US Navy Disaster Relief Task Force

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

well the US is right next to Haiti

True

would look really bad if the US just stood idly by.

USA doesn't get overly worried about world opinion.

Even then it looks like the US has spent several precious days and flights rescuing it's own nationals from Haiti while at the same time ignoring the plight of the Haitians themselves.

ALL nations put their own citizens first. For a government to do otherwise would be a betrayal of it's people.

Zero days were lost to "ignoring the plight of the hatians".

During Clinton's time the US made a military landing in Haiti with the aim of trying to 'Christianize' them. It looks like more of the same this time.

Here you seem to possess more information than the rest of us.
Would you care to elaborate?

[August]

Originally Posted by Snestorm

Good idé but, can you afford it?

We're paying for it now by having to re-task military forces away from their original missions. That's going to have to be made up somehow.

I'm just thinking that maybe dedicated assets could do a better job for around the same amount.

[August]

Originally Posted by nikimcbee

I think they need the Seebees in there to build some airfields so the supply planes can get in and out quicker.

Maybe after the initial response but building airfields does take time regardless of how good the crew is. That's not gonna help in the first days.

[CaptainHaplo]

*Sarcasm warning*

Maybe we should just pull all our people out, then nuke the whole area in the humanitarian gesture of putting all these people out of their misery. After all, they are poor, have nothing really to offer us, and are now living under the most horrible of conditions. Such an act by us would be merciful.

*Sarcasm complete*

I post the above to show the difference between what we REALLY do as a country - which is individual giving to assist those in need (regardless of where they may be) - as compared to what some on here seem to think we would do if it were not for "public opinion" of the world.

Now - before everyone piles onto Finland - its important to note that the latest numbers show they have committed aid to Haiti in the form of 2 information specialists, related equipment, and monetary aid which is estimated at a worth of about $1.8 Million USD. This information is from reliefweb.int in case anyone wants to check it. The US has committed just above $100 Million USD. Private donations - of which approximately 50% are from the US - are nearly $150 Million USD. That makes $75 Million in aid given by US citizens out of the humanity of the heart. So we have $175 Million in aid, not counting the cost of the forces (Naval and Marine) being deployed, as well as not counting the donations from all those "EVIL" corporations in the US that are giving in rather large amounts as well.

Private citizens on average - in most countries, really don't give a crap what other countries think of them. No way the US could recoup the costs of the aid they are sending.....

Could it be the US isn't nearly as horrible as some jealous and envious people would love to believe?

Naw... .couldn't possibly be that....

[stabiz]

There was an American doctor on tv today, who basically said the disaster is being treated wrongly. He pointed out that rescuing a few hundred buried under rubble looks great on tv, but the real problem are the thousands on thousands of survivors roaming the streets looking for water and food, and that their needs should be dealt with first.

Btw, why do the Americans here feel they have to find "evidence" that America cares (most) about the entire world? Who cares who rescued who, as long as people are being helped? Everything has to be a freakin competition.

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by stabiz

There was an American doctor on tv today, who basically said the disaster is being treated wrongly. He pointed out that rescuing a few hundred buried under rubble looks great on tv, but the real problem are the thousands on thousands of survivors roaming the streets looking for water and food, and that their needs should be dealt with first.

Btw, why do the Americans here feel they have to find "evidence" that America cares (most) about the entire world? Who cares who rescued who, as long as people are being helped? Everything has to be a freakin competition.

Because of the insinuation that the US only helps those we exploit.

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

Now - before everyone piles onto Finland - its important to note that the latest numbers show they have committed aid to Haiti in the form of 2 information specialists, related equipment, and monetary aid which is estimated at a worth of about $1.8 Million USD. This information is from reliefweb.int in case anyone wants to check it.

Glad to hear it.

or are you adopting tribesman's topics of just making stuff up?

Find a single example of me making stuff up Haplo.
What I write may not be popular but it isn't made up.
BTW any luck understanding scripture or science yet

[CaptainHaplo]

Stabiz - I wasn't posting to "neener neener neener America is better because look how much we give" - but to demonstrate that the accusation that we are doing this for "gain and profit" and some kind of religious force feeding is inaccurate. Had the accusations not been made, I would not have had a need to point out the facts.

Personally, I was quite gratified to see the reliefweb.net numbers - because they show that the PEOPLE as well as countries around the world are pitching in.

In cases like this - its not "how much" you give - its if your willing to step up and help. Its why I noted that Finland is doing what it can - everyone is - and that is why we should all be proud of humanity everywhere standing up and doing what it can - regardless of who or where those helpers come from.

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by MothBalls

You are cordially invited to go fu*ck yourself. You need a porthole put in your stomach, you have your head so far up your ass you can't see the world around you.

<Edit>
My apology to Neal, the mods, and the rest of the fine people at Subsim. If I get pinged or brig time for this breach of protocol, so be it. I'll accept it. But what I said, stands.

Ok, it's said, but please, no repeats. I know it's hard to resist replying to a troll post, but we cannot have this either. Seriously, you do not have to read it, Edit Ignore List.

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

Finland has always paid it's dues to the UN and has a long history of serving in the UN peace keeping forces whereas the US does things like the 1993 Mogadishu operation and the UN (Pakistanis, lol) has to come in and save their sorry butts.

Look, do not post this and then report a bad post when someone replies in anger. You know you trying to provoke a strong reaction.

We're paying for it now by having to re-task military forces away from their original missions. That's going to have to be made up somehow.

I'm just thinking that maybe dedicated assets could do a better job for around the same amount.

The problem there is what dedicated assets?
Each disaster is different and requires a different approach and different assets.
Pakistans was localised, distribution required helicopters and land transport, while the bulk shipping could use the countries ports and the main airports were unaffected. The regional US bases(and deployments) could be used together with assets already there.
The christmas tsunami on the other hand was very widely dispersed it hit different areas to different extents, that meant that a very varied set of assets was required operating from a wider variety of areas.
Now if you look at this one in Haiti, its localised and needs a whole different set of assets and approach using a whole different area of deployment.

It just isn't practical for the US to have a dedicated agency with all the assets it may need and a handy way to get them to all the places it may need to go.

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

The problem there is what dedicated assets?
Each disaster is different and requires a different approach and different assets.
Pakistans was localised, distribution required helicopters and land transport, while the bulk shipping could use the countries ports and the main airports were unaffected. The regional US bases(and deployments) could be used together with assets already there.
The christmas tsunami on the other hand was very widely dispersed it hit different areas to different extents, that meant that a very varied set of assets was required operating from a wider variety of areas.
Now if you look at this one in Haiti, its localised and needs a whole different set of assets and approach using a whole different area of deployment.

It just isn't practical for the US to have a dedicated agency with all the assets it may need and a handy way to get them to all the places it may need to go.

Which is exactly why much aid comes in the form of the armed forces which have these different modalities.

[August]

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

Which is exactly why much aid comes in the form of the armed forces which have these different modalities.

Exactly and it's an expensive and inefficient way to do it. Allowing the military to create and equip a command for the mission might be a better way.

Which is exactly why much aid comes in the form of the armed forces which have these different modalities.

Yep.
So while Augusts thought on the situation is an interesting one, it just isn't practical to have a dedicated agency with all the assets instead of using the military and its available assets.

Edit...with that last post thats gone full circle , from saying the military shouldn't be doing the job there should be an agency all the way round to saying the military should do the job as the agency