Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Imperialist American Aggressors Occupy Haiti?

I've had the news on, from a couple different networks, off and on yesterday and today. Nothing unusual there, for me.

And, nothing unusual in what I heard.
"The US has denied its military has taken charge of Haiti amid claims by France that the Americans were "occupying" the earthquake-ravaged country.

"Alain Joyandet, the French Cooperation Minister, has called on the UN to 'clarify' the American role in the impoverished country, which was previously colonised by both countries. 'This is about helping Haiti, not about occupying Haiti,' he said...."
(Telegraph.co.uk)
It's true, by the way: Americans troops are on the ground in Haiti. Big, rough American soldiers with awful, nasty guns. 'Obviously' the work of an imperialistic warmonger aggressor.

Or, maybe, the work of a nation that doesn't particularly want big people in Haiti killing little people in Haiti, to get at supplies. Or, just for the fun of it.

I heard, this morning, about a doctor in a hospital in Haiti (sorry: that's as precise as it gets for me) say that he didn't see any need for those soldiers being in Haiti. His hospital hadn't been looted.

Normally, the Haitian government would be maintaining law and order with its usual efficiency. Since about 5:00 p.m., Haiti time, last week: a noticeable percentage of the Haitian government isn't there any more. Sure, they'll get reorganized in a while: but right now, the place is a mess.

America: Damned if We Do, Damned if We Don't

The way I see it, America has two basic options, when it comes to Haitians and the little matter of keeping bullies - armed and otherwise - from hurting people who may not be big, strong, and armed themselves.
  1. Do nothing
  2. Send troops in to keep that doctor alive
Option one might work: until that doctor stopped a bullet or some other person in Haiti got hurt. Then whatever happened would be the fault of heartless, uncaring America.

Option two has resulted in the usual 'Yankee imperialism' line. No surprises there. On the up side, that doctor will probably survive to complain about something else that the Americans did - or didn't do.

Why Send Big, Rough Soldiers?

America doesn't have much of a national police force. And can you imagine the fuss, if the Yankee imperialists sent FBI or CIA agents to Haiti?

The American military is under the command of the American government, in the person of the President. And - believe it or not - American soldiers really are trained for peacekeeping. Also building bridges and roads, if it comes to that.

Sure, it would be nice if everybody in Haiti were perfectly calm, collected, law-abiding people who would never dream of taking advantage of a lack of law enforcement. It'd be nice, but the last I checked: Haitians are human beings. Some of us aren't all that nice. And many Haitians have little reason to be perfectly calm and collected right now.

Related posts: In the news:

1 comment:

Brian, aka Nanoc, aka Norski said...

怎麼辦,

Since your comment was almost relevant to the post, I'm repeating it here, without the link:怎麼辦 said...

Necessity is the mother of invention..........................

Everyone else,

"怎麼辦" means "How to do" in Chinese, and the link was to a Chinese-language website, which appears to be either a porn site, or a sex-chat service. To their credit, in a way, it looks like they cater to heterosexual males.

And generally, I simply delete spam. On the other hand, this comment could be - with some effort - perceived as relevant to the post's content.

I had, after all, strongly implied that America had to do something, even if the French were going to complain.

Unique, innovative candles


Visit us online:
Spiral Light CandleFind a Retailer
Spiral Light Candle Store

Blogroll

Note! Although I believe that these websites and blogs are useful resources for understanding the War on Terror, I do not necessarily agree with their opinions. 1 1 Given a recent misunderstanding of the phrase "useful resources," a clarification: I do not limit my reading to resources which support my views, or even to those which appear to be accurate. Reading opinions contrary to what I believed has been very useful at times: sometimes verifying my previous assumptions, sometimes encouraging me to change them.

Even resources which, in my opinion, are simply inaccurate are sometimes useful: these can give valuable insights into why some people or groups believe what they do.

In short, It is my opinion that some of the resources in this blogroll are neither accurate, nor unbiased. I do, however, believe that they are useful in understanding the War on Terror, the many versions of Islam, terrorism, and related topics.