More drug war non-sense

I've been reading up on recent media stories that relate to drug war politics and there's one thing that's very clear.Every article that makes a stand in favor of the drug war mentions harm and anarchy and blames drugs for it all.They never make any points as to just how the drugs are wreaking all this havoc.There's no question that drug abuse is a major problem and that there's currently no measures that are having a positive effect on the drug sub-culture.Just saying drugs are bad is not doing a hell of a lot of good.The drug laws currently in place were legislated near the turn of the last century and have absolutely no basis in science or logic.Most drug users do so for the respite that others find in alcohol.Like alcohol,some take the use too far.Yet the government sells alcohol and reaps the profit with very little concern for those that cannot handle their drink.Drug war advocates always say that this is why the legalization of drugs is so wrong.That alcohol does enough damage and we don't need any more intoxicants legalized in our society.Fine if you like to drink.That these people can claim to be taking the high road is just ridiculous.I've got mine so f'you.I can drink but if you choose to smoke pot you go to jail.Never a word about the reason.That's because there is no valid reason.Richard Nixon,The man that declared war on drugs.Did so against the report of his own hand picked panel of drug hardliners who told him that pot was fairly benign and should probably be legalized.Nixon had a hissy fit and went on his own"good judgment?",and declared the drug war.No-one can say why he chose this reasoning but we can say that it was against all best advice from the experts and from his own people.This was the sixties and there was still thought to be a link between pot and heroin.Heroin was taking a terrible toll on US troops in Viet Nam so there may actually have been some misguided logic in his stance.We now know,however that heroin and marijuana have no relationship other than that heroin addicts often smoked pot at some point in their lives.They also drank liquor and smoked cigarettes so there's absolutely no other connection.This is no longer in dispute but it is still often used as a reason for the law against pot.All the reasons given for the banning of marijuana have been dispelled one after another.Yet the law persists as politicians find it easier to be a drug hardliner than to do the actual research that dispells the myths.People like the current contenders for the democratic and republican nominations are either former drug users(democrats)or anti drug hardliners like John McCain who was in Viet Nam and was one of the hard drinking soldiers that were so opposed to their pot smoking fellow marines.This was demonstrated in the movie Apocalypse Now.It was just a movie but ask anyone that served in the Nam and they'll attest to the split.That split has carried on right through to today and it's hypocrites like the current democratic contenders who will speak loud and long about the danger of drugs.They did drugs and they are now running for president.I guess they must be made of sterner stuff than the rest of us.McCain is at least a dinosaur that has outlived his generation.It's clear what he stands for and what he believes.The democratic candidates,at least to this point in time,are hypocrites that speak out of both sides of their mouths at the same time.They probably relax with a bong hit after every anti-drug speach.That's drug war politics.