Who cares about the recent Mexican elections?

[stilltraveling]

Originally Posted by conklinwh

That I don't buy! The Zetas split from the Gulf cartel before any noticeable success with bigwigs and there main other target is the Sinaola cartel that has suffered little. I think it is an instance of a new group moving in and having to fight to find a position.
BTW, not a whole lot different than the Aztecs.

I'm afraid you'll have to wait until sometime in the middle of next year to get the real story. My colleagues are all too afraid to publish right now, lest it prematurely end their careers. This administration made it clear they didn't want anything published that would undermine the strategy. That's why the Secretaria de Salud hasn't published a National Report on Violence and Health since 2006, something we used to do every 3 years.

I carried out what I thought was a very scientific, unbiased study last year that showed how the violence increased dramatically everywhere anti-Cartel operations were carried out. The pattern was unmistakeable. The sad part was that the violence didn't go down after the operation moved on to the next town, but instead continued to rise steadily. The methodology was concise, the findings were irrefutable.

It's still sitting in a filing cabinet. I wasn't even allowed to submit it for publication. My boss told me that even though I didn't care about a long-term job here, she did. Politics over science. That's never a good omen for a nation. A lot of people are sitting on a lot of studies with the hope that all the work we did over the past 6 years will see the light of day under the next administration. Expect all of these studies to flood the public health literature if the government suddenly decides it wants to end prohibition. Until then, they will gather dust.

[RPBHaas]

Originally Posted by stilltraveling

But. His conclusion was that it would only result in an increase in violence. He was right.

The problem with Calderon is that he couldn't admit that it wasn't working and change strategy.
Instead of listening to his expert panels (I sat on one), he chose to try and sell the myth that it was working. He still insists that all we have to do is push harder and victory is right around the corner. That isn't showing heart, that is showing how heartless a politician can be when he puts his historical legacy above the lives of the people he was sworn to protect.

If Calderon had started this "war" against corruption at all levels of government and the police instead of against the cartels, he would have won the hearts and souls of the general populace in Mexico. It has to be virtually impossible to win a war against the cartels when so much of the enforcement arm was and predominately still is corrupt.

[RPBHaas]

Originally Posted by stilltraveling

The homicide rate is now more than 10 times what it was when he came to office and shows no sign of easing.

.

It was reported today in many of the US news sources that the homicide rate for the first 6 months of this year has decreased by 15%-20% in Mexico.

That being said, the supporting evidence was not released by the current Mexican administration.

To comment on the reference to the homicide rate in Baghdad, it is important to remember that the vast majority of the homicides towards the begining of Calderon's term occurred in Juarez. The conflict in Juarez was/is between the Sinaloa and the remanents of the old Juarez cartel. This started before most of the Federales and the military were present. Calderon had sent the military and the Federales to Morelia and surrounding areas as a reaction to the 6 heads at the nightclub incident.
The extremely high homicide rates in the most dangerous city in the world for 3 years was NOT caused by Calderon's "war" on drugs.

[stilltraveling]

Originally Posted by RPBHaas

The extremely high homicide rates in the most dangerous city in the world for 3 years was NOT caused by Calderon's "war" on drugs.

Yes, but he wasn't the mayor of Juarez, he was the president of Mexico. He's responsible for all 100 million, not just his home state. I'm sure the people in Juarez would have loved his attention, but it took him a full year before he even tried to do anything about that tragedy. Now the problem has moved on to Monterrey, so he claims victory in Juarez. Politics.

He failed miserably in his responsibility to protect the health of the people, but like the true politician he is, he'll never admit it. He'll keep this strategy going for the next several months, then focus his efforts on defending his historical legacy.

[polynomial]

Originally Posted by Longford

And then there is the maybe 1/3 of the nation (or those polled) who support armed forces of the USA on the ground in Mexico to help fight the cartels.

Where exactly do you get this from? I don't know a single mexican who would support this. Who did they poll, police officers?

[TundraGreen]

Originally Posted by polynomial

Where exactly do you get this from? I don't know a single mexican who would support this. Who did they poll, police officers?

Neither do I.

[Longford]

Originally Posted by polynomial

Where exactly do you get this from? I don't know a single mexican who would support this. Who did they poll, police officers?

From this:

Mexicans Back Military Campaign Against Cartels | Pew Global Attitudes Project

and other reports.

The information's out there. The search engines are your friend, if someone has difficulty locating things they don't otherwise notice.

[stilltraveling]

Originally Posted by Longford

From this:

Mexicans Back Military Campaign Against Cartels | Pew Global Attitudes Project

You have to be careful about extrapolating data from a poll that used 1200 subjects to a country of 100 million. It's one thing to ask "do you have diabetes". The response is simple and binary. It's nearly impossible to get any meaningful statistical power in a poll with this many items, no matter how careful your sampling methods may be. The methodology they published is very limited. I'd be interested to see how they stratified their sample.

The minute a US convoy came across the border, the same poll of the same subjects would likely drop to 1%. The fact that their poll showed such a high percentage of people who believe the government is making progress leads one to suspect all of their published findings.

Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is interesting. What they hide is essential.

[Longford]

Originally Posted by stilltraveling

The fact that their poll showed such a high percentage of people who believe the government is making progress leads one to suspect all of their published findings.

I've spoken to, listened to and witnessed the expressions of Mexicans on the topic sufficiently to form my own opinion regarding national sentiments, and to understand that this survey (the Pew survey) and other surveys reporting similarly and from varying sources are far more accurate than proclamations offered anonymously on web forums.

[stilltraveling]

Originally Posted by Longford

I've spoken to, listened to and witnessed the expressions of Mexicans on the topic sufficiently to form my own opinion regarding national sentiments, and to understand that this survey (the Pew survey) and other surveys reporting similarly and from varying sources are far more accurate than proclamations offered anonymously on web forums.

And I'm sure you've done so throughout the republic, in rural areas, city slums and posh urban centers.