Haiti, a nation... now without a Government

[GoldenRivet]

I've got one im willing to Donate.

:up:

[Oberon]

Haiti had a government?

When? :o

[GoldenRivet]

Haiti had a government?

When? :o

Until their president paddled to America, forged his birth certificate and ran for U.S. Presidential Office last year. :har::har:

but seriously...

they can have the one we have.

permanently, no backsies.

[Buddahaid]

I've got one im willing to Donate.

:up:

Yeah I'm sure. It's just, I appreciate the British Virgin Isles more than the US Virgin Isles. Less development and better for the locals.

[GoldenRivet]

Yeah I'm sure. It's just, I appreciate the British Virgin Isles more than the US Virgin Isles. Less development and better for the locals.

whatever puts Obama, Reid, Pelosi and all their mindless zombies on a boat to the middle of anywhere but here.;)

[Buddahaid]

whatever puts Obama, Reid, Pelosi and all their mindless zombies on a boat to the middle of anywhere but here.;)

Uh, the Democratic party does not have an exclusive on zombies. :har: We need a strong middle ground.

EDIT: Oh cool, I hated that last avatar.

[GoldenRivet]

Uh, the Democratic party does not have an exclusive on zombies. :har: We need a strong middle ground.

EDIT: Oh cool, I hated that last avatar.

truth there my friend!

One strong middle ground coming right up this November :yeah:

[AVGWarhawk]

There is a president of Haiti. I know, I got generators for his palace out of Frederick MD to Homestead FL in 16 hours. These loaded to a C-130 and gone! :03:

[TarJak]

Given the aid response from the US they are getting the US government whether they want it or not.:DL

[AVGWarhawk]

Given the aid response from the US they are getting the US government whether they want it or not.:DL

Excellent point!

[GoldenRivet]

Given the aid response from the US they are getting the US government whether they want it or not.:DL

I'm rather certain that if North Korea showed up with aid they would want it. :D

sounds like those guys need all the help they can get.

[SteamWake]

Wait I got it ... send Pelosi, Reed, and the Clinton's !

But wait.... stretch it out a looooong time so something can actually get done over there first !

Hey GR did you drop a link somewhere?

[Buddahaid]

There is a president of Haiti. I know, I got generators for his palace out of Frederick MD to Homestead FL in 16 hours. These loaded to a C-130 and gone! :03:

Wow! I mean WOW! I'm speechless, which is remarkable for today. Your a good soul.

[GoldenRivet]

Wait I got it ... send Pelosi, Reed, and the Clinton's !

But wait.... stretch it out a looooong time so something can actually get done over there first !

Hey GR did you drop a link somewhere?

no link... just talkin trash.

i couldnt help myself :D

[TarJak]

I'm rather certain that if North Korea showed up with aid they would want it. :DAnd then they'd have the North Korean government.:D They do certainly need help though. the place is a shambles at the moment.

[GoldenRivet]

i have seen mention that this is being labeled a U.S. occupation.

i could see where some might think that, but isnt that over the top???;)

its not an invasion for crying out loud

[SteamWake]

i have seen mention that this is being labeled a U.S. occupation.

i could see where some might think that, but isnt that over the top???;)

its not an invasion for crying out loud

On more than one occasion.

First Nutjob in Brazil

Then the French echoed him.


No really search it. :rotfl2:

[GoldenRivet]

On more than one occasion.

First Nutjob in Brazil

Then the French echoed him.


No really search it. :rotfl2:

Lord knows we have been there a few times.

but would this not be considered humanitarian?;)

[Buddahaid]

Lord knows we have been there a few times.

but would this not be considered humanitarian?;)

Yes it would, and is. But, if it does not fit in your political agenda....

[bookworm_020]

No dumping of governments on other coutries. You have to deal with your own toxic waste!

[GoldenRivet]

No dumping of governments on other coutries. You have to deal with your own toxic waste!

damn... guess we will have to wait 10 more months

[TarJak]

:03:Well Haiti ain't waiting.

[Oberon]

There is a president of Haiti. I know, I got generators for his palace out of Frederick MD to Homestead FL in 16 hours. These loaded to a C-130 and gone! :03:

Aha, that answers my question on C-130 range to Haiti. Thanks! :salute::up:

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Lord knows we have been there a few times.

but would this not be considered humanitarian?;)

Consider this analogy. I'm your next door neighbor. Peering through the distance, I manage to see that your kid has gotten himself hurt playing in your backyard. I rush over with two others of my family, with bandages and disinfectant in our left hands and with M16s in our right, climb over your fence in your yard. I start bandaging your kid, but my two family members have their M16s in ready stance and seeking potential targets...

How would you interpret all this, regardless of my intentions?

[August]

Consider this analogy. I'm your next door neighbor. Peering through the distance, I manage to see that your kid has gotten himself hurt playing in your backyard. I rush over with two others of my family, with bandages and disinfectant in our left hands and with M16s in our right, climb over your fence in your yard. I start bandaging your kid, but my two family members have their M16s in ready stance and seeking potential targets...

How would you interpret all this, regardless of my intentions?

Are there also gangs of bullies hovering around the injured kid trying to steal the bandages and disinfectant right out of your hands?

[Dowly]

i have seen mention that this is being labeled a U.S. occupation.

i could see where some might think that, but isnt that over the top???;)

its not an invasion for crying out loud

I can see why someone would see it as an occupation. I mean, you got what, 16 000 troops in Haiti atm, for an operation to help people recovering from an earthquake. :doh:

[GoldenRivet]

I can see why someone would see it as an occupation. I mean, you got what, 16 000 troops in Haiti atm, for an operation to help people recovering from an earthquake. :doh:

Fair enough, but so far Obama hasn't made a public address to Haiti saying

"All of your base are belong to us" yet so... not what i would label an aggressive occupation of Haiti.

[Oberon]

It's all about visible deterrence. You see a soldier with a rifle on patrol and you're a bit less likely to rob someone of their packet of rice. You wait until he goes around the corner and then smack them over the head...
Also, I should imagine a fair few of those soldiers are actually more involved in distribution rather than just standing around pointing their guns at people.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Occupation? Really? :roll:

I've never credited any government with an overabundance of brains, but even the most sinister politicians in the western world aren't that freaking retarded. On the other hand, there are politicians stupid enough to insinuate that this effort is a covert occupation, apparently.

The US military is regularly deployed to disaster relief areas for a lot of reasons. For one thing, most field units are mechanized to a significant extent, so they have generators, water purification systems, engineering equipment, and all that other crap. Even better, they come with built-in security. They're also already being payed. Other than the transportation costs and any seperation pay incurred for a humanitarian deployment the military costs about what it does to just have it sit around and fill sandbags in the US rather than in a disaster-stricken nation.

Does anyone remember the military occupation of New Orleans after hurricane Katrina? They sent like, 60,000 troops there but nobody was bitching about occupation. How about that Indonesian tsunami? I don't know how many troops were deployed there but I know for a fact it had to be in the tens of thousands. How about Somalia? I thought not.

The military is an efficient mechanism for disaster relief because all the assets are already in place and ready to go, that's why they use it. Well, its as efficient as a military can ever really be, anyway. :shifty: I think private contractors would probably be more efficient if the government could manage to contract a private entity at a reasonable rate, but since they overpay for everything I don't think that's likely.

[Tribesman]

I've never credited any government with an overabundance of brains, but even the most sinister politicians in the western world aren't that freaking retarded. On the other hand, there are politicians stupid enough to insinuate that this effort is a covert occupation, apparently.

I agree, politicians are stupid and often read too much into things. However the US does have quite a history of military intervention in the region and in the country. And while USAID (and its agencies)does great relief work it also has a history of being used as a cover for some very nasty stuff.
So while it can be said that the politicians are dumb for jumping to those conclusions, it cannot be said that those conclusions are baseless.

Does anyone remember the military occupation of New Orleans after hurricane Katrina? They sent like, 60,000 troops there but nobody was bitching about occupation.
How does one make an occupation of their own territory?
But wasn't the NRA bitching about the evil national guard entering peoples homes and taking away their guns:yeah:

[SteamWake]

One question...

Why in the hell would we want to 'occupy' a poverty stricken third world country with little to no assets. :doh:

[AVGWarhawk]

And while USAID (and its agencies)does great relief work it also has a history of being used as a cover for some very nasty stuff.



Can you cite some of this nasty stuff? I'm interested.

Here is cool one about Russia

http://www.infowars.com/russia-us-delivered-weapons-to-georgia-under-cover-of-humanitarian-aid/

Seems everyone is doing it. So what's the beef?

[Buddahaid]

I do not see any chance of the US annexing Haiti and adding thousands of welfare recipients to the dole. I don't think Cuba even wants it, however an effort would be made to prevent a base for terrorists being carved out of the rubble, so we will most likely help restore the current government and maintain order to that goal.

[SteamWake]

I want to hear about the Military intervention in Haitai. :06:

[SteamWake]

adding thousands of welfare recipients to the dole.

Look again

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/americas/haiti/story/1436831.html

[Tribesman]

Why in the hell would we want to 'occupy' a poverty stricken third world country with little to no assets.
Why indeed.
Why have they occupied it before?
Does it have more or less potential than somewhere like Puerto Rico?

[Dowly]

One question...

Why in the hell would we want to 'occupy' a poverty stricken third world country with little to no assets. :doh:

To spread American democracy and freedom? :)

[AVGWarhawk]

To spread American democracy and freedom? :)

Or whiskey :03:

[Snestorm]

Look again

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/americas/haiti/story/1436831.html

This is where they cross the line into WRONG!

[Tribesman]

Can you cite some of this nasty stuff? I'm interested.

That would probably be easiest if you look at USAIDs work with the old Office of Public Safety.

Here is cool one about Russia

Yeah thank god the west saw sense and didn't fully back that idiot in Georgia. What arseholes were it that was pushing for Saakashvilli to be let into NATO?

Seems everyone is doing it. So what's the beef?
If the Chinese were doing it in Mexico or perhaps even Louisianna would you have a beef with it?
If Chavez was doing it would Washington be throwing a fit?

[UnderseaLcpl]

I agree, politicians are stupid and often read too much into things. However the US does have quite a history of military intervention in the region and in the country. And while USAID (and its agencies)does great relief work it also has a history of being used as a cover for some very nasty stuff.
So while it can be said that the politicians are dumb for jumping to those conclusions, it cannot be said that those conclusions are baseless.
There are some activities that USAID takes part in that I don't approve of as well, starting with the billions it throws into third-world money-pits for no apparent reason, but I don't know of any instances in which USAID was a front for anything remotely resembling occupation.

I think it more likely that most of the protest over US troops presence is coming from politicians who are trying to blame their domestic problems on the US. The US is an easy scapegoat for governments that have a dissatisfied populace and/or domestic issues. It's easy to point to the US and claim that we have some clandestine agenda to rule the world or steal everyone's wealth or whatever hopelessly stupid thing they come up with at the time.

It's a lot harder for a populace to realize just how much of their plight is caused by their own government. That's true (in a slightly different methodology) even in the US. People here blame China and Mexico for everything under the sun without ever stopping to wonder why we have problems with those nations. To them, the answer is easy; cheap labor, greedy, ungrateful immigrants, evil corporations, whatever happens to be the fad at the time. They rarely question their own political system.

I imagine it is the same way for impoverished people who live in war-torn nations with corrupt or totalitarian governments. They look at the US and how wealthy it is and really believe that we are stealing their wealth. As if it was in some sort of finite supply, but they never look at their own governments which steal everything from money to relief shipments from them all the time and also often destroy any kind of real social mobility.
[/quote]

How does one make an occupation of their own territory?
But wasn't the NRA bitching about the evil national guard entering peoples homes and taking away their guns:yeah:

You're missing the point. I was trying to point out that US military intervention is a common response to disasters, even in our own nation. It was supposed to sound silly.

I'm sure the NRA was furious with anyone's guns being taken away, but they're supposed to be that way. The whole country is supposed to be that way about any percieved violation of the bill of rights. I'd go on, but I'm drifting OT and I'm sure you're not interested in hearing another rant from me. :DL

[Buddahaid]

Why indeed.
Why have they occupied it before?
Does it have more or less potential than somewhere like Puerto Rico?

The US had poor relations with Spain for decades in that part of the world and occupied Haiti from 1898 to 1936 after the Spanish-American War. During that time plenty of money was spent building infrastucture and developing business interests. The US has since then sent tons of money in aid, and I'm sure trying to keep another Cuba type communist takeover. So essentially a national defense posture.

[AVGWarhawk]

If the Chinese were doing it in Mexico or perhaps even Louisianna would you have a beef with it?
If Chavez was doing it would Washington be throwing a fit?

The Chinese do not have to occupy these placed, the own us lock stock and barrel. They own me financially. Oddly, I have no beef about it. Chavez has his own problems. Haiti is of no use to him anyway. :03:

[August]

If Chavez was doing it would Washington be throwing a fit?

Actually Chavez has been providing home heating oil assistance to some US citizens for quite some time without Washington throwing a fit.

http://www.citgoheatingoil.com/

[Tribesman]

There are some activities that USAID takes part in that I don't approve of as well, starting with the billions it throws into third-world money-pits for no apparent reason
There is always a reason, it may not be apparent.

I think it more likely that most of the protest over US troops presence is coming from politicians who are trying to blame their domestic problems on the US.
What domestic problems? (OK leaving aside that fruitcake in caracas as he would blame america if he got wet in the rain)

The US had poor relations with Spain for decades in that part of the world and occupied Haiti from 1898 to 1936 after the Spanish-American War.
Thats the war when they a had fake attack as justification wasn't it. Sorry, one of the wars where a fake attack was the justification.

The US has since then sent tons of money in aid, and I'm sure trying to keep another Cuba type communist takeover.
Yeah, those false flag operations in latin America were generally about some largely fictional communist threat.

Actually Chavez has been providing home heating oil assistance to some US citizens for quite some time without Washington throwing a fit.

Do those deliveries come with a Venezuelan military escort? After all who was it who said some of those areas of the US were more dangerous than downtown Baghdad?

[Buddahaid]

Thats the war when they a had fake attack as justification wasn't it. Sorry, one of the wars where a fake attack was the justification.

Yeah, those false flag operations in latin America were generally about some largely fictional communist threat.

No fake attack. It's been determined that is was an accident that the US took for an attack. Perhaps known by higher-ups and used, perhaps not.

Ever hear of the Cuban Missile Crises? That was not a false flag operation and represented a serious national threat from the Soviets.

[August]

Do those deliveries come with a Venezuelan military escort? After all who was it who said some of those areas of the US were more dangerous than downtown Baghdad?

I'm sure they would if the US didn't have it's own forces to keep the peace.

[Snestorm]

Thats the war when they a had fake attack as justification wasn't it. Sorry, one of the wars where a fake attack was the justification.

The USS Maine.

[Buddahaid]

The USS Maine.

Yes the USS Maine, which blew up about the harbor and has since been determined caused by an accident on board. This is based on photographs of the salvaged remains.

Hmmm, well I guess there is still debate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Maine_%28ACR-1%29

[Jimbuna]

I see the US troops as a stabilising feature/peacekeepers against looters etc.

They've put enough personnel and equipment in there to warrant such a presence, if not just for security to their own but also to that of the islands inhabitants.

I would like to see them leave though when some semblence of normality is resumed....but I guess that will depend on how the population settle and move on with the aftermath.

[TarJak]

Was Haiti considered normal before the quake?:hmmm:

[Snestorm]

Yes the USS Maine, which blew up about the harbor and has since been determined caused by an accident on board. This is based on photographs of the salvaged remains.

Hmmm, well I guess there is still debate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Maine_%28ACR-1%29

Accident or not, it sparked The Spanish American War.

[Tribesman]

Ever hear of the Cuban Missile Crises? That was not a false flag operation and represented a serious national threat from the Soviets.
Can you run through a quick summary of open and false flag operations representing serious national threats against Cuba in the years before that?

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Are there also gangs of bullies hovering around the injured kid trying to steal the bandages and disinfectant right out of your hands?

As I understand it, most of those "bullies" to which you mentioned are really other kids that have gotten themselves injured.

And I see like the real American government, you have completely ignored the very problem of crashing into someone elses' borders en masse, armed, without prior permission.

If the concept of sovereignty, or the sanctity of your own home on a domestic scale, is to have any meaning, you have to be control of access into it, yes even in emergencies.
-------
Sideline the CMC: Utter hypocrisy from the Americans - basically it is saying "Me putting missiles into Turkey to nuke you ... right. You putting missiles into Cuba to nuke me ... wrong."

[Buddahaid]

Can you run through a quick summary of open and false flag operations representing serious national threats against Cuba in the years before that?

Not off the top-o-the-head. This thread is piquing my interest, however, in regard to early twentieth century Spanish-American relations. Especially in light of the Spanish Nationalists, and the Communist movements in the thirties. Many people from the US fought against Franco's Nationalists whom they felt were the larger threat. Many of these people were not members of the Communist Party, but saw fascism (correctly) as the greater threat to world peace. This must have played a great part in how Cuba and Hispaniola were treated at the time. Certainly not an easy call. :arrgh!:

[Buddahaid]

If the concept of sovereignty, or the sanctity of your own home on a domestic scale, is to have any meaning, you have to be control of access into it, yes even in emergencies.
-------
Sideline the CMC: Utter hypocrisy from the Americans - basically it is saying "Me putting missiles into Turkey to nuke you ... right. You putting missiles into Cuba to nuke me ... wrong."

One would ask what type of government would place the niceties of sovereignty above the urgent humanitarian needs when that government has collapsed entirely?

Don't leave the European nations out of the equation concerning missiles. If Turkey were the only country in the area not under the USSR's influence, your statement would be more relevant.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

One would ask what type of government would place the niceties of sovereignty above the urgent humanitarian needs when that government has collapsed entirely?

A country that respects international law? A nation that respects sovereignty? A country that understands what it might look like to everyone that does not have 100% blind faith in you when you pour thousands on thousands of troops into a nation under any pretext?

What will you have said if it was say China or Russia who was doing the insertion of thousands of troops for "humanitarian cause"?

The closest thing to correct procedure, if no one can be reached in the Haiti government, is to go for the UN - I know what the average American, especially SUBSIM's Americans, thinks of the UN, but I'll think for something like this, for ONCE you'll get a speedy response.

And if one MUST take unilateral action, at the very least dedicated medics, not that many troops with guns. I understand the need for security for your medical and rescue people, but there are limits.

Don't leave the European nations out of the equation concerning missiles. If Turkey were the only country in the area not under the USSR's influence, your statement would be more relevant.

What difference does it make, in your opinion?

[Buddahaid]

A country that respects international law? A nation that respects sovereignty? A country that understands what it might look like to everyone that does not have 100% blind faith in you when you pour thousands on thousands of troops into a nation under any pretext?

What will you have said if it was say China or Russia who was doing the insertion of thousands of troops for "humanitarian cause"?

The closest thing to correct procedure, if no one can be reached in the Haiti government, is to go for the UN - I know what the average American, especially SUBSIM's Americans, thinks of the UN, but I'll think for something like this, for ONCE you'll get a speedy response.

And if one MUST take unilateral action, at the very least dedicated medics, not that many troops with guns. I understand the need for security for your medical and rescue people, but there are limits.



What difference does it make, in your opinion?

I guess it's in your general opinion of the inherent good or evil of the US what your feelings are. I have little faith in the UN to make a move anywhere near in time to render aid. First would be the discussions of what to do, then who would do it, etc. Meanwhile, thousands die of starvation because quick action was needed. Not that I disagree that the UN would be the through channels way.

To the second point, are you referring to cold war politics? The difference is NATO was a bloc of nations, mostly in the general vicinity, opposed to the further spread of USSR style communism with its purges and bloodbaths, not one small nation posing a nuclear threat. If that does not make a difference to you, than we can not find any common ground and should let this rest.

After reading this again, I think you are referring to more recent post USSR missiles in Turkey. I still think the same argument applies.

[August]

As I understand it, most of those "bullies" to which you mentioned are really other kids that have gotten themselves injured.

Maybe. We could argue the potential ramifications of what "most" entails in a country known for it's dangerous gangs and weak public safety even in "nomal" times, but either way that doesn't make a desperate survivor and less dangerous to relief workers.

And I see like the real American government, you have completely ignored the very problem of crashing into someone elses' borders en masse, armed, without prior permission.

Excuse me, I must have missed something. Are you claiming that the Haitian government did not ask for our assistance?

[August]

And if one MUST take unilateral action, at the very least dedicated medics, not that many troops with guns. I understand the need for security for your medical and rescue people, but there are limits.

There are limits? Whose limits? What you are saying is we should accept a certain amount of risk to our relief workers in order to, what? Silence critics? How many critics do you think there'd be if we some of our doctors and nurses are killed because we didn't provide enough security to them?

[Tribesman]

Certainly not an easy call.
Things are very rarely an easy call when you really look at them in depth.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Maybe. We could argue the potential ramifications of what "most" entails in a country known for it's dangerous gangs and weak public safety even in "nomal" times, but either way that doesn't make a desperate survivor and less dangerous to relief workers.

So, should America ever need international help for a disaster in a high crime area, you would think it OK that international help comes in the form of airborne regiments and special forces?

Excuse me, I must have missed something. Are you claiming that the Haitian government did not ask for our assistance?

They asked eventually. For example, they agreed to let the US take over air traffic control and airport a day after the US made it a fait accompli with Special Forces and two days after one of their ships grabbed the ATC role...

And if they did, I think they'll have asked for HELP, not TROOPS.

I think a good standard for Americans would be to consider if some other country had been the ones sending all those troops in the name of humanitarian aid. How about if it had been for a disaster on the American homeland, no matter how dire the situation? Would you have thought well if Russia or China sent airborne regiments to Katrina, and when asked pointed to "Security" as a reason? If you can honestly say that such a move would ruffle no feathers in you, at least you are consistent.

At the very least, worst comes to worst, America can force eject or destroy any airborne regiments Russia or China can send. The same can't be said like Haiti, or most of the world's governments versus American troops.

There are limits? Whose limits? What you are saying is we should accept a certain amount of risk to our relief workers in order to, what? Silence critics? How many critics do you think there'd be if we some of our doctors and nurses are killed because we didn't provide enough security to them?

Of reasonability, similar to reasonable application of self-defense. Generally, that would be determined by "community" norms - basically in this case at least try looking at what everyone else brought to security and comparing it to battalions of Marines...

If some US doctors and nurses were killed, I would think the biggest feeling would be sympathy.

I guess it's in your general opinion of the inherent good or evil of the US what your feelings are. I have little faith in the UN to make a move anywhere near in time to render aid. First would be the discussions of what to do, then who would do it, etc.

Make the resolution merely approve the sending of aid, without listing specifics. That should get it through ASAP by reducing the points of debate.

Besides, the perceived need for haste or efficiency is among the most popular excuses for the violation of safeguards.

As for the inherent good or evil of the US, I'll put in a neutral vote. I will say that I personally believe that the US motives in Haiti are at least mostly noble. However, their actions do seem to create a valid concern - though I think they are goofs of haste, not malice.

To the second point, are you referring to cold war politics? The difference is NATO was a bloc of nations, mostly in the general vicinity, opposed to the further spread of USSR style communism with its purges and bloodbaths, not one small nation posing a nuclear threat. If that does not make a difference to you, than we can not find any common ground and should let this rest.
After reading this again, I think you are referring to more recent post USSR missiles in Turkey. I still think the same argument applies.

While I think the collapse of the Soviet Union and Communist bloc was for the overall good of the world (despite my immense sympathy for the Russian military and MIC who got a most crappy deal), as far as the nuke part of the equation is concerned, both sides are morally equivalent - trying to keep themselves from being destroyed by threatening to destroy others. If you want to say that it is right for NATO and the US to try to keep peace by threatening Moscow with missiles in Turkey, on Polaris SSBNs ... etc, then it must accept that it is valid for the other side to keep peace by basing missiles in places that can threaten America and Europe as well.

[August]

Of reasonability, similar to reasonable application of self-defense. Generally, that would be determined by "community" norms - basically in this case at least try looking at what everyone else brought to security and comparing it to battalions of Marines...

Two points:

First what you think of as reasonable sitting in your easy chair thousands of miles away is probably not what we'd think of as reasonable. Who gets to decide, you? The world press? I don't think so.

Second, what "everyone else" brought doesn't really count for much when it's the US providing security for everyone, like we always do. If the US pulled out every "everyone else" will quickly up their security. It only makes sense.

If some US doctors and nurses were killed, I would think the biggest feeling would be sympathy.

Hmmm, sympathetic foreigners. I'm sure that will make their families feel better. :dead: Meanwhile their families will be lambasting the government for not providing adequate safeguards.

Look Kaz, without those troops field hospitals don't get set up, at least not nearly in the same time frame, equipment doesn't get landed, food and supplies aren't distributed. To create this soldier free illusion you will be seriously retarding progress and that will cost lives.

[Tribesman]

Second, what "everyone else" brought doesn't really count for much when it's the US providing security for everyone, like we always do.
:rotfl2:
One of the complaints was from the Brazilians who were providing security, though the Tunisian in charge and his Brazilian deputy were replaced 8 days ago by a Guatamalan and his American deputy.
Though of course there are some that say the Brazilians are not really providing security for everyone, they are just pushing France and Americas foriegn policies in Haiti

[August]

Naw we don't need security.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8474293.stm

Insp Aristide Rosemont, of the Cite Soleil slum area, told the BBC a large number of gangs had begun robbing and looting since the prison escape.

I'm sure that particular problem could be handled by a couple cops with night sticks...

[Tribesman]

I'm sure that particular problem could be handled by a couple cops with night sticks...
Oh dear, the clue is in the name of the place August.
So when exactly did the police, like those under Inspector Aristide Rosemont actually begin to venture into Sun City and who did they go with?
A complaint that the police cannot go into an area alone when it is an area they never go to alone anyway is not a valid complaint.

What is funny about what you wrote though is that the military assigned to sun city only lost 18 soldiers, whereas inspector Rosemont seems to have lost the majority of his police officers. Since the 18 troops have been replaced and the unit has been reinforced then it appears as far as that particular problem goes it is policemen that are lacking.

[Snestorm]

The bottom line here is that without US troops there is no aid, because it is those very troops that are providing, and distributing, the aid.

[August]

The bottom line here is that without US troops there is no aid, because it is those very troops that are providing, and distributing, the aid.

They don't want to see that. It's far more fun to sit back and criticize their betters.

[Highbury]

The US isn't the only country with troops there.. Canada has sent some and I am sure LOTS of other countries have as well... is it a sinister plan on a massive level to occupy all of the poverty stricken 3rd world ****holes of the world? Probably not...

[Tribesman]

The bottom line here is that without US troops there is no aid, because it is those very troops that are providing, and distributing, the aid.

That is simply just not true.

They don't want to see that. It's far more fun to sit back and criticize their betters.
That takes something that is not true and adds a strange layer of nationalist arrogance to it

[OneToughHerring]

I think the aid could be turned into something beneficial to the Haiti economy in the long run. Although it might need a change in leadership. Rene Preval (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren%C3%A9_Pr%C3%A9val), the current president, hasn't been able to convince the Haitians that the aid is coming and that the aid operation is succeeding.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Two points:

First what you think of as reasonable sitting in your easy chair thousands of miles away is probably not what we'd think of as reasonable. Who gets to decide, you? The world press? I don't think so.

The world press is probably the closest thing to a judge in these affairs. By the way, are your chestnuts in Haiti? If not, should you really be including yourself into that "we"?

Second, what "everyone else" brought doesn't really count for much when it's the US providing security for everyone, like we always do. If the US pulled out every "everyone else" will quickly up their security. It only makes sense.

I'm sure they would, but not thousands of troops. You DO realize that another way of reading this is ... what else could most of those US troops do anyway. They have a few medics and other relevant specialists, but in a much lesser proportion than other nations who send in specialists with maybe some security rather than the other way around! So what can most of the other troops do except as:
1) Very fit "volunteers" without specialist medical or rescue training.
2) Security

[August]

The world press is probably the closest thing to a judge in these affairs.

Screw the world press. Them saying the sky is blue would give me a reason to doubt it. I've never seen anything written by the foreign press about my country that was accurate so why should I ever accept them as my judge? Why should you?

By the way, are your chestnuts in Haiti? If not, should you really be including yourself into that "we"?

Who the heck do you think is financing all of this? The UN? :haha: It's my Army and Navy that you're criticizing, so yeah it's "we" as in "we Americans" who are in Haiti. What is your county doing?

So what can most of the other troops do except as:
1) Very fit "volunteers" without specialist medical or rescue training.
2) Security

It's nice of you to belittle volunteers. Here in America whole towns owe their existence to those very fit volunteers pitching in during natural disasters. Building levees, manning fire lines, search parties, feeding and sheltering survivors, tending to the dead.

Maybe you don't realize that for every soldier carrying a gun in the field we have a dozen or more support troops that handle the myriad number of tasks involved with keeping him there. Almost all of them are exactly the things required in any large scale relief effort.

So to expand your list a little these very fit volunteers provide:

3. Truck drivers
4. Material handlers
5. Builders
6. Graves registration
7. Water purification
8. Food preparation
9. Power and lighting
10. Field Sanitation

That's just off the top of my head. So just remember that if you want our troops out of Haiti then all those things go with them. I seriously doubt the rest of the world would ever provide all those vital things at a similar scale in anywhere close to the same time frame.

[Tribesman]

It's nice of you to belittle volunteers.
But it is you and Snestorm that is belittling volunteers.

Who the heck do you think is financing all of this? The UN?
Could you remind me again how far behind your country is with its payments to the UN, you know the organisation that does things like disaster relief as an example?
Its rather strange that you wish to make an issue over how your country is paying for doing disaster relief itself when it owes lots and lots of money to the group it set up to do the job.

3. Truck drivers
4. Material handlers
5. Builders
6. Graves registration
7. Water purification
8. Food preparation
9. Power and lighting
10. Field Sanitation

So the same jobs as the group you are supposed to be paying to do the job.

[Snestorm]

The world press is probably the closest thing to a judge in these affairs.

What exactly is the world press?

At the very minimum, different countries and regions, have different priorities as to how relevent an event is, and what qualifies as relevant.

Personaly, I stick with the danish press.

[Snestorm]

But it is you and Snestorm that is belittling volunteers.

Where exactly did Snestorm do this?

[Tribesman]

Where exactly did Snestorm do this?
Post#67 where you ignore every aid effort apart from that of the US military.
In case you didn't notice, what you wrote was simply not true.

[urfisch]

newspaper says:

- 130.000 confirmed dead
- 190.000 confirmed wounded
- 600.000 homeless

---

these are horrible stats!!

:cry:

its like a nuke hit the town...

[Snestorm]

Post#67 where you ignore every aid effort apart from that of the US military.
In case you didn't notice, what you wrote was simply not true.

There is nothing belittling to volunteers in post # 67.

[Tribesman]

There is nothing belittling to volunteers in post # 67.
Of course there is.
By falsely claiming that its only the US military that is getting things done you denigrate the work of every other volunteer and agency.
You made a very definitive statement, and that statement is just plain wrong.

[Biggles]

Is this entire thread based on a joke?:doh:

[August]

There is nothing belittling to volunteers in post # 67.

Don't feed the troll Sne.

[Tribesman]

Don't feed the troll Sne.
Is that Augustspeak for "Ooops I wrote something untrue again and will try and avoid facing the fact that I wrote nonsense":rotfl2:

[Snestorm]

Don't feed the troll Sne.

Good advice.

[Tribesman]

Good advice.
Good advice would be, "don't write things that are not true".
The problem is that both you and August have carried on in the same vein long after it was obvious that what you were writing was untrue.
To still continue with the same claism after it is obviously untrue transforms your claims into outright lies.
People who write outright lies to inflame a discussion are known as trolls.:rotfl2:

[Jimbuna]

<Back OT>

Some of the British search and rescue teams began arriving home yesterday so it's beginning to look like any chance of finding further survivors in the rubble is pretty slim :hmmm: