Criticizing the US in Haiti

13»

Comments

  • josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 30,276
    Fuck Chavez & France ..........
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • nuffingman wrote:
    I don't care who coordinates the rescue effort as long as someone helps those poor sods.
    the voice of reason. thank you.
  • Heatherj43Heatherj43 Posts: 1,254
    So since no one else is talking about it. Why is Venezuela and France calling US support to Haiti occupation. Would they rather out support go away? The US is there augmenting UN forces and Haiti police forces. I guess we can do nothing right.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/01/18/2010-01-18_hugo_chavez.html

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/18/AR2010011801850.html
    What happened was that a French plane wanted to land with supplies, but the US had the air strips tied up, so they said we were occupying it, which we were in that sense. We were "occupying" the airstrips at that moment in time.
    Natuarlly, it turned into "we were occupying" in the other sense. And so what?
    I lived in Fort Lauderdale back in the early 70's. I can remember "the boat people" coming ashore all the time. I was young and dumb and thought they were Cubans, but they were Haitians. They would have these big row boats with 50 to 100 people aboard and would just row up to the beach. It was a very regular. It would often be at dusk. I couldn't believe that they could come ashore on a public beach like that and avoid immigration. It was a different time, I guess. We didn't know how vulnerable we were and didn't have such tight security.

    Anyway, way back then these people were desperate. It only got worse in the 40 or so years since. I guess we should "occupy" a place where such suffering is happening. Its humane. I do know the US doesn't do these things for "humanity" reasons. I know they have their own agenda, yet...does it matter? People still need the help.
    Save room for dessert!
  • Drowned OutDrowned Out Posts: 6,056
    Heatherj43 wrote:
    Anyway, way back then these people were desperate. It only got worse in the 40 or so years since. I guess we should "occupy" a place where such suffering is happening. Its humane. I do know the US doesn't do these things for "humanity" reasons. I know they have their own agenda, yet...does it matter? People still need the help.
    It does matter, because in most cases (not speaking of the current situation in Haiti), that agenda has nothing to do with helping people. It usually makes things worse for the (poor) majority when the Western world operates in the third world for non-humantarian purposes. Even much of the humanitarian 'aid' is LOANED - a morally 'justifiable' way to saddle these countries with debt.
  • This pretty much sums how I feel about this:

    http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=547

    Statement of Congressman Ron Paul
    United States House of Representatives
    Statement in Opposition to H Res 1021, Condolences to Haiti
    January 21, 2010


    I rise in reluctant opposition to this resolution. Certainly I am moved by the horrific destruction in Haiti and would without hesitation express condolences to those who have suffered and continue to suffer. As a medical doctor, I have through my career worked to alleviate the pain and suffering of others. Unfortunately, however, this resolution does not simply express our condolences, but rather it commits the US government "to begin the reconstruction of Haiti" and affirms that "the recovery and long-term needs of Haiti will require a sustained commitment by the United States. . . ." I do not believe that a resolution expressing our deep regret and sorrow over this tragedy should be used to commit the United States to a "long-term" occupation of Haiti during which time the US government will provide for the reconstruction of that country.

    I am concerned over the possibility of an open-ended US military occupation of Haiti and this legislation does nothing to alleviate my concerns. On the contrary, when this resolution refers to the need for a long term US plan for Haiti, I see a return to the failed attempts by the Clinton and Bush Administrations to establish Haiti as an American protectorate. Already we are seeing many argue that this kind of humanitarian mission is a perfect fit for the US military. I do not agree.

    Certainly I would support and encourage the efforts of the American people to help the people of Haiti at this tragic time. I believe that the American people are very generous on their own and fear that a US government commitment to reconstruct Haiti may actually discourage private contributions. Mr. Speaker, already we see private US citizens and corporations raising millions of dollars for relief and reconstruction of Haiti. I do not believe the US government should get in the way of these laudable efforts. I do express my condolences but I unfortunately must urge my colleagues to vote against this resolution committing the United States government to rebuild Haiti.
  • Dirtie_FrankDirtie_Frank Posts: 1,348
    Heatherj43 wrote:
    So since no one else is talking about it. Why is Venezuela and France calling US support to Haiti occupation. Would they rather out support go away? The US is there augmenting UN forces and Haiti police forces. I guess we can do nothing right.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/01/18/2010-01-18_hugo_chavez.html

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/18/AR2010011801850.html
    What happened was that a French plane wanted to land with supplies, but the US had the air strips tied up, so they said we were occupying it, which we were in that sense. We were "occupying" the airstrips at that moment in time.
    Natuarlly, it turned into "we were occupying" in the other sense. And so what?
    I lived in Fort Lauderdale back in the early 70's. I can remember "the boat people" coming ashore all the time. I was young and dumb and thought they were Cubans, but they were Haitians. They would have these big row boats with 50 to 100 people aboard and would just row up to the beach. It was a very regular. It would often be at dusk. I couldn't believe that they could come ashore on a public beach like that and avoid immigration. It was a different time, I guess. We didn't know how vulnerable we were and didn't have such tight security.

    Anyway, way back then these people were desperate. It only got worse in the 40 or so years since. I guess we should "occupy" a place where such suffering is happening. Its humane. I do know the US doesn't do these things for "humanity" reasons. I know they have their own agenda, yet...does it matter? People still need the help.


    No ma'am they think we are there to stay
    96 Randall's Island II
    98 CAA
    00 Virginia Beach;Camden I; Jones Beach III
    05 Borgata Night I; Wachovia Center
    06 Letterman Show; Webcast (guy in blue shirt), Camden I; DC
    08 Camden I; Camden II; DC
    09 Phillie III
    10 MSG II
    13 Wrigley Field
    16 Phillie II
  • Heatherj43Heatherj43 Posts: 1,254
    Heatherj43 wrote:
    So since no one else is talking about it. Why is Venezuela and France calling US support to Haiti occupation. Would they rather out support go away? The US is there augmenting UN forces and Haiti police forces. I guess we can do nothing right.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/01/18/2010-01-18_hugo_chavez.html

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/18/AR2010011801850.html
    What happened was that a French plane wanted to land with supplies, but the US had the air strips tied up, so they said we were occupying it, which we were in that sense. We were "occupying" the airstrips at that moment in time.
    Natuarlly, it turned into "we were occupying" in the other sense. And so what?
    I lived in Fort Lauderdale back in the early 70's. I can remember "the boat people" coming ashore all the time. I was young and dumb and thought they were Cubans, but they were Haitians. They would have these big row boats with 50 to 100 people aboard and would just row up to the beach. It was a very regular. It would often be at dusk. I couldn't believe that they could come ashore on a public beach like that and avoid immigration. It was a different time, I guess. We didn't know how vulnerable we were and didn't have such tight security.

    Anyway, way back then these people were desperate. It only got worse in the 40 or so years since. I guess we should "occupy" a place where such suffering is happening. Its humane. I do know the US doesn't do these things for "humanity" reasons. I know they have their own agenda, yet...does it matter? People still need the help.


    No ma'am they think we are there to stay
    But this is how that started. The occupation of the air landing strip and then they said we were occupying, period. At least that is how ALL the major news networks are portraying it.
    Save room for dessert!
Sign In or Register to comment.