Haitian earthquake was used as an excuse for US invasion

perseus said:
He wasn't far off, wasn't it ex-Nazis and an SS man which designed the rockets which enabled the US to beat the Russians to the moon? The US gave Von-Braun protection from prosecution despite being closely involved in the 'production' aspects of the V2 slave labour Mittelwerk facility.
Click to expand...

Von-Braun didn't have much choice in the matter. Once the Nazi's decided his work was essential to the war effort he had to give them what they wanted or be considered a traitor. Had he refused to work with the Nazi's he would have ended up in a concentration camp and the Jews that died in his factories would have been cremated elsewhere. Would you have preferred that?


perseus said:
With respect to the Vietnam it was certainly as immoral as the Holocaust, although I don't see a close parallel in terms of systematic extermination of a race. Perhaps more analogous to the civilian deaths on the Eastern front (burning villages etc)
Click to expand...

You think defending South Vietnam from invasion was as immoral as the holocaust? Okay. Would you like to burn all that remains of your credibility right here and now or just sink it later?
 
perseus said:
He wasn't far off, wasn't it ex-Nazis and an SS man which designed the rockets which enabled the US to beat the Russians to the moon? The US gave Von-Braun protection from prosecution despite being closely involved in the 'production' aspects of the V2 slave labour Mittelwerk facility.
Click to expand...


Not to mention the US post-WW2 spying on the Soviet Union, which was led by "ex-"Nazis employed by the OSS/CIA. See Reinhard GehlenWP.
 
Hey, I heard there's oil in Haiti. Is that troo? Must be, since I read it on a non-MSM site. They tell the trooth about everything.
 
carmenjonze said:
Hey, I heard there's oil in Haiti. Is that troo? Must be, since I read it on a non-MSM site. They tell the trooth about everything.
Click to expand...

If there was you can bet that Exxon would have already been there with drilling rigs. The whole Caribbean has pretty much been turned into swiss cheese by oil exploration parties. That's how they found the Chicxulub crater.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Not to mention the US post-WW2 spying on the Soviet Union, which was led by "ex-"Nazis employed by the OSS/CIA. See Reinhard GehlenWP.
Click to expand...

True, true.

Of course, that might have had something to do with the USSR's and China's genocide of tens of millions and attempt to "convert" others to their favorite form of totalitarian dictatorship.

Essentially JJ's and Perseus attempt, now that the cold war had ended and the full horror of the Communist catastrophe has been made clear, to try and create some sort of moral equivalence. "See? Marxism isn't THAT bad -- USA did evil things too!".

But it's a bit hard to create that equivalence, with the Ukranian famine, the gulags, the Berlin wall, the "great leap forward" that starved (we now estimate) about 70,000,000, the "1984"-like life ("1984" was, of course, a view of Stalinist Russia amplified), and so on and so forth, to convince anybody the great paradise of the worker was really so great.

Marxism being "anti-imperialist" also doesn't seem to have much traction, considering what China did to Tibet and North Korea, or the USSR did to Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Poland, Georgia, the Ukraine, Albania, Cuba (the missile crisis), East Germany, Romania, Afghanistan, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, etc., etc., etc.

So the only way to get some traction is to claim anything and everything the USA does is eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeevil impppppppperialism -- including sending a large amount of humanitarian help to Haiti in the wake of a devastating earthquake.
 
Last edited:
Cimerian said:
Ok boys, lets stop the BS. US is as imperialist as the Soviets used to be and will do whatever is necessary to keep their influence over nearby regions, specially if Chavez and Morales are around telling people they can do it without the US.
Click to expand...

Yes, let's stop the BS.

The BS is that somehow the behavior of the US, whatever that may have been, during a war it fought against the Soviet Union for 40 years, but has been over for 20, somehow means a god damn thing in 21st Century Haiti.

"Only" 36 years ago was still 16 years before that war ended.

Might as well judge the French military because of it's dependance on Genoese crossbowmen.
 
Rogue1stclass said:
Yes, let's stop the BS.

The BS is that somehow the behavior of the US, whatever that may have been, during a war it fought against the Soviet Union for 40 years, but has been over for 20, somehow means a god damn thing in 21st Century Haiti.

"Only" 36 years ago was still 16 years before that war ended.
Click to expand...

If you really believe that things happening 40 or 100 years ago have nothing to do with what is going on now, then you have a really limited perspective of history. In my previous post I stated documented facts that occurred during my lifetime, and I am not old. I could easily argue, and be right about it, that the Haitian occupation is a continuation of the same war with old Soviet Union, this time with different characters in a different continent.
 
Those on another (non political) site who are far less partisan and willing to see beyond the blind patriotism have pointed out that this is an extension of the Monroe_Doctrine and has a long history indeed. It seems that US citizens are constantly trying to bury its past sins, this only works if you are no longer commiting them.

As the United States emerged as a world superpower, the Monroe Doctrine came to define a recognized sphere of control that few dared to challenge.[6] In 1904, U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt, added the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, which asserted the right of the United States to intervene in Latin America in cases of “flagrant and chronic wrongdoing by a Latin American Nation”[5]. This was the most significant amendment to the original doctrine and was widely opposed by critics, who argued that the Monroe Doctrine was originally meant to stop European influence in the Western Hemisphere[6]. This amendment was designed to preclude violation of the doctrine by European powers that would ultimately argue that the independent nations were “mismanaged or unruly”.[6]
Click to expand...

See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroe_Doctrine
 
Last edited:
The Monroe Doctrine has absolutely nothing to do with the 2010 "occupation" of Haiti. Except in the minds of whackjobs who are ideologically driven to paint every action of the USA as evil.
 
The_Librarian said:
I never said it was going to be easy. I never said that any attempt to resist to your "US invasion" was going to succeed. In fact, any civil group opposing trained military is very likely to end in the blood of the civilians.
Actually, I feel very uncomfortable sitting behind the security of my computer and arguing about that the Haitians should do, or not do. Because I'm not over there and I have no idea of their suffering.
All I wanted to do was to point out that an opposition to an invasion does not need modern weapons to start.
And given the number of journalists who swarmed the place right after the quake, I doubt that any form of unrest will go unnoticed for long.
Click to expand...

I think it would be more accurate to call it "your" US invasion rather than mine. Haiti has never been allowed independence. To consider that armed resistance to is likely in the context of a devastating earthquake is ludicrous.

There is some hope, though, that the tragedy may at least lead to Haiti being freed from debt slavery if not from "Shock Doctrine" vultures.

What this has to do with the rest of the post?
It has been one month already, for Pete's sake. I hope peoples were starting to plan to rebuild "just weeks after".
Click to expand...

Watching the video might answer your question.
 
Naomi Klein last all credibility when she twisted friedman's words around to say that he supported Pinochet. The guy was a life-long critic of Pinochet.
 
Cimerian said:
If you really believe that things happening 40 or 100 years ago have nothing to do with what is going on now, then you have a really limited perspective of history.
Click to expand...

Certainly the past has it's influences on the present but only so much. If one spots, via Google Earth, a new rectangular piece of land being fenced off in Germany you don't, or at least shouldn't, immediately go, "OMFG they're setting up new concentration camps! They did it once so surely they must be doing it again!"

Cimerian said:
In my previous post I stated documented facts that occurred during my lifetime, and I am not old.
Click to expand...

You posted, then later retracted, that, "US is as imperialist as the Soviets used to be," which is incorrect. Compare West vs East Germany, the US letting the Philippines go vs The Hungary Uprising of 1956 or the sheer number of puppet governments the USSR set up vs the relative handful the US had.

Cimerian said:
I could easily argue, and be right about it, that the Haitian occupation...
Click to expand...

So we're now calling the humanitarian mission an "occupation." :rolleyes:

Cimerian said:
...is a continuation of the same war with old Soviet Union, this time with different characters in a different continent.
Click to expand...

So when do the ICBM's go in? Who's the USSR in this new paradigm? Will they have to build walls to keep their people from emigrating too?

perseus said:
Those on another (non political) site who are far less partisan and willing to see beyond the blind patriotism have pointed out that this is an extension of the Monroe_Doctrine and has a long history indeed. It seems that US citizens are constantly trying to bury its past sins, this only works if you are no longer commiting them.

See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroe_Doctrine
Click to expand...

The people on that site are stupid then. A humanitarian disaster is not a reason to invoke the Monroe Doctrine and no Haitian government is being replaced nor is any outside influence being repelled.
 
Ah, Chavez, that paragon of free people. Yet another tin-pot dictator the usual gang of idiots support for the sole reason he claims to be a Marxist. Hey, you know he claims the USA caused the Haitian earthquake with secret weapons, don't you?

But yeah, what TR said in 1904 about the Monroe doctrine of 1823 just has to be the real reason for anything the USA does in 2010.
 
Last edited:
Travis said:
Certainly the past has it's influences on the present but only so much. If one spots, via Google Earth, a new rectangular piece of land being fenced off in Germany you don't, or at least shouldn't, immediately go, "OMFG they're setting up new concentration camps! They did it once so surely they must be doing it again!"
Click to expand...

Quite right. What you should do, according to the folks here, it to immediately go, "OMFG they're setting up new concentration camps with American help to be manned with American soldiers!". Because we all know the USA was just as bad as the Nazis, and stuff.

So we're now calling the humanitarian mission an "occupation." :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Of course, if the USA had not send troops to help Haiti, the same folks would be whining that the USA "ignored the catastrophe" because "Haiti has no oil" or "is a country of poor blacks" or something.
 
Cimerian said:
If you really believe that things happening 40 or 100 years ago have nothing to do with what is going on now, then you have a really limited perspective of history. In my previous post I stated documented facts that occurred during my lifetime, and I am not old. I could easily argue, and be right about it, that the Haitian occupation is a continuation of the same war with old Soviet Union, this time with different characters in a different continent.
Click to expand...

No, you couldn't, because you don't seem to understand the basic facts about the Cold War.

First of all, it was a war. It was a period of aggression between the US and USSR that was fought through proxies, often covertly, because direct confrontation would have lead to destruction the likes of which this world hasn't seen since the K-T Extinction. But don't kid yourself, it was every bit as much a war as WWII.

During this war, countries like Vietnam, and Cuba took on more importance than they otherwise would have, because in truth it was never about these countries to begin with. They were simply pawns in a high stakes, international chess game between two superpowers. The Soviets would support revolutions in these countries, and the US would support whoever opposed them. It wasn't even about ideology. The US supported communist regimes like China and eventually even post-war Vietnam while the USSR supported far-right, anti-US regimes in the Middle East.

However, that war is over now. The USSR no longer exists, in part because it had to support so many tiny, obstensively Leftist regimes that it got nothing from except international influence. Without the military and economic support of the USSR, these little hotspots have gone back to being at worst petty annoyances.

In other words, what Travis said.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom