Mamu Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Very elite company to be in Nice job Pakis. Enjoy your status.:two_thumbs_up::two_thumbs_up: WASHINGTON: Just three places below Afghanistan, Pakistan has been ranked the 10th most failed state in the 2010 Failed State Index released by the prestigious Foreign Policy magazine on Monday. The list is topped by Somalia, followed by Zimbabwe, Sudan, and Chad. India is ranked 87 in a list of 177 countries. In India's immediate neighbourhood, Burma has been placed at 13, Sri Lanka (22) and Nepal 25. China is ranked at 57th place. Norway is ranked at the bottom of the list. "Shattered Somalia has been the No.1 failed state for three years running, and none of the current top 10 has shown much improvement, if any, since FOREIGN POLICY and the Fund for Peace began publishing the index in 2005," it said. "Altogether, the top 10 slots have rotated among just 15 unhappy countries in the index's six years. State failure, it seems, is a chronic condition," the magazine said. The magazine said Somalia saw yet another year plagued by lawlessness and chaos, with pirates plying the coast while radical Islamist militias tightened their grip on the streets of Mogadishu. "Across the Gulf of Aden, long-ignored Yemen leapt into the news when a would-be suicide bomber who had trained there tried to blow up a commercial flight bound for Detroit," it said. Afghanistan and Iraq traded places on the index as both states contemplated the exit of US combat troops, while already isolated Sudan saw its dictator, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, defy an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court and the war-ravaged Democratic Republic of the Congo once again proved itself a country in little more than name, the magazine said.
cowboysfan Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 they forgot to mention that its the most dangerous country in the world.If pakistan didnt exist then the world would be a much safer place.
Ram Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 There’s absolutely no need to feel euphoric about having neighbors who’re in trouble. Think of it, if your neighbor’s house is constantly on fire, it’s the real-estate value of your home that goes down, you’ll be the one who will constantly be awakened in the middle of the night by the wail of the fire-engines. Stability strengthens the moderate forces and marginalizes the extremists. Right now, there’s a quasi-civil war going on in certain parts of Pakistan, resulting in war-time like refugee situation in their own country. Rest assured these refugee camps are fertile breeding grounds for tomorrow’s terrorists and suicide bombers. And all it takes is a few thousand brain-washed men and women to create a generation long crisis in the entire region. But as Indians, we have plenty of reasons to be proud over the fact that we’re one of the sole beacons of sanity and calm in a region so mired in fundamentalist politics and policies. Sure, we have our pockets of instability, but by and large, India is the calming influence in a region full of wild elements. But boy, have we not paid a heavy price for our collective imperialist history. I know its facile and grossly inaccurate to pin-point any one reason for the reason of our instability, but the British came here 200 years ago, changed the entire dynamic of our region and left in a hurry. Its funny how Germany constantly gets pulled up for its Nazi past (and rightfully so), but hardly anyone ever mentions the role of the British in altering boundaries and creating new divides, something for which the entire region still pays a heavy price till today.
Clarke Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 There’s absolutely no need to feel euphoric about having neighbors who’re in trouble. Think of it' date=' if your neighbor’s house is constantly on fire, it’s the real-estate value of your home that goes down, [b']you’ll be the one who will constantly be awakened in the middle of the night by the wail of the fire-engines. Unless u are able to sound proof & fire proof your walls. Ok bad analogy, but Mexico isnt exactly heaven, and Texas/Arizona have not had a fraction of the drug violence that can be seen across the border. If we were to use the best of technology and manpower and stop crying about vast borders and a billion plus population, we could minimize the collateral effect you might be referring to.
Ram Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Unless u are able to sound proof & fire proof your walls. Ok bad analogy, but Mexico isnt exactly heaven, and Texas/Arizona have not had a fraction of the drug violence that can be seen across the border. If we were to use the best of technology and manpower and stop crying about vast borders and a billion plus population, we could minimize the collateral effect you might be referring to. You havent been following the news. The entire point of the new ‘Papers Please’ Arizona immigration law was a tacit concession that the US has simply been ineffective in sealing its borders. So their entire focus in tackling illegal immigration has actually shifted to apprehending criminals who are already here. And did you also know that Arizona leads the entire country in drug-related abductions and extortions? Fact is, if someone is desperate, whether it be a poor Mexican wanting to work illegally in the US to support his family back home, or a brainwashed Pakistani wanting to murder innocent Indians on the back of a perverted faith, they will manage to find their way across, however robust the border defences are. That is the reality of the geo-political situation that we find ourselves in and there’s no getting away from it. We share a land and maritime boundary with our biggest foe that’s 1000s of miles long, they look quite similar to us, their entire creation is borne out of a separate identity and animosity towards us. This makes the task of preventing insurgent elements from crossing over and causing destruction a statistical and practical impossibility. To put it in short, the concept of Homeland Security in India will forever remain a mirage, as long as our neighbors also continue to be hostile towards us. And don’t also forget, all it takes is a handful of people to wreak havoc in any one of India’s cities, as the Mumbai terror attacks showed. There can be no permanent peace in India, unless institutions of moderation and progress take control of Pakistan. If the status quo continues, we’re doomed to a future filled with conflict and chaos.
Ram Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 ^ If you want to have a real debate based on facts and considered opinion feel free to participate, but if all you have to offer is mischaracterizations of others’ positions and fundamentalist opinions that wont budge no matter what, then this is going to be a futile exercise. I dunno what part of ‘We will not have long-lasting peace in our country unless the extremist elements in their society are marginalized and we must do all we can to make it happen. Till then, whatever we attempt will only remain a patchwork solutions’ reads to you as ‘Lets encourage them to attack us even more’ to you. Your position of open confrontation is a recipe for disaster and groundwork of a nuclear war that will annihilate millions of people and set back our country by atleast a couple of generations. If that is what you so wish for the country you so much love, so be it.
UmarAkmal Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Who did they interview this time for the report??? Last time the honor went to the talibans for pubilishing the eternal truth about Pakistan :giggle:
Ram Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 facts, debate :woot: :woot: :woot: :woot: :woot: :woot: :woot: :woot: :woot: On the Mahatma Gandhi / Dalai Lama scale of peace ... can we see a list of Islamic rulers that were even a fraction as peacefull ? We can start from Qasim to Musharraf. Your bigoted mindset will obviously seek to look answers for ALL questions through the prism of your Islam-hating glasses. As I said many times before, your understanding and interpretation of history is simply too narrow, inaccurate and skewed to even consider the possibility of trying to make you see other points of view. By trying to pin blame for all our current geopolitical problems on the back of one isolated ideology that has certain extremist tenets and its brain-washed followers, you’ve repeatedly shown yourself to be someone who suffers from an acute case of tunnel vision. But here’s a parting thought for you to chew on – The biggest murderer in the Post WW II history of our world is a secular nation that waged an illegal war on the back of fabricated evidence and bullying tactics that killed 5,00,000 innocent iraqi civilians and 5000 gullible coalition soldiers who signed for this war.
bharathh Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 ^ If you want to have a real debate based on facts and considered opinion feel free to participate, but if all you have to offer is mischaracterizations of others’ positions and fundamentalist opinions that wont budge no matter what, then this is going to be a futile exercise. I dunno what part of ‘We will not have long-lasting peace in our country unless the extremist elements in their society are marginalized and we must do all we can to make it happen. Till then, whatever we attempt will only remain a patchwork solutions’ reads to you as ‘Lets encourage them to attack us even more’ to you. Your position of open confrontation is a recipe for disaster and groundwork of a nuclear war that will annihilate millions of people and set back our country by atleast a couple of generations. If that is what you so wish for the country you so much love, so be it. Although what you say about marginalizing the extremists is true, the average person in Pakistan does not actively shun the fundamentalists. In fact, most people in Pakistan believe that all acts of terror perpetrated in other parts of the world by the militant muslims are actually self-inflicted or part of some game to humiliate Pakistan. I am not sure how India can do anything to promote the common Pakistani to marginalize their extremists, when the majority there does not believe that they can do anything wrong! The power brokers of Pakistan depend on depicting India as an evil country out to get Pakistan for survival. There is a reason that illogical rants from people like Zaid Hamid and Ahmed Quereshi are so popular among the educated middle-class in Pakistan. In fact the biggest fans of their absurd theories such as Ghazwa-e-Hind are university students.
Ram Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Although what you say about marginalizing the extremists is true, the average person in Pakistan does not actively shun the fundamentalists. In fact, most people in Pakistan believe that all acts of terror perpetrated in other parts of the world by the militant muslims are actually self-inflicted or part of some game to humiliate Pakistan. I am not sure how India can do anything to promote the common Pakistani to marginalize their extremists, when the majority there does not believe that they can do anything wrong! The power brokers of Pakistan depend on depicting India as an evil country out to get Pakistan for survival. There is a reason that illogical rants from people like Zaid Hamid and Ahmed Quereshi are so popular among the educated middle-class in Pakistan. In fact the biggest fans of their absurd theories such as Ghazwa-e-Hind are university students. You’re absolutely right. There’s a general trend of animosity and distrust for Indians among Pakistanis that cannot be denied, but I am sure you will agree when I say that among average Indians, you can find very similar reciprocal sentiments for Pakistanis as well. So what differentiates the two nations? While peoples of both countries distrust each other equally, some elements in the Pakistani govt. have successfully managed to institutionalize terror as an instrument of state policy, while Indians hesitate to employ similar tactics (Make no mistake, Indian governmental agencies continue to support at various levels, anti-establishment, renegade groups in Pakistan. The only difference is, we keep it down to a level that is not easy to be perceived). Pakistan, on the other hand, has an entire foreign and military policy that is based on the sole cause of under-mining Indian interests and destabilizing our Republic. We never stoop down to those levels. And that’s partly because, our leaders over the years have been great statesmen and mainly because in our country, the institutions of legislature and judiciary is simply strong for the executive branch of govt. to simply run away with whatever it wants to do. If we have to go down the path of reproachment (which quite really, is the only option, given the alternative is a protracted proxy war over several decades or a disastrous nuclear confrontation over a short-time), we have to encourage moderate forces in Pakistan to get into the government so that they begin to influence official policy. It wont be easy and it wont be fast, but that is the ONLY long-term, lasting solution. Of course, at the same time we must do all we can to strengthen our defences and deter future terror attacks on our homeland on one hand, while working with world powers and institutions to convince Pakistani intelligentsia and centers of power that they must abandon terror as an instrument of state policy. And If you had noticed, that is what is happening already, especially after Septermber 11. Obviously, it will be impossible to stop terror attacks completely, but the least we can do is to minimize the casualties while the wheels of change are in motion.
Ram Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 I thot you wanted a factual discussion ... No? So if my mindset is sooo bloody wrong can we see some peace merchants from the green and pure world ? You answer this question first, coz it has as much relevance to this topic as yours does – Why are all donuts round?
Ram Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 the first rule of a fact based debate is you dont indulge in rhetorics or answer a question with another question. So can you please answer my question in post#9 ? There’s nothing rhetorical or frivolous about my question. Its extremely important that we all understand why donuts are round because as I said, it will help explain all our current problems as much as the answer to your questions regarding Islamic rulers/govts who did not have a violent past. So, I ask you again – Why are donuts round?
bharathh Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 You’re absolutely right. There’s a general trend of animosity and distrust for Indians among Pakistanis that cannot be denied' date=' but I am sure you will agree when I say that among average Indians, you can find very similar reciprocal sentiments for Pakistanis as well. So what differentiates the two nations?[/quote'] The fact that till date, there has not been a single instance of a bunch of Indians jumping on a boat, landing in Karachi/Lahore and mowing down Pakistanis with AK-47s... Till now Indians have not been infiltrating into their territories to establish a Hindu fort... We don't have people declaring on national TV that there is an ancient prophecy which requires us to fly our flag in all the Pakistani cities. I will agree with you there that a lot of people blame Pakistan for many things that are not even remotely connected to them. However, the very fact that no Indian (despite many having a good reason to do so) has caused a normal Pakistani any harm directly makes us different to them. While peoples of both countries distrust each other equally' date=' some elements in the Pakistani govt. have successfully managed to institutionalize terror as an instrument of state policy, while Indians hesitate to employ similar tactics (Make no mistake, Indian governmental agencies continue to support at various levels, anti-establishment, renegade groups in Pakistan.[/quote'] At the risk of sounding rude... what proof is there of this? Are you privy to some information that is not readily available? I mean the Pakistani leaders are yet to provide a single convincing piece of evidence linking the government of India to groups affecting Pakistan. Just because people in Pakistan believe that because Indians hate Pakistan, they have to be sponsoring their militants does not mean that we should believe that as well. And that’s partly because' date=' our leaders over the years have been [b']great statesmen and mainly because in our country, the institutions of legislature and judiciary is simply strong for the executive branch of govt. to simply run away with whatever it wants to do. Who??? Other than Abdul Kalam, who else can be called great? And he was not directly involved in the administration of our country. If we have to go down the path of reproachment (which quite really, is the only option, given the alternative is a protracted proxy war over several decades or a disastrous nuclear confrontation over a short-time), we have to encourage moderate forces in Pakistan to get into the government so that they begin to influence official policy. It wont be easy and it wont be fast, but that is the ONLY long-term, lasting solution. Of course, at the same time we must do all we can to strengthen our defences and deter future terror attacks on our homeland on one hand, while working with world powers and institutions to convince Pakistani intelligentsia and centers of power that they must abandon terror as an instrument of state policy. And If you had noticed, that is what is happening already, especially after Septermber 11. Obviously, it will be impossible to stop terror attacks completely, but the least we can do is to minimize the casualties while the wheels of change are in motion. How is this possible? It sounds wonderful of course. Why would the Pak leaders who depend on portraying Indians as wanna be rulers of Pak, stop supporting the proxy war against India? When the moderate forces themselves hate Indians, how is encouraging them going to help any? Pakistan has note dismantled anything since 911. Also even a country with the vast resources of the US is sinking thanks to its gifts to the Pak establishment since 2001. How has this helped them build a better image in Pak?
Ram Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 The fact that till date, there has not been a single instance of a bunch of Indians jumping on a boat, landing in Karachi/Lahore and mowing down Pakistanis with AK-47s... Till now Indians have not been infiltrating into their territories to establish a Hindu fort... We don't have people declaring on national TV that there is an ancient prophecy which requires us to fly our flag in all the Pakistani cities. I will agree with you there that a lot of people blame Pakistan for many things that are not even remotely connected to them. However, the very fact that no Indian (despite many having a good reason to do so) has caused a normal Pakistani any harm directly makes us different to them. Dude, you’re mistaken, mine was a rhetorical question. Of course till today, no Indian has jumped on a boat and mowed down Pakistanis with a Kalashnikov and that’s partly because there’s no active Indian govt. sponsored covert program that seeks to train, arm and sponsor the infiltration of Indian terrorists into Pakistan, while in Pakistan, proxy war is an unwritten tenet of Pakistani foreign policy. Point me to one Pakistani citizen who unilaterally chose to become a terrorist and simply infiltrated across the border and started bombing people. The point I am trying to make is – Yes, our people are a lot more moderate than them, but their govt. actively seeks to radicalize their peoples to forward their narrow political interests. At the risk of sounding rude... what proof is there of this? Are you privy to some information that is not readily available? I mean the Pakistani leaders are yet to provide a single convincing piece of evidence linking the government of India to groups affecting Pakistan. Just because people in Pakistan believe that because Indians hate Pakistan, they have to be sponsoring their militants does not mean that we should believe that as well. Hmmm, I thought this was self-evident, but I’ll try to explain it nevertheless. Our intelligence agencies have a long, documented history of supporting renegade, secessionist movements not just inside Pakistan, but also outside it. In fact, our govt. was one of the few in the world who supported the erstwhile Northen Alliance in Afghanistan, in its fight against the ISI backed Taliban in the late 90s, even as the US govt. stood by and watched as Bin Laden planned multiple terror attacks all over the world using the refuge and hospitality provided by the Taliban. This has been clearly documented by Richard Clarke, former Counter-terrorism chief under the Clinton Admn, in his book ‘Against All Enemies: Inside America’s War on Terror’. If we’re going to fight Pakistani backed groups in Afghanistan, don’t you think we wont try to pro-up anti-establishment groups inside Pakistan? We have a long history of covert support for the Baloch nationalist movement (You and I can debate on the extent of support that was extended, but its an undeniable fact that support was given). Who??? Other than Abdul Kalam, who else can be called great? And he was not directly involved in the administration of our country. I meant it in a generic sense, not referring to specific individuals. And my statement can be backed by the fact that all our leaders have been democratically elected with a mandate to rule, while they’ve had to deal with frequent military rule. How is this possible? It sounds wonderful of course. Why would the Pak leaders who depend on portraying Indians as wanna be rulers of Pak, stop supporting the proxy war against India? When the moderate forces themselves hate Indians, how is encouraging them going to help any? Pakistan has note dismantled anything since 911. Also even a country with the vast resources of the US is sinking thanks to its gifts to the Pak establishment since 2001. How has this helped them build a better image in Pak? As I said, it is not going to be easy. If it was, it would have been done already. It will take time, but we have to persist and keep trying. World history is littered with instances of former foes turning into best friends, whether it be the American civil war against the British imperialists, or fascist Europe against Western Europe. It is possible and can be done.
Lurker Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Very elite company to be in. Nice job Pakis. Enjoy your status. Instead of rejoicing in Pakistan's misery(or being sarcaustic about it), you would probably be better served if you see that 3 nations that lie in top 10 have a direct role played by United States in ensuring where they are today. Regardless of which -ism you support(Capital,Social or Commun), the fact is Afganistan, Iraq and Pakistan have all been taken to the toilet by United States. US, and China, are two countries that have single handedly failed many a countries (in latter case you can immediately think of Burma and North Korea). Of course my post is based on the fact that seeing pictures of davasted regions aka failed states invokes compassion in you and so you started this thread. Now if you are happy to rejoice in misery well.....
Ram Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Because whoever makes them does it itentionally. I can make a square donut FWIW. Now I shall hold my breath for your profund explanation on the connection and ofcourse an answer to my question :nervous: Great Answer! Now lets go about figuring what connection round donuts have to terrorism. Just like how intermittent histories of violent conquest by Islamic rulers in the past can largely explain the current conflict of cultures gripping our societies, it is my judgment that round donuts actually have lot do with terrorism as well. You see, when Americans see round donuts, it resembles the Islamic symbol of the crescent, which spooks them a lot. And to add to that, whenever they go to any Dunkin Donuts to buy donuts, especially in the east coast, most of it is owned by brown people, which totally convinces them that US is being taken over by terrorists. In fact, it my thinking that the Bush administration gave round donuts as the no.1 reason for its justification for the WMD threat posed by Saddam and hence decided to invade Iraq and kill 5,00,000 innocent Iraqis.. OMG OMG OMG dude..! Between you and me, we have collectively managed to find the answer to a question that has eluded even the best of minds on this planet! Its the EFFIN DONUTS! :omg::omg:
bharathh Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Point me to one Pakistani citizen who unilaterally chose to become a terrorist and simply infiltrated across the border and started bombing people. He is currently standing trial and facing the death penalty for the Mumbai attacks. The others were killed. Hmmm' date=' I thought this was self-evident, but I’ll try to explain it nevertheless. Our intelligence agencies have a long, documented history of supporting renegade, secessionist movements not just inside Pakistan, but also outside it. In fact, our govt. was one of the few in the world who supported the erstwhile Northen Alliance in Afghanistan, in its fight against the ISI backed Taliban in the late 90s, even as the US govt. stood by and watched as Bin Laden planned multiple terror attacks all over the world using the refuge and hospitality provided by the Taliban. This has been clearly documented by Richard Clarke, former Counter-terrorism chief under the Clinton Admn, in his book ‘Against All Enemies: Inside America’s War on Terror’. If we’re going to fight Pakistani backed groups in Afghanistan, don’t you think we wont try to pro-up anti-establishment groups inside Pakistan? We have a long history of covert support for the Baloch nationalist movement (You and I can debate on the extent of support that was extended, but its an undeniable fact that support was given).[/quote'] So the fight was against the Taliban and not Pakistan itself. Also the Northern Alliance was in Afghanistan ... how did India help fight against the govt of Pakistan.. unless you mean that fighting against the Taliban means taking on Pakistan directly. Has any Indian group been guilty of the bomb blasts that have become so commonplace in Pak? As I said' date=' it is not going to be easy. If it was, it would have been done already. It will take time, but we have to persist and keep trying. World history is littered with instances of former foes turning into best friends, whether it be the American civil war against the British imperialists, or fascist Europe against Western Europe. It is possible and can be done.[/quote'] Fact of the matter is that there are some things that cannot be solved. I am not saying that we should give up on peace.... but chances of Pak ever finding peace with India is non-existent. In fact during the 60s and early 70s Pak was doing much better than India economically. That didn't stop them from initiating 2 wars against us.
Clarke Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 You havent been following the news. The entire point of the new ‘Papers Please’ Arizona immigration law was a tacit concession that the US has simply been ineffective in sealing its borders. So their entire focus in tackling illegal immigration has actually shifted to apprehending criminals who are already here. And did you also know that Arizona leads the entire country in drug-related abductions and extortions? Fact is, if someone is desperate, whether it be a poor Mexican wanting to work illegally in the US to support his family back home, or a brainwashed Pakistani wanting to murder innocent Indians on the back of a perverted faith, they will manage to find their way across, however robust the border defences are. That is the reality of the geo-political situation that we find ourselves in and there’s no getting away from it. We share a land and maritime boundary with our biggest foe that’s 1000s of miles long, they look quite similar to us, their entire creation is borne out of a separate identity and animosity towards us. This makes the task of preventing insurgent elements from crossing over and causing destruction a statistical and practical impossibility. To put it in short, the concept of Homeland Security in India will forever remain a mirage, as long as our neighbors also continue to be hostile towards us. And don’t also forget, all it takes is a handful of people to wreak havoc in any one of India’s cities, as the Mumbai terror attacks showed. There can be no permanent peace in India, unless institutions of moderation and progress take control of Pakistan. If the status quo continues, we’re doomed to a future filled with conflict and chaos. Let me explain with some depth what i mean. There is a definite difference between an absolutely secure border and an effective border. Closing any border entirely so that no human being is able to cross whatsoever is a direct path to bankruptcy. The way the border patrols and national guards deal with the issue of drugs and violence is different from that of an ordinary illegal seeking employment, at the bare means by emphasizing substantially more on the smuggler than the ordinary illegal. The same applies to the local law enforcement agencies as well. Together, the local and federal agencies track the high profile criminals and smuggled weapons/goods with much greater vigor and focus, which makes a lot of sense considering the immense task at their hands and the limited resources available. This is definitely the reason the violence on the streets of El Paso is much lesser than those of Tijuana. You can feel the difference between how our country deals with this issue as opposed to USA: remember the home minister's statements on 26/11 .. aisi ghatnayen hoti hai :blink: The same hota hai chalta hai attitude is the reason we are unable to defend our borders. The reason i say this: whether our neighbor is the most developed nation or a failed state is not entirely in our hands and never shall be. We can try by all means to resolve the Kashmir dispute and educate them that India does not 'steal' their water but that's what we've been trying for so long. They barely have democracy that's stable or decisive military leadership that is keen on a practical solution for an extended period of time, either of which is must to get the ball rolling.
asterix Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Looking at some of the "secular and moderate" POVs in this thread and the Naik's thread, I can conclude that Pakistan is one of the luckiest nation to come in existence as a neighbour of India full of deluded, stupid, pseudo-moderate, psedo-secular, corrupt, weak mentality individuals. Pakistan can survive and keep on bleeding a country like India for many years to come. Kya taqdeer payi hain Pakistan nei, Alhamdulillah! Jeeve jeeve..
Lurker Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 This is definitely the reason the violence on the streets of El Paso is much lesser than those of Tijuana. I beleive your argument would be Juarez versus El Paso, or Tijuana versus San Diego. Before you recommend the reason(s) why violence is lower on American side you should also understand why violence is larger on Mexico side - American guns. I know its kind of off-topic but your argument of Mexico violence is too simplistic and doesnt point fingers where it should.
Recommended Posts