[sam_goody]

1. Deaths by overdose, especially of Fentanyl is through the roof (it has surpassed road accidents, heart attacks, etc.)

2. We have got to do something

3. This is something

4. The president has something to offer as a solution. For everything. (It is unusual to have a president who is so willing to try to solve everything.)

5. No one commenting in the news has enough info of the plan (or of the future) to offer a useful appraisal of this particular something.

Whether or not this something is actually a useful and good thing [and whether or not it will lead to other good things, and if those other things will be good...] will definitely be biased by your view of the administration, your policy towards war, and you risk tolerance.

As someone who has lost family members to Fentanyl, I at least recognize my bias :/

[Vasbarlog]

You realise that killing people without even identifying them first, and even going as far as invading a foreign country is not a solution in any shape or form. It’s not a ”something”.

If the market for fentanyl is there, the drug will come. And one of the reasons the market became so big because of all the legal opioid drugs being so broadly prescribed.

[gausswho]

I am sorry to hear you lost someone to Fentanyl. It really is wreaking havoc upon American society.

In the majority of cases (not to assume the one you experienced) this is but a new variant of 'slow suicide', alongside excessive drinking, gambling, various forms of risk seeking.

It's not enough for me to agree that making a new Vietnan is 'something we've got to do'. The scars of America's war adventures are widely visible and part of the reason we uniquely suffer from these slow suicides.

Blowing up other citizens is easy (at first). Not unlike the addicts this purports to protect, this administration thinks this one quick fix they don't want you to know about will cure our ails. Unfortunately the something we can do (must do) is hard. It means addressing why American society is increasingly disenfranchised, lonely, and unhappy.

[JKCalhoun]

"3. This is something"

We don't even know what "this" even is.

There are no receipts: no narco captures, no confiscated drug hauls.

[Spooky23]

It’s an opportunity to find out which military officers are good soldiers vs. good men.

[Thorrez]

>Since early September, the United States has carried out at least 14 strikes against alleged drug vessels in the Caribbean and Pacific, killing 61 people.

[vel0city]

This has practically nothing to do with fentanyl. Practically none of the US supply of fentanyl comes from Venezuela. Other drugs, sure. Not really fentanyl.

If the Cheeto in Chief declared war on salad forks, all salad forks are now illegal in the US, death penalty for all those trafficking in salad forks, it'll help stop fentanyl trust me, would you also be for it? After all, it's doing something, and we need to do something. Or would you see it as something unrelated and would make no impact while making most people less safe?

> No one commenting in the news has enough info of the plan (or of the future) to offer a useful appraisal of this particular something.

Do you not find that incredibly troubling though? That the US government is gearing up to go to war against a country and yet the populace isn't being read in on the slightest in whatever evidence they may have that these boats they're bombing are actually drug boats or that Venezuela actually is a primary source for fentanyl or whatever? Isn't that an immensely troubling thing that we should push back on until they actually tell us good reasons to go to war?

[forgotoldacc]

Seems like the problem was the US medical industry getting everyone hooked on opiates. The US even prescribes fentanyl for injuries, a temporary problem, and gets people addicted to the strongest stuff in the world for life.

But maybe the hospitals and American drug corps are all covert Venezuelan operations. Probably not, though. This makes as much sense as invading Iraq for a terrorist attack carried out by a rich Saudi Arabian family.

You thinking killing some random people thousands of miles away is some sort of step in the right direction is honestly just sad. Imagine Botswana having a problem with lion attacks and their president kills your family on the other side of the earth because the people of Botswana want the president to do something, and killing someone, doesn't matter where, is progress towards a solution. I'm an American, but it's stuff like this that makes me realize that hundreds of years from now, people will hold the US's government and its people in the same regard as King Leopold and colonial Belgians.

[mothballed]

I only see two practical answers to the fentanyl crisis. Legalize it, or total war against the suppliers.

Which one you pick will largely come down to personal morals or ethics.

The addictive properties of the drug and profits seem to make the responses of more mellow legal incentives -- inelastic. The addict does not give a shit he may go to jail. The high-level supplier does not care he might be risking life, when he is making a gazillion dollars and plans to go out shooting anyway. The low level suppliers, well they fall under the same problem as the 'addict' bucket because you can get as many as you need from that one, no matter the consequences.

[cjbgkagh]

A 100% on the total war must also go after users not just suppliers. Otherwise you’re just making the market more profitable for the remaining suppliers. It’s really hard to stop things that are immensely profitable.

[gamerDude]

Legalizing it is also a total war against the suppliers in most cases (just economically instead of with guns). By legalizing, you usually replace the current suppliers with ones you like.

[password54321]

1. We must do something! (moral panic)

2. Does something

3. Un(intended) consequences of doing something (problem is now worse or different)

4. Back to number 1

[orwin]

No one thinks cartels use fishing boats to transport drugs, especially launching from Venezuela. Venezuela itself only have minor cartels. Target Zodiacs from DR, Jamaica, Haiti or Sinaloa, you'll get a better ROI.

Venezuela network traffic Venezuelian first (some of which you probably killed, not unexpected from a bloodthirsty country, but still), gold second, and drugs a far away third.

Killing gold traffickers probably help Brazil and France, while most Venezuelian drug is probably still headed to Europe through Dutch vessels.

[lawn]

> This is something

I'm sorry that you're being swayed by propaganda as this isn't solving anything and will most likely make it worse.

[rubyfan]

Is it possible that this something isn’t even about drugs? The administration has signaled aggression and potential military action in the Western hemisphere since I think before the term even started. It almost feels indiscriminate at this point since it started with friends and allies, and now moves to a focus with a more plausible cover of legitimacy.

[mrbombastic]

https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/2025-Intern...

The state dept report from 2025 found that fentanyl basically only comes to the US through Mexico and Venezuela is not a major player.

I find your point 5 to be particularly anti-democratic to be honest, we don’t know because Trump doesn’t think us nor Congress need to know beyond some tweets on Truth Social.

I am sorry for your loss, I have some friends who passed the same way, and it is horrible.

[JackC]

> The president has something to offer as a solution. For everything.

Unfortunately it is not a coincidence that the solution to all problems is always (a) make a loud noise (b) take your stuff (c) take away your ability to object to taking your stuff. Amoral sadistic narcissist gonna amoral sadistic narcissist. If you think you don't have enough information to predict how that's going to play out as far as family members you care about, ok.

[mmooss]

> 2. We have got to do something

That's a mistake. We need to do something with good results. Doing something with bad results is worse than doing nothing.

> Whether or not this something is actually a useful and good thing [and whether or not it will lead to other good things, and if those other things will be good...] will definitely be biased by your view of the administration, your policy towards war, and you risk tolerance.

You're accusing random people of bias - you don't even know who they are. It's a way to shut down discussion and reason.

Whether or not it's good and useful doesn't depend on bias, but on reality. We can talk about reality here, without shutting each other down.

From what I understand, fentanyl doesn't come by boat, and few drugs do.

> 5. No one commenting in the news has enough info of the plan (or of the future) to offer a useful appraisal of this particular something.

If that's true, it's a major problem in democracy, where the people have sovereignty. Their elected representatives in Congress decide on wars, not the White House.

[apexalpha]

>2. We have got to do something

>3. This is something

Killing random people extrajudicially is not "doing something".

You could use your argument to justify the Holocaust...

[nielsbot]

you’re misinformed. this is not about fentanyl. venezuela didn’t export that.