Haitian earthquake was used as an excuse for US invasion

perseus said:
Covertly and Overtly it most definitely does, here are just 3 examples taken at random

Source Iraqi casualties March 2003 to...
Click to expand...

I will start by tearing your cites to pieces.

Please cite a batter source than the Lancet, which lost all credibility by keeping up a discredited mmr/autism study for 12 years. :eek:

The ORB is obviously inflated. 1.2 million deaths would be 150 Srebrenica massacres, which is not possible. And it destroys its credibility when it says "more than one million iraqis murdered" and the only source saying it is credible is "media lens".

Vincent Bugliosi and the Iraq body count estimate ~100k deaths. And most of the civilian deaths can be attributed to the baathists.

The Contra war was started by the KGB backed sandinistas when they sought to implement a totalitarian dictatorship (c'mon, they were bringing in the STASI :eek:). As well as that, the Sandinistas were persecuting the Miskito and have their fair share of the bloodshed.

As for Chile, no comparison. Pinochet removed a tyrant on the orders of the chamber of deputies. That is so bad an analogy, i think alien space bats are more apt. Linky: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Agreement_of_the_Chamber_of_Deputies_of_Chile
 
Last edited:
JihadJane said:
No, I didn't "dodge" your question - I was waiting for clarification about your military activities. The ideology I had in mind was right wing militarism.
Click to expand...

Well, you were wrong.

Your version of the history of Haiti/US relations is highly sanitized, ignoring, for example, the active US role in promoting the thug coup it later gave up on ("overthrew"), after the coup gang slaughtered thousands of the opposition.
Click to expand...

And I find your version laughable. It continues to ignore that the last two military actions in Haiti were specifically for the benefit and at the request of Aristide himself. It also means that when the US military has finally decided to just take over the country, it has done so at a time when Aristide is not only not in power, but not particularly likely to be again.

Also, there is whole having absolutely nothing to gain from doing so thing.
 
I will start by tearing your cites to pieces.

Please cite a batter source than the Lancet, which lost all credibility by keeping up a discredited mmr/autism study for 12 years
Click to expand...

Out of all the Iraqi casualty surveys so far, only the Lancet surveys and the Iraq Family Health Survey were peer-reviewed.

Regarding MMR it seems that your method is to take one article out of thousands to represent the entire journal or organisation, this smells of 'glaciergate' syndrome. Your other assertions are so biased they are hardly worth commenting on.
 
Last edited:
This is about Haiti. Not about how many people the Baathists have blown up in Iraq.
 
perseus said:
Covertly and Overtly it most definitely does, here are just 3 examples taken at random

Source Iraqi casualties March 2003 to...
Click to expand...

I love that "random examples" taken from 1973 and 1984 somehow prove something that the US is doing in the present.

I know it's been two pages now and all, but the Cold War is still over.
 
perseus said:
Out of all the Iraqi casualty surveys so far, only the Lancet surveys and the Iraq Family Health Survey were peer-reviewed.

Regarding MMR it seems that your method is to take one article out of thousands to represent the entire journal or organisation, this smells of 'glaciergate' syndrome. Your other assertions are so biased they are hardly worth commenting on.
Click to expand...

Handwavium aside, the Lancet is an unreliable source for keeping up the MMR Autism "peer reviewed" study. It also used less than credible means of calculating the death toll.

You can't respond to my other assertions because i tore your claims to ribbons.
 
After reading through this thread, I am still left with several questions that seem to be unanswered.
Why in hell would the US, or any other country for that matter, want to invade Haiti?
Why aren’t the other countries that are in Haiti being accused of doing the same thing? Or, is it a joint effort?
Why are all conspiracy theorists alike?
Just asking.
 
fess said:
After reading through this thread, I am still left with several questions that seem to be unanswered.
Why in hell would the US, or any other country for that matter, want to invade Haiti?
Why aren’t the other countries that are in Haiti being accused of doing the same thing? Or, is it a joint effort?
Why are all conspiracy theorists alike?
Just asking.
Click to expand...

Well you haven't read the thread closely enough since this is one of those issues addressed early on.

If you are a ruthless CEO and dissent is spreading in one of your smaller subsidiaries do you just ignore it or stamp it out so it doesn't spread? The US has had their hands on Haiti many times in the recent past as well as many small Latin American countries for much the same reason. By liberalising international markets they ostensibly provide the impression of free country which are de facto providers of slave labour for US Corporations.

The aid effort was effectively handed over to the US and is dominated by US combat troops.

It seems that you have made your mind up, this is hardly a crack pot theory, the evidence supports that this is far more than a pure humanitarian mission, it merely requires looking beyond the politically biased media you are constantly fed.
 
perseus said:
this is hardly a crack pot theory, the evidence supports that this is far more than a pure humanitarian mission, it merely requires looking beyond the politically biased media you are constantly fed.
Click to expand...

Wrong. This is nothing more than a crackpot theory based on nothing besides hatred of the USA and capitalism in general.
 
perseus said:
Well you haven't read the thread closely enough since this is one of those issues addressed early on.

If you are a ruthless CEO and dissent is spreading in one of your smaller subsidiaries do you just ignore it or stamp it out so it doesn't spread?
Click to expand...

What "dissent" are you talking about? Who's the CEO in this analogy?

perseus said:
By liberalising international markets they ostensibly provide the impression of free country which are de facto providers of slave labour for US Corporations.
Click to expand...

Please explain to us what this "de facto slave labor" in Haiti was and what US corporations were using it.

perseus said:
The aid effort was effectively handed over to the US and is dominated by US combat troops.
Click to expand...

It has been explained to you many times that only a fraction of the troops are "combat" troops.

perseus said:
It seems that you have made your mind up, this is hardly a crack pot theory, the evidence supports that this is far more than a pure humanitarian mission, it merely requires looking beyond the politically biased media you are constantly fed.
Click to expand...

In what way is the media politically biased and how do you account for those that don't watch TV that don't believe your ideas?
 
DC said:
opportunities feeds alot people?

in case you ment it sarcastic:

who was hindered to help by the US army?
Click to expand...

Sorry, I thought we were talking about more than two centuries of political and economic manipulation rather than simply the relief effort.

Military occupation and effective a humanitarian relief are not incompatible, BTW, (tho the effectiveness of US effort to feed people is debatable). The latter can easily provide an opportunity for the former.


fess said:
After reading through this thread, I am still left with several questions that seem to be unanswered.
Why in hell would the US, or any other country for that matter, want to invade Haiti?
Why aren’t the other countries that are in Haiti being accused of doing the same thing? Or, is it a joint effort?
Why are all conspiracy theorists alike?
Just asking.
Click to expand...


I suggest you also read the other threads on the topic. Plenty of reasons have been put forward. Additionally there are large oil, gas and gold prospects.

(See, also, previous post. Do you think the US would allow a socialist Haiti to emerge from the rubble?)


NWO Sentryman said:
which lost all credibility by
Click to expand...

Hello Mr/Ms Credibility Seeker!

I've asked you what you consider credible sources - so far you have mentioned only Barack Obama, the fantasy "Change You Can Believe In", Wall Street puppet.

:)
 
Last edited:
I will now address each new point from the opposition that has not already been addressed multiple times in this thread:

There is no way the US could mine enough gold from Haiti to pay for this operation.
 
Rogue1stclass said:
I will now address each new point from the opposition that has not already been addressed multiple times in this thread:

There is no way the US could mine enough gold from Haiti to pay for this operation.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Just look at Japan's difficulties getting all those precious resources out of the islands they annexed during WWII. Of course, they had the additional complication of American submarines, but still, the fact that you have to set up remote operations and lug the stuff back and forth makes it almost not worth the effort.

And Haiti ain't no Indonesia.
 
Perseus, set up a thread just for you.

ETA: Jihadjane, Obama is more credible because he is accountable to the US nation and has a better reputation and is mroe open than your buddies ortega and chavez.
 
Last edited:
aggle-rithm said:
Absolutely. Just look at Japan's difficulties getting all those precious resources out of the islands they annexed during WWII. Of course, they had the additional complication of American submarines, but still, the fact that you have to set up remote operations and lug the stuff back and forth makes it almost not worth the effort.

And Haiti ain't no Indonesia.
Click to expand...

Plus, you know, the country was just destroyed by an earthquake. It's going to take some serious rebuilding to even get to the point where it could be exploited.
 
NWO Sentryman said:
Perseus, set up a thread just for you.

ETA: Jihadjane, Obama is more credible because he is accountable to the US nation and has a better reputation and is mroe open than your buddies ortega and chavez.
Click to expand...

Watch Obama lie about transparency:

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom