It sounds like UN and French aid would be welcome, too. The article talks about the US’s refusal to send military aid.
The US would be well-suited to send military aid in the near-term, they have military bases with helicopters in range of Haiti. They could secure the capital from the rebelling gangs within a day.
I’m not familiar with the situation in Haiti, but keep in mind that organized crime is inherently fascist. I would like an explanation from the developed countries in the area why they don’t think they should prevent an entire country from tumbling into fascism.
Haiti is a failed state. It isn’t just a matter of re-establishing peace. The whole society has to be re-built.
The US invested billions and billions and BILLIONS of dollars and a ton of social capital trying to rebuild a failed state in Afghanistan and it didn’t work. Not only did it not work, but the US has got nothing but scorn for it. No one thinks it would be any better in Haiti.
The US had a moment of glory when it won WW2 and then rebuilt both Japan and Europe into world class economic powers. Of course, those were highly civilized, sophisticated, and industrialized states and so America’s job was easier. Places like Afghanistan, Haiti, and most of Africa…not so much.
Any Western government would be crazy to set foot in countries like that. Maybe send some humanitarian aid, but otherwise stay the fuck out. Let their cultural peers help them out.
…The US had a moment of glory when it won WW2 and then rebuilt both Japan and Europe into world class economic powers. Of course, those were highly civilized, sophisticated, and industrialized states and so America’s job was easier. Places like Afghanistan, Haiti, and most of Africa…not so much.
Sooo much ewww.
How in the world, I wonder, did a beautiful island become suddenly swarmed and populated with an essentially non-homogeneous group of people from across the ocean? Surely their “uncivilized and unsophisticated” nature wouldn’t have allowed them to cross such a vast expanse. Such a mystery!
Any Western government would be crazy to set foot in countries like that. Maybe send some humanitarian aid, but otherwise stay the fuck out. Let their cultural peers help them out.
You’re right, it’s best that outisders remain totally uninvolved and let nature take its course amoungst this anthropologically typical country and neighbors… Well, I guess yeah, we can pitch in some goodfeels and be a tiny lifeline for a limited to few, after all, we gotta sleep at night.
Your sarcasm is not appreciated, but yes, Haiti was created by European colonialism. No one is defending that. The answer isn’t more European colonialism. Western nations can provide the money to help, but some other nation that is more culturally similar needs to provide the boots on the ground. Do you have a better idea, Captain Sarcastic? Remember that the comment I was responding to asked why the US isn’t sending peacekeepers.
I know exactly what you were replying to.
I’m saying your idea is not one that I think to be good. But, I disagree with opinions I see all the time without feeling the need to point out why. My sarcasm, and my bothering to reply, come from the same place.
Setting aside the conversation on what the US should or shouldn’t do, your comment directly implied that the Hatian people, and their peers, which we’ll give the charitable interpretation of neighoring island countries, to be less civilized, less complex, and not as industry heavy as Japan/Europe post-ww2. I don’t find that to be the language or implication of an opinion that is on good footing to say the least. Also, that you viewed those to be reasons that would make the task of intervention difficult.
I’m in agreement with you about one thing, doing a good job of stabilizing the hatian future is riddled with difficulty and challenges. Where we differ, is that the idea that the US (and other western governments) aren’t already highly involved/responsible for the current situation. The question is not “Should the US get involved now with how much violence there is etc”. The question is actually “Should the US continue to shirk its responsibilities to the hatian people for their hand in the hatian government that has all but collapsed?”
We aren’t jumping in or staying out, we’re either staying silent or a stepping up.
An entire country cannot mobilize an invasion force because civilians ask them to.
Without specific dealings, documents, and official BS, no country would enter another unless they’re intending for it to be an invasion instead of assistance.
I have no knowledge of that happening yet, but I also don’t keep an eye on the situation. It may have already happened, I have no idea.
But the idea that random people being murdered is enough for a foreign country to barge in guns blazing and declare martial law is kind of crazy to imagine.
I imagine if the US military mobilized a portion of its logistics to assist the government of Haiti, there would be 100 more threads going on about how the US has to stick its nose everywhere it doesn’t belong.
Personally I’d love to be able to bitch slap and [REDACTED] some politicians into pulling all support from Israel and redirecting the focus to assisting poorer areas around us. Building your neighbors up gives you a much larger foundation to build on in the future. Unfortunately nobody gives a shit who I am, so here we are, complaining about countries run by people who will never listen to or care about us.
Why isn’t the US sending peacekeepers?
Why should they? Why isn’t the UN? Why isn’t the French?
It sounds like UN and French aid would be welcome, too. The article talks about the US’s refusal to send military aid.
The US would be well-suited to send military aid in the near-term, they have military bases with helicopters in range of Haiti. They could secure the capital from the rebelling gangs within a day.
I’m not familiar with the situation in Haiti, but keep in mind that organized crime is inherently fascist. I would like an explanation from the developed countries in the area why they don’t think they should prevent an entire country from tumbling into fascism.
Pottery store rules.
Haiti is not strategically important.
Haiti is a failed state. It isn’t just a matter of re-establishing peace. The whole society has to be re-built.
The US invested billions and billions and BILLIONS of dollars and a ton of social capital trying to rebuild a failed state in Afghanistan and it didn’t work. Not only did it not work, but the US has got nothing but scorn for it. No one thinks it would be any better in Haiti.
The US had a moment of glory when it won WW2 and then rebuilt both Japan and Europe into world class economic powers. Of course, those were highly civilized, sophisticated, and industrialized states and so America’s job was easier. Places like Afghanistan, Haiti, and most of Africa…not so much.
Any Western government would be crazy to set foot in countries like that. Maybe send some humanitarian aid, but otherwise stay the fuck out. Let their cultural peers help them out.
Sooo much ewww.
How in the world, I wonder, did a beautiful island become suddenly swarmed and populated with an essentially non-homogeneous group of people from across the ocean? Surely their “uncivilized and unsophisticated” nature wouldn’t have allowed them to cross such a vast expanse. Such a mystery!
You’re right, it’s best that outisders remain totally uninvolved and let nature take its course amoungst this anthropologically typical country and neighbors… Well, I guess yeah, we can pitch in some goodfeels and be a tiny lifeline for a limited to few, after all, we gotta sleep at night.
Your sarcasm is not appreciated, but yes, Haiti was created by European colonialism. No one is defending that. The answer isn’t more European colonialism. Western nations can provide the money to help, but some other nation that is more culturally similar needs to provide the boots on the ground. Do you have a better idea, Captain Sarcastic? Remember that the comment I was responding to asked why the US isn’t sending peacekeepers.
I know exactly what you were replying to. I’m saying your idea is not one that I think to be good. But, I disagree with opinions I see all the time without feeling the need to point out why. My sarcasm, and my bothering to reply, come from the same place.
Setting aside the conversation on what the US should or shouldn’t do, your comment directly implied that the Hatian people, and their peers, which we’ll give the charitable interpretation of neighoring island countries, to be less civilized, less complex, and not as industry heavy as Japan/Europe post-ww2. I don’t find that to be the language or implication of an opinion that is on good footing to say the least. Also, that you viewed those to be reasons that would make the task of intervention difficult.
I’m in agreement with you about one thing, doing a good job of stabilizing the hatian future is riddled with difficulty and challenges. Where we differ, is that the idea that the US (and other western governments) aren’t already highly involved/responsible for the current situation. The question is not “Should the US get involved now with how much violence there is etc”. The question is actually “Should the US continue to shirk its responsibilities to the hatian people for their hand in the hatian government that has all but collapsed?”
We aren’t jumping in or staying out, we’re either staying silent or a stepping up.
But are we in agreement, also, that the US should NOT be sending peacekeepers?
Probably because Haiti doesn’t want them. They just can’t send them in, that would be an invasion.
Too many pro Putin bootlickers. It’s necessary for their survival that they don’t understand why invading a sovereign nation is wrong.
Really? Nobody in Haiti wants the US to help them?
They’d rather be gangraped and murdered? I’ll be sure to let them know you feel that way before they die.
An entire country cannot mobilize an invasion force because civilians ask them to.
Without specific dealings, documents, and official BS, no country would enter another unless they’re intending for it to be an invasion instead of assistance.
I have no knowledge of that happening yet, but I also don’t keep an eye on the situation. It may have already happened, I have no idea.
But the idea that random people being murdered is enough for a foreign country to barge in guns blazing and declare martial law is kind of crazy to imagine.
I imagine if the US military mobilized a portion of its logistics to assist the government of Haiti, there would be 100 more threads going on about how the US has to stick its nose everywhere it doesn’t belong.
Personally I’d love to be able to bitch slap and [REDACTED] some politicians into pulling all support from Israel and redirecting the focus to assisting poorer areas around us. Building your neighbors up gives you a much larger foundation to build on in the future. Unfortunately nobody gives a shit who I am, so here we are, complaining about countries run by people who will never listen to or care about us.
You do know that the US has fucked around and made things worse there, right? And not like once a long time ago, but like it was their hobby.
The article implies that the Haitian government is requesting military support.
From WHO though. And the US might not want to go in and make things worse due to how they have interfered in the past.
This is 100% the real explanation.
Please no. Somehow someway we would just make it worse. There are plenty of ways to help without guns.
Let’s establish a safe zone and slowly build out with the amenities we’ve come to expect in America.
Oh wait, that would work but it won’t be easy and cost money.
We only do things that are easy unless they make rich people richer faster.
Because it’s not a white nation.