Opinion: Fentanyl Deaths Cause Need For Military Intervention


The rise in fentanyl-related deaths in the United States has been nothing short of alarming. Over the past few years, the drug has caused a staggering number of fatalities, becoming the leading cause of overdose deaths in the country. While the reasons for this rise are complex, one thing is clear: the majority of fentanyl comes from Mexico, and it is being smuggled into the US by Mexican drug cartels.

The opioid epidemic has taken a severe toll on American communities, and it is time to take action. According to Orange County Sheriff Don Barnes, using military force against Mexican drug cartels is a justified response to the crisis. In an op-ed for the Orange County Register, Barnes stated that the rising death toll from fentanyl overdoses "demands that we take a new approach to the drug cartels."

Barnes' argument is based on several key points. First, he notes that fentanyl is not only highly addictive but also incredibly lethal. The drug is 50 times more potent than heroin and can easily lead to overdose and death. Second, he points out that the majority of fentanyl in the US comes from Mexico, where drug cartels operate with near impunity. According to Barnes, the cartels are responsible for flooding American streets with fentanyl, and they must be held accountable for the deaths it causes.

Barnes goes on to argue that using military force against cartels is not only justified but necessary. He suggests that the US should take a more aggressive approach to the cartels, including deploying troops to the border and engaging in military action if necessary. Barnes acknowledges that such actions would be controversial, but he believes that the cost of inaction is simply too high.

While Barnes' proposal is certainly controversial, it is not without merit. The opioid epidemic has caused immense harm to American communities, and it is clear that the source of the problem lies in Mexico. The cartels have proven to be incredibly resilient, and traditional law enforcement measures have failed to stop their activities. If we are serious about stopping the flow of fentanyl into the US, it may be necessary to take more aggressive action.

Of course, using military force is not a decision that should be made lightly. Such actions carry the risk of collateral damage and could potentially lead to further destabilization in Mexico. However, Barnes' argument should be taken seriously. The rise in fentanyl-related deaths demands a bold response, and it is time for the US to consider all options to stop this crisis.

It is also worth noting that the US has a long history of using military force to combat drug trafficking. In the 1980s, the US launched the War on Drugs, which included military involvement in countries like Colombia and Mexico. While the effectiveness of these efforts is still up for debate, they do demonstrate that the use of military force is not without precedent.

However, there are also significant risks associated with using military force against the cartels. The situation in Mexico is complex, and the use of force could exacerbate the violence and instability that already exists in the country. Additionally, it is unclear whether military action would actually be effective in stopping the cartels. The US has been engaged in a war on drugs for decades, and drug use and trafficking continue to be major problems.

Furthermore, the use of military force against the cartels could strain the relationship between the US and Mexico, which is already tense. Mexico is a key trading partner and ally of the US, and any action that could be seen as an infringement on Mexican sovereignty could have far-reaching consequences.

In conclusion, the rise in fentanyl-related deaths is a serious problem that demands a bold response. While the use of military force against Mexican drug cartels is a controversial proposal, it is one that should be taken seriously. However, any action taken must be carefully considered and weighed against the potential risks and consequences. Ultimately, it will take a comprehensive approach that includes not only law enforcement but also public health measures and increased access to addiction treatment to effectively combat the opioid epidemic.

I'm interested
I disagree with this
This is unverified