Haitian earthquake was used as an excuse for US invasion

I would love to hear what kind of political/economic system Jihad Jane wants, since she seems to hate most of the current ones.
 
dudalb said:
I love the way extremists never get that using "evidence" from other extremists sites does not exactly help their cause.
Click to expand...

Yep, at best it's a lame argument from popularity. "Look! There's another person somewhere in the world that agrees with me! Perhaps there are more!"
 
INRM said:
What does a neoliberal economic plan mean?
Click to expand...

Read the article.

From the article:

"why [is]the United States is so obsessed with controlling a country so impoverished, devastated and seemingly inconsequential as Haiti[?] ...

'Why was the U.S. so intent on destroying northern Laos, so poor that peasants hardly even knew they were in Laos? Or Indochina? Or Guatemala? Or Maurice Bishop in Grenada, the nutmeg capital of the world? The reasons are about the same, and are explained in the internal record. These are ‘viruses’ that might ‘infect others’ with the dangerous idea of pursuing similar paths to independent development. The smaller and weaker they are, the more dangerous they tend to be. If they can do it, why can’t we? Does the Godfather allow a small storekeeper to get away with not paying protection money?'” -Naom Chomsky.
 
Last edited:
I love the way some people quote Noam Chomsky the way a Christian quotes Jesus, as a source who Word Is Law.
 
I think the Conspiratists like to spin information around, they must've been playing spin the bottle a little too much as a kid.

CTist 1: "I'm spinning the bottle!"

CTist 2: "It landed on the U.S. Government."

CTist 1: "So they must've planned the Haiti earthquake just like they planned 9/11."

CTist 2: "Yup! But we need hard facts & evidence to support our claims."

CTist 1: "Naw, lets just make sure we place blame on them so we can gain political status & pretend that we're smarter than most experts."
 
Jihad Jane,

"why [is]the United States is so obsessed with controlling a country so impoverished, devastated and seemingly inconsequential as Haiti[?] ...

'Why was the U.S. so intent on destroying northern Laos, so poor that peasants hardly even knew they were in Laos? Or Indochina? Or Guatemala? Or Maurice Bishop in Grenada, the nutmeg capital of the world? The reasons are about the same, and are explained in the internal record. These are ‘viruses’ that might ‘infect others’ with the dangerous idea of pursuing similar paths to independent development. The smaller and weaker they are, the more dangerous they tend to be.
Click to expand...

(Emphasis in bold is mine)

That's actually a very good point you stumbled upon. In fact our government operates on the principle that the less integrated, connected, globalized a nation is, the more dangerous it automatically is, regardless of whether it poses a serious danger or not.

Ironically we feel that we should be allowed to make our own decisions when it comes to development, yet we feel more than comfortable denying that right to small, less fortunate countries. Other countries should be allowed to make their own decisions when it comes to development. I understand if they were posing an actual threat to the world, it would probably be time to step in, but otherwise, let them do what they want.

INRM
 
INRM said:
Jihad Jane,



(Emphasis in bold is mine)

That's actually a very good point you stumbled upon.
Click to expand...

Well, you have to take into account the fact that Chomsky's quote is a classic example of a heralded expert speaking outside his area of expertise. Appealing to this type of authority is a common fallacy of clonky thinkers.

In fact our government operates on the principle that the less integrated, connected, globalized a nation is, the more dangerous it automatically is, regardless of whether it poses a serious danger or not.
Click to expand...

I would love to hear your supporting arguments for this. Can you provide some examples?
 
Pardalis said:
I expect this post to be ignored and the conspiracy theorists to not look at reality and stick to their original idea as per usual.
Click to expand...

Amazingly enough, it turns out that it's hard to get material out of the ports to the needy in a country whose infrastructure was just completely destroyed, its' roads un-passable, and so on. But nah, that's waaaaaaaaay to simple an explanation. The evil Americans are just securing their own base takeover!
 
JihadJane said:
Read the article.

From the article:

"why [is]the United States is so obsessed with controlling a country so impoverished, devastated and seemingly inconsequential as Haiti[?] ...

'Why was the U.S. so intent on destroying northern Laos, so poor that peasants hardly even knew they were in Laos? Or Indochina? Or Guatemala? Or Maurice Bishop in Grenada, the nutmeg capital of the world? The reasons are about the same, and are explained in the internal record. These are ‘viruses’ that might ‘infect others’ with the dangerous idea of pursuing similar paths to independent development. The smaller and weaker they are, the more dangerous they tend to be. If they can do it, why can’t we? Does the Godfather allow a small storekeeper to get away with not paying protection money?'” -Naom Chomsky.
Click to expand...



Got anything more recent? Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, even Iraq? Or do you just have to keep going back to the (20 year old) Cold War well?

ETA: Ya know what? Nevermind. This thread is about Haiti. A country that the US has twice in 15 years put boots on, and it still seems to be under its own rule. Why, exactly, should this time be any different?

And, for that matter, why bother using such overwhelming military force on a country that, I should remind you, doesn't even have a military?
 
Last edited:
When people misspell Chomsky's first name, I am never able to create the right "Norm from Cheers" pun. If everyone at Cheers had a hairlip, would that work?

/sorry - America bad. Western World bad.
 
aggle-rithm,

Actually the "Disconnected equals danger" is actually a policy the US uses to assess danger of other countries.
 
JihadJane said:
Read the article.

From the article:

"why [is]the United States is so obsessed with controlling a country so impoverished, devastated and seemingly inconsequential as Haiti[?] ...

'Why was the U.S. so intent on destroying northern Laos, so poor that peasants hardly even knew they were in Laos?
Click to expand...


Laos was being used as a base of operations by an entity the US was at war with. That made it a legitimate target.

Or Indochina?
Click to expand...

Again, there was a war.

Or Guatemala?
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware the US ever intended to destroy Guatemala.

Or Maurice Bishop in Grenada, the nutmeg capital of the world?
Click to expand...

Seriously. :rolleyes:

The reasons are about the same, and are explained in the internal record. These are ‘viruses’ that might ‘infect others’ with the dangerous idea of pursuing similar paths to independent development.
Click to expand...

When did the US last invade Jamaica? Or Belize? How long has the ongoing US occupation of Sri Lanka been dragged out? When do Marines land on Sao Tome to wreak havoc and "show them who's boss?"

The smaller and weaker they are, the more dangerous they tend to be.
Click to expand...

Makes perfect sense......in bizarro world.

Does the Godfather allow a small storekeeper to get away with not paying protection money?'” -Naom Chomsky.
Click to expand...

Actually the Godfather might. He's worried about the other big bosses. It's the small time thugs that the shopkeeper should be worried about.

INRM said:
Jihad Jane,

(Emphasis in bold is mine)

That's actually a very good point you stumbled upon. In fact our government operates on the principle that the less integrated, connected, globalized a nation is, the more dangerous it automatically is, regardless of whether it poses a serious danger or not.
Click to expand...

That's because the less integrated and globalized a nation is the more likely it is to go one of two ways; become a psychotic state like North Korea or a failed state like Somalia. When they become psychotic they pose a military risk. When they become failed states they become the responsibility of more developed nations to bail out and reconstruct. The US has already had to bail out Haiti more than once so it makes sense to try and improve its economy and connect it to the rest of the world so that it won't have to be done again.
 
I love watching CT’ers in action. How do they prove the US was involved in causing the earthquake in Haiti; bring up something that happened 20 years ago… long before HAARP was even a dream. Or, we invaded Haiti because we have invaded other countries. Or, any other thing they can think of.
It sure didn’t take me long to see who was who in this thread.
Just saying...
 
Well spotted Jihad Jane. Good report. This confirms our suspicions and the brainwashed nature of the forum members on this thread. Shame it will fall on deaf ears.

While much of the corporate media fixated on "looters,” virtually every independent observer in Haiti after the earthquake noted the lack of violence. Even Lt. Gen. Keen described the security situation as "relatively calm." One aid worker in Haiti, Leisa Faulkner, said, “There is no security threat from the Haitian people. Aid workers do not need to fear them. I would really like for the guys with the rifles to put them down and pick up shovels to help find people still buried in the rubble of collapsed buildings and homes. It just makes me furious to see multiple truckloads of fellows with automatic rifles."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Ever think the "relative calm" might be due to the security forces? No, of course you didn't. You are blinded by your hatred of the US; all that matters to you is making the US look as evil as possible. It is pretty disgusting how you people are using this tragedy to push your stupid political ideology.

The truth of the matter is that the "occupation" of Haiti will cost the US billions of dollars and there is no way that it will gain anything from it. You people are crazy.
 
perseus said:
Well spotted Jihad Jane. Good report. This confirms our suspicions and the brainwashed nature of the forum members on this thread. Shame it will fall on deaf ears.
Click to expand...

Seems like the Haitians would try to fight back if they were being invaded. Maybe they know something you don't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom