Mexico drug cartel insurgents beating Mexican army in gun battel
 

It's published by Time so it's probably not fake news.
The left doesn't seem to want to cover it because they don't want to stop the flow of drugs, slaves, votes and money coming across the boarder.
https://time.com/5705358/sinaloa-car...xico-culiacan/

Incase, no make that when the article mysteriously goes 404.

From time:

In Mexico’s big cities, drug cartel gunmen normally act like phantoms. They hide in safe houses or amid communities, suddenly striking with an assassination or a gunfight, and then disappearing again. Residents know they are there and are scared, but most the time, they can’t see them.

But on Thursday in the Sinaloan city of Culiacan, the cartel gunmen were everywhere. They openly drove in trucks with mounted machine guns, blockaded streets flashing their Kalashnikovs and burned trucks unleashing plumes of smoke like it was a scene in Syria. They took control of the strategic points in the metro area, shut down the airport, roads, and government buildings and exchanged fire with security forces for hours, leaving at least eight people dead. In contrast, everyone else had to act like ghosts, hiding behind locked doors, not daring to step outside.

And in this unusual battle, the Sinaloa Cartel won. Their uprising was in response to soldiers storming a house on Thursday and arresting Ovidio Guzman, the 28-year old son of convicted kingpin Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman. In February, the U.S. Justice Department announced it had indicted Ovidio Guzman on trafficking cocaine, marijuana and meth. But after hours of cartel chaos, Mexico’s federal government gave soldiers the go ahead to release him. It capitulated.

Picture
[Burnt vehicles used by gunmen smolder on an intersection, one day after street battles with security forces, in Culiacan on Oct. 18.]

I’ve covered Mexico’s drug violence for 18 years, written two books about the subject, and seen many extraordinary episodes. In Sinaloa, the cradle of drug traffickers, I’ve repeatedly been on the crime beat chasing bullet-ridden corpses and into the mountains to Guzman’s opium-growing village. But Thursday was different. It wasn’t gangster action; it was a mass insurrection.

“There was panic, terror, the city was under siege,” says Vladimir Ramirez, a political scientist in Culiacan, who like many has continued curfew into Friday. “People slept wherever they were at. Businesses are closed, nobody wants to go out.”

This change has not come overnight. It is the result of a bloody trend of cartelsdeveloping insurgent tactics over many years. The use of burning vehicles to block roads was taken from militant protesters; cartels use it to stop the movement of troops and put pressure on the government. The cartels have armed up with stolen military weapons and an endless stream of rifles from the United States. Cartels from the Texas border to Guadalajara have learned to protect their leaders with rings of gunmen who can cause trouble to stop their capture.

Yet it was still shocking on Thursday to see how fast the cartel moved and how brazenly the gunmen stayed on the streets. Residents took dozens of photos of the armed thugs that circulated on social media, amplifying the threat. And it was almost a side note that there was a simultaneous prison break in which 51 inmates fled.

Picture
[Cartel gunman just hanging out in the streets, October 17]

“The Sinaloa Cartel demonstrated a tremendous ability to mobilize rapidly and take effective control of the city,” says Raul Benitez, an expert on Latin America’s armed conflicts. “They showed that in Sinaloa, they are the ones who run things".

In Mexico’s big cities, drug cartel gunmen normally act like phantoms. They hide in safe houses or amid communities, suddenly striking with an assassination or a gunfight, and then disappearing again. Residents know they are there and are scared, but most the time, they can’t see them.

But on Thursday in the Sinaloan city of Culiacan, the cartel gunmen were everywhere. They openly drove in trucks with mounted machine guns, blockaded streets flashing their Kalashnikovs and burned trucks unleashing plumes of smoke like it was a scene in Syria. They took control of the strategic points in the metro area, shut down the airport, roads, and government buildings and exchanged fire with security forces for hours, leaving at least eight people dead. In contrast, everyone else had to act like ghosts, hiding behind locked doors, not daring to step outside.

And in this unusual battle, the Sinaloa Cartel won. Their uprising was in response to soldiers storming a house on Thursday and arresting Ovidio Guzman, the 28-year old son of convicted kingpin Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman. In February, the U.S. Justice Department announced it had indicted Ovidio Guzman on trafficking cocaine, marijuana and meth. But after hours of cartel chaos, Mexico’s federal government gave soldiers the go ahead to release him. It

The last two paragraphs repeat. Was that in the original?

This is a few days old. No mention that the cartel was better armed than the police, with crew-served weapons.

Scott Adams response was that since the cartels act in concert with China to kill 50,000 Americans a year via smuggled Fentayl, we would be justified in achieving peace through superior firepower.

Mexico, like the Kurds, would thank us.

Total smoke show. I'm going to randomly guess that 8 people dead is at the high end of average for a day there. 8 dead from hours of fighting look like accidents.

Yeah, those Chinese, cheerfully serving markets like they do.

If Scott Adams was smart he'd form a freekin' megachurch. :rolleyes:

I am unsure how many atheists start religions.

Crew served weapons versus semi-automatics.

Providing inaccurate suppressive fire versus being unable to aim because you are being suppressed, but if you send enough rounds in the same general direction, you should eventually hit your target, even if there is an inconvenient building or civilian vehicle in the way.

I hate to say it, but these are convicted and hardened criminals:

My enemy continues to be an enemy until he is dead.

It is possible that the cartel would have reacted even worse had the Chapos been killed, but there would be two fewer Chapos.

I was going to say L. Ron Hubbard but he was into some freaky sch-tuff with Jack Parsons and the Woman In Red.

I was thinking about the news this morning, and between Our Presidents speech and Gywnne Shotwell's (COO SpaceX), I can imagine a Starship suborbital mission instead of the eight helicopters. They could do a touch-and-go on the target and then set down next to the smoking crater.

The seats will be 'less than business class but more than economy' for anywhere on the planet in under an hour. And then home again.

.

Hmmm...

https://theaviationist.com/2019/10/2...-than-2-years/



:turtle:

>

I haven't watched this yet, it could be as big a deal as GPS: Elon Musk’s Starlink begins tests with US Air Force on sending broadband to planes - News 247

edit:
Don't even mute the piano and go 2x; just pause it and turn on the transcript. It's closed captioned and that is readable much more easily. :thumbup:

TLDR: Global Lightning

If you use drugs you are kelping killing people, you son of a b...tch !!!


Mexico remambers Brazil, but even more violent...

If the cartels didn't have drugs it would be something else. Slavery for instance.

I'm also concerned about the Northern border. Twice as long and unprotected, and the state hasn't failed yet but they couldn't shake off Trudeau.

They deal in slavery too.
The political correctness hall patrol calls it's "human trafficking" for some reason. I'm like why not call it what it is.
Why the attempt to dress it up to not sound so bad?

I chose the word knowlingly. The cartels need a little of A-10 Warthog singing the song of it's people.

The war on drugs has only rarely been fought like an actual war.

Another story old as time. China had it's Opium Wars, Americans shipped home from Vietnam with bags of heroin [Oxford comma] in their coffins.

Demand is the other half of the problem. There'd be no cartel if there was no demand. Nobody is innocent.

That said, it's absolutely absurd that Mexico can't win a fight against thugs (no matter how heavily armed and numerous they are). Heck, Texans (civilians) could probably mount a counter against a hypothetical cartel takeover.

It is like All Darc says - stop using drugs and the cartels lose their main source of income.
The problem is not just with the provider. It is the clients that keep giving them money.

Somehow some people still think it is cool to use drugs; they look no further than their own pleasure. But they are responsible for the misery widespread drug trafficking causes, with all the corruption and dysfunctional governmental and police agencies in Latrin America as they get overwhelmed by the drug cartels.
Hundreds of millions of people live in misery because of drug trade. How 'cool' is that?

It may be impossible to completely defeat all drug use.
There seem to be some cases where cannabis could help, like in reducing the effects of MS. So maybe legalize and regulate the mildest forms, but educate the people about the havoc illegal drug trade causes.

I don't blame opiate manufacturers either (unless they are selling through illicit channels). How are providers to determine if people need narcotic pain medication or not, since pain is subjective and impossible to convey? Even then, the body learns to generate pain to influence the response of seeking out medication.

I was on opiates for 2 months for my back, but I limited myself to half a tab of codeine every 4 hrs regardless of how much pain I was in. It probably takes extreme discipline to keep from developing addiction.

It is silly we don't have a national database for health records. It would be impossible to get 10 different prescriptions from 10 providers and fill them all if there was a single database with all that info.

It's all market driven. You'd think Mexico would declare war on drug consumers up here, what with our funding armies of criminals down there.

I'm not going to point fingers because that would be hypocritical. But people could use a little discernment about their sourcing. Local sources are light years beyond the ditchweed coming over the border.

And the Fentanyl is an act of aggression.

The technology exists to essentially peer back in time across a city and solve major crimes like this.

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts...ticles/eye-sky

While I'm typically saying government needs to stay out of things, the ability to solve serious crimes and reduce the number of detectives on staff and possibly reduce crime seems worthy of an experiment in certain terrible cities. I know, it goes against my signature, but then again, I never considered that people have a right to privacy when they are out and about in public, and all the standard laws of warrant procedure can be applied to this method of data collection.

It's an amazing system when they let it work.

In the UK NHS is [apparently] metering health care based on whether they think your a racist and/or some other thing. Basically an ad-hoc social score.

The emergent problem is that now the surveillance isn't the governments doing, it's that devil's spawn from Internet, social media.

[turn down your speakers] HYPER-REALITY

With some exceptions the sky is mostly free to fly. You’re also allowed to photograph from the sky. It’s a small step then for private enterprise to sell that info to those willing to pay. If governments don’t want to pay a subscription fee to assist their policing, I bet there would be people willing to pay top dollar for their own curiosities.

Might be a shortish window of opportunity though, as I expect body cams to be commonplace at some point. I’ve considered the utility of recording life 24x7 so that I can save those moments that are so easily forgotten. Deep conversations had while enjoying scotch, for instance.

A permanent record of things that aren't illegal yet? What could possibly...

We've already got dash cams that record public scenes. Not too crazy to think we might have some sort of body cam at some point (Google Glass for instance). Say there was a bank robbery and the guy gets away in a stolen car. With enough cameras out there, people could piece together where the guy came from and where he went.

I'm big on the right to privacy at home and the 4th amendment, but as I say, have never held that you have a right to privacy when in public.

As far as government becoming too authoritarian; we've got the responsibility to keep them in check.

Anyhow, this reminds me of a Black Mirror episode:

The Entire History of You

Then there's the cloud of eyes in low Earth orbit. Cubesats fly a little higher than the SR-71 Blackbird.

It's all about signal to noise ratios. Being closer to the object in question increases signal and decreases noise. Sensors are getting better all the time though, so it wouldn't surprise me if one day cubesats can snap a decent picture of a small object (person).

Season 2 of Jack Ryan on Amazon has something to do with orbital imaging. I haven't finished so no spoilers please.

Drones make sense for surveillance since the cost is low, and the ability to repair or upgrade their equipment is very easy. They can be made very fuel efficient for long loiter times, especially since you don't have to design them to carry people.

Technology always tends to get used first for destructive purposes before it gets used for constructive purposes.

I'm in favor of quad-copters that use directed sonic weapons to blow out forest fires.

3 women and 6 children/babies slaughtered by cartels today.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/cousin...resident-trump
Vehicles ambushed, mom shot and suv set on fire with children strapped into car seats.

Mexico is turning into a failed state.
If Mexico doesn't fix it the US will fix it for them.

Mexico is so bad that 2 guys excaped from jail in northern California, made it all the way to Mexico got there said wow what a s hole and came back.

Again? Or two days ago?

It looks like they ran someone to ground.

What I hear is that the family left the USofA due to it's oppressive anti-polygamy laws. And they've contended with the cartel[s] before.

OTOH; we could make it our business. :) Scott Adams contends that the border isn't with the government of Mexico so much as Cartel-held territory.
https://i.imgflip.com/u2rf0.jpg
https://i.imgflip.com/u2rf0.jpg

Exactly.
People whop blame goverment politic (of not legalize drugs) for the violence and killing of drug dealer and drug cartels, are just as silly like say the goverment should give free cars to make people stop steeling cars.

Many rock celebrities, and hollywood star, are guilty for glamorize drugs and turn stupid teens interested on it.

People today have no character and don't take responsabilities for what they do. They act by convennience. If they want to use they create numeroues excuses, but if they kill someone under inflkuence of drugs, they change mind to avoid jail, and start to teel everyone it was a msitake and that was the drug and not hin who commited the crime.


These cartel's leaders are seeds of evil. They need to be executed. No jail for such cold blood murders who kill even children.

Step 1: Stop buying all the drugs the cartels can ship.
Step 2: Watch what happens now that the cartels don't have more revenue than the government.

Are the gringoes still in Mexico for the same reason they originally went? If not, why are they still there?

Sometimes the only way to defeat your enemy is to deny them battle.

That's logical. But, druggies have less logic, than druggies who are dead. At least, when dead, druggies can't get any worse. :D

What's illogical is treating the drug cartels as if they are aggressively doing something to us. Overall, if your country demands a product and insists the product remain illegal, the market can only be served by criminals- and the more money that's at stake, the more vicious the criminals will be.

The US has no grounds to complain about drug cartels' behavior because they're simply serving our market. Attacking the supply end has never worked and we seem set on keeping the whole industry illegal, so we might as well try to affect the demand side of things.

Hard drugs should remain illegal. People that use them should either be locked up, or sent to some druggie island to fend for themselves, their choice. What we do to facilitate their drug abuse and criminal activity to support it is criminal itself.

Best solution; let each state decide their drug policy. It would have the effect of sending drug abusers to drug islands.

I had this idea years ago. Get all hard drug users who are quite addicted, put in a isolate place to they start a society of only drug addicteds. Let's see if they will susceed. Someone get overdoses and the ambulance driver will also be a addicted, and the doctors, the emergency room workers, nurces...

A leper colony / purge island would be kind of cool.

To be clear, I'm not saying I don't care about drug addicted people, only that the only way to break addiction is either to take away their freedom to harm themselves (locked up), or removed from the ability to leech resources from the community to support their addiction.

My friend recently was burglarized while his entire family was home sleeping, and it cost him a couple days of work and about $9,000. Probably allowed a tweaker to tweak another few days before doing it again to someone else.

As long as I know, people do not choose to be inffected by leprosy.
As long as I know, leper colony was compulsory.

People choose use heavy drugs.
Many people advocate to use drugs.
And the island idea would be to people who choose to keep using drugs.