I'm in too but I'm a little confused. I guess Pedro Pascal is not returning as Javier Pena, which sucks. The way they ended season three with him watching the traffickers bringing it across the Rio Grande, I thought for sure they'd pick it up with him in the mid/late 90's in Mexico.

Looks like instead it will start out in 1980 and focus on Kiki Camarena. Looks good though.

I'll watch but this doesn't look anywhere as good as the first three seasons.

Not feeling inspired at all to tune in on this.

I kinda rather they had either picked up with Pena or even gone with an Escobar prequel to S1.

Season 2 was so stretched out it was nauseating. S3 just wasn't very good.

Pass.

Urban Ag said:

---

I'm in too but I'm a little confused. I guess Pedro Pascal is not returning as Javier Pena, which sucks. The way they ended season three with him watching the traffickers bringing it across the Rio Grande, I thought for sure they'd pick it up with him in the mid/late 90's in Mexico.

Looks like instead it will start out in 1980 and focus on Kiki Camarena. Looks good though.

---

IIRC he backed out once a producer or someone on set of significance was murdered. Major bummer.

I like the production quality and acting but it's just spread out and stretched so ridiculously long. They could trim so much fat. A major flaw of a lot of streaming shows imo.

yeah the location scout was murdered in Mexico just over a year ago when he was down there looking for places to film season 4. I've done some searches and can't find anything newer than a year ago to what Mexican authorities have determined, if anything. Pretty scary.

johnnyblaze36 said:

---

You didn't like season 3? I wondered how it could even be good without Pablo and man I thought it was surprisingly phenomenal.

---

Yep me too. I didn't realize they'd end season two with Escobar's death so I was apprehensive about season 3. But taking down the Cali Cartel was a great story line and Pedro Pascal was great. Man, I wish Javier Pena would have an autobiography published. Dude had any amazing career in the DEA.

With season 3, the creators proved that they could make an interesting show without the incredible presence of Pablo Escobar (and the actor who portrayed him) and the weird bro chemistry between Javi and Steve. I'm definitely in.

It's gonna be weird watching the show knowing the protagonist is going to meet a grisly end. (Not a spoiler since season 1 specifically mentioned it)

I hope they show the US going postal on those dudes afterwards.

Yea well known what happens to him as a lot of conspiracy theories that the CIA was involved and worked with the Cartel, since the CIA was in the drug business.

Season 3 was awesome, the Salcedo storyline was nails

I'm gonna miss Javi

BurnetAggie99 said:

---

Yea well known what happens to him as a lot of conspiracy theories that the CIA was involved and worked with the Cartel, since the CIA was in the drug business.

---

I haven't seen evidence of those conspiracies that has any weight. I hope this show doesn't go there. What makes this show so good is, as outlandish as the stuff may appear to be, usually it's based on actual events.

zgood10 said:

---

Season 3 was awesome, the Salcedo storyline was nails

---

Salcedo's wife was hot. Well for that matter, all the women of Narcos are hot. Muy caliente.

Yea be interesting to see if they do go there or not since this be the 80's and some of the rumors were CIA was involved to fund the CIA backed Contra's.

Quote from a report that's been a on going investigation a number of years.

"In October 2013, two former federal agents and an ex-CIA contractor told an American television network that CIA operatives were involved in the kidnapping and murder of DEA covert agent Enrique Camarena, because he was a threat to the agency's drug operations in Mexico. According to the three men, the CIA was collaborating with drug traffickers moving cocaine and marijuana to the United States, and using its share of the profits to finance Nicaraguan Contra rebels attempting to overthrow Nicaragua's Sandinista government."

BurnetAggie99 said:

---

Yea be interesting to see if they do go there or not since this be the 80's and some of the rumors were CIA was involved to fund the CIA backed Contra's.

Quote from a report that's been a on going investigation a number of years.

"In October 2013, two former federal agents and an ex-CIA contractor told an American television network that CIA operatives were involved in the kidnapping and murder of DEA covert agent Enrique Camarena, because he was a threat to the agency's drug operations in Mexico. According to the three men, the CIA was collaborating with drug traffickers moving cocaine and marijuana to the United States, and using its share of the profits to finance Nicaraguan Contra rebels attempting to overthrow Nicaragua's Sandinista government."

---

What report is that?

There a few out there done by FBI and DEA and also media investigation reports on some of the findings, testimony and documents

https://www.insightcrime.org/news/analysis/the-death-of-camarena-and-the-real-cia-guadalajara-cartel-link/

johnnyblaze36 said:

---

You didn't like season 3? I wondered how it could even be good without Pablo and man I thought it was surprisingly phenomenal.

---

This right here. I thought Season 3 was fantastic.

BurnetAggie99 said:

---

There a few out there done by FBI and DEA and also media investigation reports on some of the findings, testimony and documents

https://www.insightcrime.org/news/analysis/the-death-of-camarena-and-the-real-cia-guadalajara-cartel-link/

---

I'm not buying it. It looks to me that DEA guys believe that the CIA was responsible, and are grasping at anything can to make others believe it. If they had anything resembling proof, then congress would have had modern Church hearings about it.

A CIA contract pilot would never know such the details. And I'm not sure what they mean by "operatives"? Are they saying that American CIA case officers were present? Because I find that extremely hard to believe. That would mean Spanish speaking Americans would wander down there and somehow sweet-talk themselves into the inner circles of the cartel. That's not the way it works. How it works is American CIA case officers get foreign agents to be sources for us. So in this case, they would be working for the cartels (and likely would be really bad guys) but would provide information to CIA. So at most, CIA assets recorded it (at risk of their own lives) and then subsequently provided the recordings to their case officers. That is a far cry from the CIA ordering it to happen.

aTmAg said:

---

BurnetAggie99 said:

---

Yea well known what happens to him as a lot of conspiracy theories that the CIA was involved and worked with the Cartel, since the CIA was in the drug business.

---

I haven't seen evidence of those conspiracies that has any weight. I hope this show doesn't go there. What makes this show so good is, as outlandish as the stuff may appear to be, usually it's based on actual events.

---

you should read "Down by the River" by Charles Bowden. Im not going to derail this thread, but there is plenty of evidence that suggests CIA colluded.

Being that the CIA and DEA had widely divergent goals in latin American only fuels these conspiracies. The fact of the matter is that the DEA's mission was to curb the flow of narcotics and help take down the cartels. The CIA's mission was to contain the rise of Soviet influenced communism.

As such, the drug trade did in fact provide cover and almost certainly funding for right wing organizations that were battling leftists from Columbia to Peru. US military and intelligence/black ops interventions are not conspiracy in that regard, just look what happened to Che. To what extent is the question.

Uncle Gunnysack said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

BurnetAggie99 said:

---

Yea well known what happens to him as a lot of conspiracy theories that the CIA was involved and worked with the Cartel, since the CIA was in the drug business.

---

I haven't seen evidence of those conspiracies that has any weight. I hope this show doesn't go there. What makes this show so good is, as outlandish as the stuff may appear to be, usually it's based on actual events.

---

you should read "Down by the River" by Charles Bowden. Im not going to derail this thread, but there is plenty of evidence that suggests CIA colluded.

---

I won't derail this thread either, but I'll just leave this one last thing:

If there was much to any of this, then it would have been a political bonanza. One side would have loved nothing more than to pin this on the other side (even when assuming the president didn't know). Just look at this Mueller investigation. They are desperate to find anything and have spent 2 years trying. Yet supposedly we have proof that the CIA did all of this and they just let that go? That makes no sense.

Urban Ag said:

---

Being that the CIA and DEA had widely divergent goals in latin American only fuels these conspiracies. The fact of the matter is that the DEA's mission was to curb the flow of narcotics and help take down the cartels. The CIA's mission was to contain the rise of Soviet influenced communism.

As such, the drug trade did in fact provide cover and almost certainly funding for right wing organizations that were battling leftists from Columbia to Peru. US military and intelligence/black ops interventions are not conspiracy in that regard, just look what happened to Che. To what extent is the question.

---

But the CIA ordering the death of a DEA agent and over watching his torture and death? That is a huge accusation.

I too will not derail this thread


Pumped for S4. I love stories about the drug trade in the 70's - 90's and the production value is top notch

Anyone watched yet? About to start this one today.

Yeah, I thought season 3 was the best of the series. I'm going to start the new series after the A&M vs UAB game tomorrow.

I watched the first episode. I'll give it one more but found myself dozing off.