i dunno, maybe i need glasses, well, i do but i dont see that bad yet... doesnt it look like 2 toy soldiers on a toy sub and all, rather the real thing to anyone else?

Read the article. It says, "complete submersion"

You sure you "seen" the 'zact same pitcher back then?

I could swear I saw the exact same photo before too, although it says the picture was just taken. Very interesting.

Found and posted several links showing a lot of subs. Have to go page by page to see most of the 30 subs captured so far. Located at #16 and 16.2

Your grammar usage tells me you 'seen' too much drug use! LOLOL. Hooo boyyyy!!!

Don't give them any ideas, last thing we need is dope torpedos washing up on our beaches

I agree, they will and be considered Morons if they did that. We can just blow them out of the water in no time.

oops thats "searching"

Posting before reading and understanding the article makes you look like an idiot. I should also add that the smart people on top just walk through the scanner instead of making security grope them.

Cost of sub included in the product. Money buys everything but good sense and peace.

I doubt a submarine would fix our border problem, other than lay there and look intimidating.

Off topic! Off topic!!

You should read a little closer next time.--"A submersible has the capacity to transport eight tons of cocaine, and it can sail from Colombia to Mexico."

they are not using these things in U.S. waters, otherwise the navy or coast gaurd would catch them i'm sure. just because our border patrol sux doesn't mean our military does.

yeah I remember the story about the narco sub in ecuador when it was found. think those are the pics/story that Longhair was thinkin of.

It's a bit more. This link shows about 30 subs.====http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&sugexp=ldymls&xhr=t&q=drug+submarines&cp=15&bav=on.1,or.&wrapid=tljp1297725953125028&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=ErpZTYe_CcS4tgew84juDA&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1&sqi=2&ved=0CCcQsAQwAA&biw=1263&bih=607

Oh, dear! Check out page 40 under "barbie." That is some interesting way to hide drugs.

i realy like it when such well think to be perfect peaple.discrimination is what closed minded peaple use when reality makes no scence to them .. if you dont realise by now most drug cartel lords dont use drugs . thay distribute thair product like any other company would . just couse you own a night club do you drink ? of course many of you wouldent think such a thing due to the fact that(drug;s) are in the conversation . shallow mindness keeps the flow moving .due to the fact that most think drug related peaple are just not smart enouph to achive . you might concider if thay are drug users or drug movers ? thair is a huge difference

M.R. Chase thank you for your kind words. Yes you certainly do have every right to disagree with my opinions. In fact one of my sons served for 8 years as a first responder and an EMT on our local fire department. He had similar experiences with the unfortunate drug victims he encountered. For a time he believed as you do but he came to realize that in most cases these people were as much a victim of unregulated and contaminated drugs as they were of their own habit.

Often they had no idea of the strength of the product they purchased from various street vendors as it varied depending on who you bought from. Some 'cut' it more than others so the strength varied. Also the unscrupulous dealers were not too careful what they used to 'cut' their products and occasionally poisoned many of their own clients. Eventually he came to believe, as I do, that if drug use were decriminalized the quality and safety of the product could be controlled resulting in fewer deaths by users, the profit motive for the criminal element could be eliminated thus putting an end to drug related violence in our city streets and along our borders, and users who are already addicted could be identified much easier and treatment made available to them so that they might get off of drugs. Another benefit is that once drugs become no longer some kind of exciting social taboo there is less incentive for our young people to experiment with them and because the criminals no longer have a financial incentive to provide them the kids simply won't have a source to obtain the really hard and dangerous drugs in the first place. I think this was proven in the results that Portugal has achieved with their 10 year old policy of decriminalization.

My point is that we simply cannot keep doing the same things over and over again and somehow expect to have different results. Outright prohibition has been used as a tactic in virtually every civilization known to man throughout history and it has never proven to be an effective solution to any problems. There are always going to be those who will resist and ignore such prohibitions no matter how hard you try to enforce them. So the question becomes what is the best way to deal with such problems then when simple prohibition does not work? Other countries like Portugal and certain European countries are trying different approaches and I feel that we should at least look at and give credence to their successes and/or failures. Otherwise we are simply going to keep jousting at windmills and wasting our time, money, and resources and having people die needlessly while we procrastinate and wallow in indecision.

Shepherdo86, the point of prohibition isn't to eliminate the use of the prohibited substance; rather, prohibition is society's statement that particular behaviors are not acceptable. Of course there will always be lawbreakers - the law exists because people do some things that must be prohibited. Murder is prohibited, so is bank robbery, so is drunk driving. You're not going to argue that because people still do these things, and enforcement of the laws against those things costs money and, sometimes, lives, that we should abolish the laws that prohibit these behaviors, are you? Why then would you make the argument that the anti-drug laws aren't "working" simply because people still use drugs? The fact that drugs are intercepted, that dealers are arrested, etc, is evidence that that laws are in fact working; we just need to continually refine them and their enforcement, and complement that enforcement with continued education and rehabilitation.

One of the PR errors in drug law enforcement is that it is cast as a "war", as in "the War on Drugs". This is an unfortunate terminology, because 'wars' have winners and losers and, if we're not defeating the enemy of drug use, then in public opinion we must be losing the battle. But drug prohibition is no more a war on drugs than a prohibition of murder is a "war on murder." Certain behaviors must be made illegal for civilized society to flourish, and there will always be those who break the law and who are thus subject to the consequences - there is no final victory against the prohibited behavior. Yes, there can be a debate as to which drugs should be legal (as alcohol already is, and it causes plenty of problems - do we really need more drugs legalized?), and there can be debate as to the place of enforcement versus rehabilitation versus education etc, but it makes no sense to say that simply because people continue to use drugs, the best solution is to just get rid of drug prohibition.

SL I understand and appreciate your position regarding the prohibition of drugs and actually agree with your point to some extent. Where I have a problem is with the degree of violence that this prohibition is causing in our society. That is actually the same reason for the repeal of the prohibition on alcohol. The criminal activity was becoming so violent and so indiscriminant (actually machine gunning innocent bystanders just to kill a mob opponent or authority figure) and the criminals were becoming so rich and powerful that our own police forces were simply overwhelmed. They were out manned, outgunned, and even faced military weaponry in some cases that included tanks and aircraft dropping bombs. That is when the public outcry became so loud that 'enough was enough.'

Now if you look at what is happening in Mexico you find that even the government officials in that country don't feel safe in their offices or on the streets. Women and children are being brutally slaughtered in the streets as the various gangs fight over territory and trafficking routes. Attacks on whole small towns are being carried out with armored vehicles, full automatic weapons, rocket propelled grenades, and even old miltary mortars. That is actually a drug war complete with military hardware and collateral damage. Then we take a look at Los Angeles, San Diego, Miami, New York, Chicago, Dallas/Ft. Worth, Huston, and other large metropolitan areas here in the U.S. and we see what used to be just disorganized gangs of thugs aligning themselves with the cartels of Mexico and even South America. They have access to all the drugs they can sell, all the weapons they can use, and are beginning to bring the same kind of violence to the streets of America that exists in Mexico today. In any major city there are parts of town that normal people and even police authorities just don't go because of the unregulated violence that exists there and it is getting worse. I don't want to wait until we reach the point where Mexico is now and what Columbia, So. America used to be like before we put a stop to this insanity.

It is way past time that we stop 'doing the same old things' with no change in status or significant results and take a long hard look at what other countries are doing successfully to combat these same problems. If we take into account the basic principles of supply and demand from the business world and the most basic form of child psychology from the science world there might be a better way to deal with the overall drug problem. Flood the market with a clean, cheap, regulated alternative and the criminals can no longer sell their unregulated and dangerous product. Remove the 'taboo mystique' from the use of drugs and many of those who might be tempted to try drugs simply won't have the pressure to do so. It won't be cool anymore because just anyone can do it.

This is sort of what the country of Portugal discovered when they 'decriminalized all drugs' about 10 years ago. Drug crime dropped to almost zero, overdoses nearly ceased to exist because the supply was clean and consistent, more addicts were able to receive treatment and ultimately kick the habit because they no longer feared prosecution, the number of new users dropped substantially because it just wasn't 'cool' any longer, and (huge sigh of relief) drug related violence ceased to exist. As I see it that approach has been far superior to the prohibition technique hands down.