enslaved African people for more than 500 years, I'm not proud of it. Americans shouldn't be as well for their awesome "tour" in the Middle East. If we all could just live together without always wanting to dominate the others, the world would be much much better!

Please, please, please, don't speak about things you have no idea about. I'm Russian, I work in the law enforcement field, and I am familiar with all the hypocricy our beloved goverment pours on us. Today they decided not to obey the ECHR decisions because they violate human rights guaranteed under Russian constitution.

BTW, how easily a crime topic degraded to a national argument,

All I can say is that war on drugs can't be won if the government (American, Mexican, Russian) profits from it. There're enourmous money in that game, so... It's either "escape from any jail" or "untouchable".

 

I'm not talking about inside Russia, I obviously don't know anything about it to talk about it because I'm not Russian nor do I live in Russia. I'm talking about foreign policy only, I thought you knew I was talking about that :P

And you're right about war on drugs can't be won if govs profit from it. Just like the gun lobby in the USA. Every time there's a shooting at a school whatsoever the gun topic comes out but nothing is done because obviously the gov benefit from the gun industry.

The topic degraded to a national argument thanks to me, I'm just sick of USA foreign policy. I know people who suffered from it directly.

Now let's all live our lives and wait for LSPDFR 0.2, my discussion is over.

Yeah, we can't accuse anyone without knowing enough. Thanks for agreeing. Obviously the Americans here are brainwashed by jewish mainstream media...

War on drug cartels would just cause destruction and more deaths but legalizing marijuana would make these drug lords legit and therefore their fortunes would be considered legit as well? I don't think so.

Some people do think USA is the world police, no need to do extra research (I am friends with some Americans who do think their country is world police), and the world has only given you that name because of your foreign imperialistic policy.

I'm not suggesting USA to "invade" Mexico, all I'm saying is USA should do more efforts to maybe, just maybe try and help them with advisors, etc.

Of course Mexicans would still immigrate but what I'm saying is much less people would just because they don't feel safe in their own country.

If you have hate, that's your problem. :)

It's hard to like a country that has sticking its nose in my country in the 70s just for the "commies" not to win the election because that could be dangerous to us joining USSR. Maybe you're the one who should do some research.

I agree with the first part. But saying that USA was entitled to begin a war in the Middle East just because of 9/11... that's just wrong. I'm ashamed my country followed yours like a puppet (among with Spain and UK in the famous Azores summit in 2003...) Not to mention Iraq was invaded BASED ON A LIE!!! Where are the mass destruction weapons? LOL!  

And who was the enemy? Al-Qaeda has no country whatsoever. Who would you be invading or killing? And can you compare 2996 people to more than 15000? I don't think so... American lives are not worth more than Iraqi ones. And Iraq back then was safer than it is now. Americans have this complex that all the world must be like them, they can't see that there are some countries where democracy can't be implemented. Imperialism at its best. Such as Lybia (great work taking down Gaddafi, we see how safe Lybia is now... not to mention Gaddafi made Lybia the richest in Africa), Syria (great job the "arab spring", I bet my aunt wouldn't visit the country now) and Iraq, mainly these 3.

Completely justified based on a lie... and sure the countries now are much safer! And yeah their own problems were drastically increased by USA's presence! Who trained and armed the talibans??? Right, the CIA!

USA has the moral obligation of saving Iraq of ISIS. They took down Saddam for what? More misery? I hope Europe open its eyes one day and see that USA is not a country to be followed. Not to mention all the spying on France, Germany, etc... The difference between Russia and USA is that Russia isn't hypocrite. They never say they respect human rights because it's a fact they don't. But USA is always talking about human rights and yet they have a maximum security prision called Guantánamo in another country in which they torture prisioners.

 

As you continue to post in this topic it becomes more and more clear that you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

"Jewish mainstream media" this is the dumbest thing you've said thus far. I'm not even going to fully address this, because the moderators won't like my response.

Again, the title of "world police" isn't a self-acclaimed title. It's a title that the world has given us, and most Americans are aware of the title to an extent. Just because Americans understand why the world has given us this title, doesn't mean that we're proud to have this title. Here again, just another ignorant sitting outside US borders thinking they know everything about the US.

I wasn't suggesting that the US invade Mexico. We shouldn't send any sort of aid to Mexico period, it's their problem. It's a problem that Mexico should have dealt with centuries ago, and they've only let it worsen over the years. When the United States was going through the civil rights era, did Mexico hop across US borders to help us ensure civil equality? No, because that was our problem, and we overcame it. I don't agree that we should send our service men and women to help another country with its own problems, and neither would the rest of America. It's also very hypocritical to say that we should stop being the  "world's police", yet suggest we stick our nose into Mexico's business. Again, I'd suggest you do a bit of research before posting. 

Nope, lot's of Mexicans would still immigrate to the United States. Plus it's not just Mexicans coming to the United States, people from all over Central American and South American are immigrating, more than any other continent or region. The biggest issues they face are crime, poverty, corruption, and underdevelopment. These aren't our problems, these are their problems, and they need to fix them themselves. If they wish to immigrate then we welcome all legal immigration.

At this point your only spouting bull shit that we're all already aware of. Maybe the Portuguese media is just now reporting on what's happening in the world, I'm not sure. I would highly suggest you do take a seat out of this discussion, as you said you would.

Edited July 14, 201510 yr by TheDivineHustle