RAZONES DE CUBA [clearH=10]
Opening for marijuana addicts in the US Army
By Francisco Arias Fernández
“Did you smoke marijuana and want to go to war? The Army allows it .“ That is the call or promotional announcement that the Latino press recently began to reproduce in the US, as part of a broader recruitment effort for the military.
This was the title of a recent report by the Miami newspaper El Nuevo Herald, where it is announced that, given the order to increase the number of US military personnel. and the increase in the number of North American states that have legalized or decriminalized the use of the herb, the Army will grant exemptions to those who have consumed that substance and want to enlist in military adventures of the superpower.
According to the rep[ort, the number of exemptions granted by the army to marijuana smokers amounted to half a thousand this year compared to 191 in 2016. He adds that this type of flexibility was not granted for three years and it’s justified by the need to fulfill the order to increase the forces that the White House has given. The army added that almost 69 thousand recruits this year, some 6,000 more than in 2016.
The only requirement is that addicts have to commit not to use the drug while serving in the armed forces. “As long as they understand they can not do it while doing military service, I’ll give them all the exemptions they want,” said Maj. Gen. Jeff Snow, head of the army’s recruiting command.
He added that exemption figures will increase as the states where the drug is allowed increases. Currently, in eight, the possession of marijuana is legalized and in 13 other states, it has been decriminalized, which means that the possession of a small amount is the equivalent of a traffic infraction or another minor crime that is not punishable by jail. Another 29 together with the national capital and the territories of Puerto Rico and Guam allow consumption for therapeutic purposes.
According to the report, recently Congress and other areas have expressed concern about the drop in the quality of new recruits. Army data reveal that more than 8,000 recruits received exemptions in 2017, compared to 6700 last year, mostly for reasons of physical or mental health.
In this sense, it stands out that the exemptions for marijuana use represent 25% of the total of those granted for misconduct in the fiscal year that ended on September 30. They also represent 50% of the general increase in exemptions granted to those who needed it for some type of misconduct.
In addition to the poor quality of recruitment, it is suspicious that armed forces that have been accused in the past of having a “hallucinogenic arsenal” that they have used in recent wars to manipulate their own forces, the civilian population, and its adversaries, so it is betting on the massive use of addicts for future war adventures.
According to the book “Drugs in war”, by Polish author Lukasz Kamienski, the Vietnam war was “the first real pharmacological war” with consumption among US military personnel that reached levels never previously seen. The study points out that in 1973, the year of US withdrawal from the Asian country, 70% of the soldiers took some drug, be it marijuana, dexedrine, heroin, morphine, opium, sedatives or hallucinogens.
He points out that no less outlandish have been later US projects. like the one to bombard enemy forces with pheromones to sexually uncontrol the soldiers or the one to use viagra with the members of their own special forces to make them more aggressive. Pheromones are chemical substances that cause specific behaviors in other individuals.
The Polish scholar describes as hypocritical that there are “very restrictive anti-drug policies … and in other cases official policies of distribution of these substances to soldiers in war”.
The call for marijuana addicts to enter the US Army triggers alarms when military budgets increase to exorbitant levels, when Washington establishes a foreign policy of threats of extermination against its enemies, of sanctions against adversaries and superpowers, of revenge and reprisals, and the executive’s capacity for strategic leadership is questioned.
Unedited Google translation of comments: