Comments for The Perfect Evil, Part I of III at http://www.michaelyon-online.com , comment 1 to 4 out of 4 comments http://www.michaelyon-online.com Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:50:55 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.michaelyon-online.com/the-perfect-evil-part-i-of-iii.htm#comment-16139 Same stupid ideas. Ask yourself what would happen if we legalize all drugs. 1. There would be a small increase in the users of hard drugs. Some would overdose and die. No big loss. (stupid is as stupid does) 2. Drugs are easily available now; no change there. 3. Gangs, cartels, many terrorists, and criminal enterprises would be cut off from their source of funding. 4. We would save billions of dollars. 5. We could use 10% of the savings for treatment and education. - Larry Wares Wed, 08 Oct 2008 13:42:00 +0100 http://www.michaelyon-online.com/the-perfect-evil-part-i-of-iii.htm#comment-15874 Thank you for the important work you do. I can't imagine the spirit of a man that can do such dangerous work. God bless you, stay safe. - Jon F. Sat, 20 Sep 2008 20:22:00 +0100 http://www.michaelyon-online.com/the-perfect-evil-part-i-of-iii.htm#comment-15706 The AUTHORITIES will not care until the childrens bodies line up or addicts are breaking into their houses. I saw this in the late 60s at the end of another war. Radical ISLAM will win unless all free people declare war. ( A Michael Yon supporter and no Hollywood Obama for me) - Ken V. Thu, 28 Aug 2008 19:43:00 +0100 http://www.michaelyon-online.com/the-perfect-evil-part-i-of-iii.htm#comment-15697 Great article, as always. However there is one the bit I don't get, that I see everywhere: the Taliban is behind the increased Opium trade. Every thing you read before said that the only time that the Opium trade was disrupted was when the Taliban ruled - as they banned it for religious reasons - see here for example: http://opioids.com/afghanistan/index.html (this website is out of date, but useful for this purpose). This, remember, is the type (though a different group) of religous fanatics that so refuse to compromise on Sharia and other things that they believe violate Islam, that they have consistantly hurt themselves with the local population. A well-reported example is in Iraq, when they tried to brutally enforce their version of Sharia on a population more used to some secular freedoms, such as showing a bit of ankle or selling Western CDs, girls going to school, etc. Now we are being told that the Taliban are the Opium Kings. They are financing their terrorism via opium harvests, both taxed and direct harvests. I could see fringe groups without the religous bent, as well as the warlords, capitalizing on the current unrest, and some of that money making its way to the Taliban. But I don't see Mullah Omar suddenly deciding that drug-pushing is now acceptable and a part of the Taliban business. I don't even see them letting it slide where they do have influence. I'm sorry, I don't buy it. I see a maelstrom (typical Afghanistan, as GEN McCaffrey points out), with a weak central government, warlords trying to re-establish their power, the Taliban hitting and running from the shadows (of Pak, mostly), and farmers doing what's needed to survive, which is growing poppy and paying off the local warlord. Can a more knowledgable source (like Mike Yon) comment on this? Has the Taliban become more utilitarian? thanks Dan K (a Mike Yon fan and - disclaimer - Obama supporter) - Dan K Wed, 27 Aug 2008 14:21:00 +0100