USA! USA! USA!

pljudge321 wrote: »

Seeing as Haiti is essentially an ex-colony of the United States they kind of owe them.

Haiti is an ex-colony for France.

The US did occupy it for about 20 years in the early 20th century.

cowen4life wrote: »

Havent read all the comments here but it is unfair to say that America are the only ones sending in aid/troops. Israel were the first to send in troops. I am currently in Mexico and people here are very concerned. Mexico,Cuba and countries like that have all sent aid. The media lets you see what they want you to see.

In the Media, people hate Israel even more than they hate the US.

Frankly Im not surprised positive light on Israel is being minimized. I wasn't even aware of their activity there. Thats not to say I've been reading many articles though, so thats hardly implying a Conspiracy or anything.

But it should also be noted the UN has been there since early on. These are not purely US efforts by any stretch.

Also, Obama got the help of GWB and Clinton to encourage people to donate to private charities - who knows how much that helped to raise.

That was an eerie sight and I think the first time since stepping down that GWB has gotten in front of the National Spotlight. Certainly it helped the numbers, I would say across the whole spectrum.

Manic Moran wrote: »

True. But the scale is a bit different. Ireland sent aid. Donating the aid is pretty useless if it can't get to where it's needed, though. USS Carl Vinson alone is distributing that aid by using twice as many helicopters as the entire Irish Air Corps has. USNS Comfort has a thousand hospital beds, I'm not sure there's a hospital in all of Ireland which is as well equipped. Again, all very well sending aid, but how about the 950 medical staff to administer that aid? The Irish budget couldn't afford a ship like Comfort to begin with. The US military response has been bigger than the entire Irish defence forces, and most foreign aid does not provide the ability for the distribution of such aid in quite the same manner as a brigade of US Marines.

Sheesh dont need to turn it into a contest..

Didn't the EU promise over 500 million, in this case the proximity to the US means that they can get things there quicker so that's why attention is focused on them.

This wont be over quickly. After things settle down aid distribution will need to scale back down to sustainable levels for a long term recovery that could potentially last years: there'll be plenty of credit to go around.

rossie1977 wrote: »

breakdown is here http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tMozJlQiN8ftSj0s8tLx31g&output=html

Again, you're counting cash and STILL ignoring what was said in the first post.

Also, it looks like that just gives donations by Government rather than through individual donations (since it has a different row for individual donations). Obama, Bush Jnr and Clinton have been actively encouraging people to donate through private charities.

admiralofthefleet wrote: »

a military base on haiti in preparation for a future invasion of cuba?

They already have a military base on cuba but not strictly speaking in cuba, guantanamo bay

Manic Moran wrote: »

Secondly, there's the unique way that the US government spends its tax money on charities: It basically provides a funds matching service by allowing the citizenry to make donations to charities of their choice and providing tax breaks. For example, let's say there was a recognised charity organisation called "The Haiti Fund of America." I, the taxpayer, choose to donate $100 to this fund. When it comes to tax time, I receive a $100 deduction when I file my tax return, reducing my tax liability to the government (say $20). In effect, the US Government has just donated $20 to the Haiti Fund of America. Even better, it has effectively donated to a charitable fund that the citizens of the country think is important, not what some chap in sitting inthe Oval Office thinks is important. But because of the way the accounting system is carried out (Usually the following year), the national government is not credited with donating that money.

NTM

this is not unique to america, its done here and in other countries

Karoma wrote: »

Eh, Mexico is quite unstable. Haiti hasn't exactly been the most stable of countries in years. Americas involvement there has done more harm than good. America actively encourages and supports destabilising Cuba. <Insert "South American" country> - same can be said here. America only does what is in America's best interests.

I am not up to speed on recent efforts in Mexico except to say the recent 2009 Drug War was certainly the subject of months of attention and US involvement.

U.S. death toll and national security

U.S. authorities are reporting a spike in killings, kidnappings and home invasions connected to Mexico's cartels, and at least 19 Americans were killed in 2008.[131][132] Also, more than 200 Americans have been killed in Mexico since 2004.[133]
For the U.S. Joint Forces Command, in terms of worst-case scenarios, Mexico bears some consideration for sudden collapse in the next two decades as the government, its politicians, police, and judicial infrastructure are all under sustained assault and pressure by criminal gangs and drug cartels.[127] The Joint Forces Command are concerned that this internal conflict over the next several years, will have a major impact on the stability of the Mexican state, and therefore would demand an American response based on the implications for homeland security alone.[127] In March 2009, the United States Department of Homeland Security said that it is considering using the National Guard to counter the threat of drug violence in Mexico from spilling over the border into the US. The governors of Arizona and Texas have asked the federal government to send additional National Guard troops to help those already there supporting local law enforcement efforts against drug trafficking.[29] On March 26, 2009, the body of a U.S. marshal, who was the subject of an arrest warrant, was discovered in Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua.[134]


So yes, keep your eyes open on Mexico. The United States isn't there yet, because it isn't "There" yet. Haiti, is in Ruins, and its system of government is essentially in a state of Hiatus.

Relief efforts / aid after disaster: where is America each time a hurricane hits other countries around them, example: Haiti's poverty-stricken neighbour: they get lashed out of it with storms and hurricanes and suffer lots of damage and considerable loss of life on a regular basis: we see nothing from America. Is it that America is willing to give a proper dig out once and doesn't want to really help out more than that?

Oh get the Head out: the Haiti Death Toll is in the Tens of Thousands. At least 40,000 and as of today's latest estimates it could top 50k.

I challenge your "Considerable Loss of Life" - please quote some figures of these Hurricane Tragedies.

As to the 'At least America is doing something while the world waits' rhetoric: bollox to that. It's an international effort. America can respond quicker and with less expense (Do you know how much it costs to sail a carrier from Europe over to there?)

It would be pretty cheap if you were going to sail, it would just take a while and you'd want a good headwind. A Carrier though - Im not sure you can pull that much metal with Canvas... you'd want to power up the Diesel for that move.