Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

USA! USA! USA!

1356

Comments

  • #62
    Karoma
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,396 ✭✭✭✭Karoma


    southsiderosie wrote:
    Most of these countries would be loath to see US marines on their soil ...
    But, there you go: why marines? So far, the US effort in Haiti has been to flood in troops in the thousands. Aeroplane after aeroplane - they've diverted aeroplanes from other countries with life-saving medical equipment and doctors as a result. Most of these troops (Not just the US, but the UN are doing the same) are on policing tasks and not helping to bury the dead, help dig people out of the rubble, or to help rebuild.
    "Recovery teams and direct aid" - really? I'd love to see decent examples. America usually offers economic aid, but rarely (never as far as I know) without strings attached - it's usually a 'front for free economic reform' that benefits American interests, or favourable terms when trading commodities.
    Read Naomi Klein's 'Shock Doctrine' - although slanted,it offers good reasons to question Americas involvement in disaster-stricken areas.

    I compared Haiti to Mexico and other 'South American' countries on the basis that someone put forward the argument that America's involvement is to prevent destabilisation - a functioning puppet government isn't an ideal.


    @Overheal: The hurricanes by no means have wrought as much destruction as this earthquake, but an example of one hurricane: I think the death toll reached 600-and-something by the end. Quick google: http://news.scotsman.com/world/Hurricane-death-toll-in-Haiti.4465775.jp - just one storm. Thousands each year...every year + considerable economic repercussions.
    Sail v. "traverse or travel on (a body of water)"...oh, I see what you did there.


  • #63
    Steyr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,266 ✭✭✭Steyr


    Karoma wrote: »
    why marines?

    Why not use the Marines, put some no BS Troops in to Stabalise that Nation.
    Karoma wrote: »
    So far, the US effort in Haiti has been to flood in troops in the thousands.

    I beg to differ,

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/3972191/c-17-conducts-air-delivery-of-aid/?playlist_id=87249


  • #64
    southsiderosie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,560 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    Karoma wrote: »
    But, there you go: why marines? So far, the US effort in Haiti has been to flood in troops in the thousands. Aeroplane after aeroplane - they've diverted aeroplanes from other countries with life-saving medical equipment and doctors as a result. Most of these troops (Not just the US, but the UN are doing the same) are on policing tasks and not helping to bury the dead, help dig people out of the rubble, or to help rebuild.

    I compared Haiti to Mexico and other 'South American' countries on the basis that someone put forward the argument that America's involvement is to prevent destabilisation - a functioning puppet government isn't an ideal.

    How are doctors supposed to set up field hospitals when there are mobs running through the streets with machetes? Large swathes of Port-au-Prince were a Hobbesian nightmare before the earthquake; it can only get worse. There has to be some level of stability in the city for rescuers and aid agencies to do their jobs.

    Of course the US wants to prevent a complete meltdown in Haiti - the Florida Straits will be full of boat people if things get too desperate. I'd add that the Dominican Republic would also like to see things stabilize, since they aren't in great shape and absorb a lot of Haitians already in their workforce. They have moved troops to the border explicitly to keep Haitians out, or to limit their access to border markets...not exactly neighborly (and BTW, the DR's relationship with Haiti is quite bloody...yet we only hear about US misdeeds in the 20th century, hmmm :rolleyes:).


  • #65
    metaoblivia
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,256 ✭✭✭metaoblivia


    Karoma wrote: »
    But, there you go: why marines? So far, the US effort in Haiti has been to flood in troops in the thousands. Aeroplane after aeroplane - they've diverted aeroplanes from other countries with life-saving medical equipment and doctors as a result. Most of these troops (Not just the US, but the UN are doing the same) are on policing tasks and not helping to bury the dead, help dig people out of the rubble, or to help rebuild.

    I compared Haiti to Mexico and other 'South American' countries on the basis that someone put forward the argument that America's involvement is to prevent destabilisation - a functioning puppet government isn't an ideal.


    @Overheal: The hurricans by no means have wrought as much destruction as this earthquake, but an example of one hurricane: I think the death toll reached 600-and-something by the end. Quick google: http://news.scotsman.com/world/Hurricane-death-toll-in-Haiti.4465775.jp - just one storm.
    Sail v. "traverse or travel on (a body of water)"...oh, I see what you did there.

    A. The US is sending more than just troops. We are also sending medical equipment, doctors and food.

    B. The reason troops are required is because right now Haiti's in a state of martial law. The ability of their government to control the situation has been severely compromised. Their infrastructure is in shambles. That means that distributing the things listed in A will be very difficult until the situation stabilizes. The Marines are there to help make the environment safer for the doctors and humanitarian aid workers to do what they need to do. They are also there to protect the Haitian people from the kind of violence that breaks out after disasters of this nature. As things stabilize and as the Haitian government regroups, they can take on more of this responsibility, but right now, they're overwhelmed.

    C. The US provided a large amount of aid for the 4 large storms that hit Haiti in 2008. Just because you didn't hear about it doesn't mean it didn't happen. And I would imagine that if you had heard about it, you would be spouting the same kind of drivel you are here.


  • #66
    fryup
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,067 ✭✭✭✭fryup


    Is it really necessary for the the troops to be carrying weapons??

    it looks like they're going into battle. :cool:

    troopsz.jpg


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    metaoblivia
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,256 ✭✭✭metaoblivia


    fryup wrote: »
    Is it really necessary for the the troops to be carrying weapons, look like they're going into battle. :cool:

    troopsz.jpg

    Yes, because some of the people they have to control will be carrying weapons. I love holding hands and singing kumbaya as much as the next hippie, but we're dealing with a very unfortunate reality.


  • #68
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,895 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    skelliser wrote: »
    this is not unique to america, its done here and in other countries

    Is my recollection wrong, or do donations of -under- E250 fail to qualify for tax relief in Ireland?

    NTM


  • #69
    CrazyRabbit
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,659 ✭✭✭CrazyRabbit


    Poccington wrote: »
    They're damned if they do and they're damned if they don't.


    No matter what America does, somebody will complain about it.

    And who's fault is that? They've been poking their noses in the affairs of countless countries for decades. They get a lot of bad press for this...especially in the last decade. So it's no surprise they when they do something nice that many people think it is just a PR stunt.


  • #70
    CrazyRabbit
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,659 ✭✭✭CrazyRabbit


    Steyr wrote: »
    i dont see anybody else sending their hospital ships or Aircraft Carrriers or C-17's dropping aid ( Yes other Nations have Carriers and Hospital Ships and C-17's too ),

    Other countries are probably afraid of 'friendly fire' if they send their ships too close to the Americans.


  • #71
    Karoma
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,396 ✭✭✭✭Karoma


    Steyr wrote: »
    Why not use the Marines, put some no BS Troops in to Stabalise that Nation.

    I beg to differ,

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/3972191/c-17-conducts-air-delivery-of-aid/?playlist_id=87249

    metaoblivia wrote: »
    A. The US is sending more than just troops. We are also sending medical equipment, doctors and food.

    ...
    The Marines are there to help make the environment safer for the doctors and humanitarian aid workers to do what they need to do.
    ...
    The number of troops -v- number of doctors, recovery teams, engineers, etc. is ever so slightly disproportionate, but fine: you do have a point and that is security.
    The first 72 hours are the most critical is disaster recovery. The looting and violence is (a) most likely exaggerate by CNN and Fox and whatever bull**** you're being fed if you contrast it with on-the-ground reports and other more respectable agencies (like Al Jazeera.) Before there would have been any chance of real looting or violence - the US armies were prioritising US planes over planes with Doctors Without Borders and several planes from Brazil and Argentina with medical equipment... but, hey, Blackwater are on the ground now so everyone's gonna be safe, right?

    metabolox wrote:
    B. The reason troops are required is because right now Haiti's in a state of martial law.
    I could get into the cyclic logic there, but it'd be lost on you. In fact, I suspect more than just that.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    fryup
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,067 ✭✭✭✭fryup


    fryup wrote: »
    Is it really necessary for the the troops to be carrying weapons??

    it looks like they're going into battle. :cool:

    troopsz.jpg
    metaoblivia wrote: »
    Yes, because some of the people they have to control will be carrying weapons. I love holding hands and singing kumbaya as much as the next hippie, but we're dealing with a very unfortunate reality.

    yes, but do thay have to do it in such an in your face way?? it gives the impression they're trying to take over the place


  • #73
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    CrazyRabbit wrote: »
    Other countries a probably afraid of 'friendly fire' if they send their ships too close to the Americans.
    Is that just jealousy we didnt come and aid you during your Snow Crisis?
    yes, but do thay have to do it in such an in your face way?? it gives the impression they're trying to take over the place
    That'll clear the message to the Looters.


  • #74
    southsiderosie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,560 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    Karoma wrote: »
    The number of troops -v- number of doctors, recovery teams, engineers, etc. is ever so slightly disproportionate, but fine: you do have a point and that is security.
    The first 72 hours are the most critical is disaster recovery. The looting and violence is (a) most likely exaggerate by CNN and Fox and whatever bull**** you're being fed if you contrast it with on-the-ground reports and other more respectable agencies (like Al Jazeera.) Before there would have been any chance of real looting or violence - the US armies were prioritising US planes over planes with Doctors Without Borders and several planes from Brazil and Argentina with medical equipment... but, hey, Blackwater are on the ground now so everyone's gonna be safe, right?

    I could get into the cyclic logic there, but it'd be lost on you. In fact, I suspect more than just that.

    I think you are not taking into account the security situation there BEFORE the earthquake. There were entire parts of the city that were no-go zones. Ironically there was less damage in those neighborhoods because it's easier to survive when your tin shack falls on you than when a 5-story cement building collapses on you.

    I don't get my news from US -based sources, and from what I've seen, the Port-au-Prince airport can - at best - handle 30 flights a day. So whoever got there first was going to take up time and space. Ironically it was a Chinese cargo plane that held up the airport for hours two days ago.

    As for the first 72 hours, Haiti was just screwed in that regard. Their own government didn't have the capacity to handle disaster recovery, and it takes other people and groups time to mobilize. The federal government in the US generally takes 72 hours to respond to national disasters within its own borders - the initial emergency response is from state and local government. Unfortunately, Haiti had a barely functioning government before the storm - local or national -and it appears that nobody is in charge right now, six days later.


  • #75
    metaoblivia
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,256 ✭✭✭metaoblivia


    Karoma wrote: »
    you do have a point and that is security...

    Thank you for conceding my point. And for the record, I get my news from neither Fox nor CNN.

    Karoma wrote: »
    I could get into the cyclic logic there, but it'd be lost on you. In fact, I suspect more than just that.

    Ah, something I said must have struck a nerve. I'm the only person on this thread you've attempted to personally insult. I'll take that as a compliment. ;)


  • #76
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,895 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    yes, but do thay have to do it in such an in your face way?? it gives the impression they're trying to take over the place

    They're not wearing body armour, they're not wearing helmets. Guy up front is smiling. Looks more like a group of troops out for a ruck march than an invasion.

    There's only so low-key you can be when you're carrying a machinegun.

    NTM


  • #77
    bonerm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,594 ✭✭✭bonerm


    America! Fuk yeah! Kicking ass for 200 years with a score of W=11 L=1. Eat that terrorists! Yeeeeaaaaaahhhh!


  • #78
    ejmaztec
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,369 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    southsiderosie wrote: »
    I think you are not taking into account the security situation there BEFORE the earthquake. There were entire parts of the city that were no-go zones. Ironically there was less damage in those neighborhoods because it's easier to survive when your tin shack falls on you than when a 5-story cement building collapses on you.

    I don't get my news from US -based sources, and from what I've seen, the Port-au-Prince airport can - at best - handle 30 flights a day. So whoever got there first was going to take up time and space. Ironically it was a Chinese cargo plane that held up the airport for hours two days ago.

    As for the first 72 hours, Haiti was just screwed in that regard. Their own government didn't have the capacity to handle disaster recovery, and it takes other people and groups time to mobilize. The federal government in the US generally takes 72 hours to respond to national disasters within its own borders - the initial emergency response is from state and local government. Unfortunately, Haiti had a barely functioning government before the storm - local or national -and it appears that nobody is in charge right now, six days later.

    As bad as the security situation was before the quake, it seems to be a hell of a lot worse now. There was a Guardian report that thugs have looted UN weapons and ammunition from collapsed armouries, and that those who escaped from the prison are already involved in turf-wars to regain territory that they lost when they got banged up. With rape, looting and murder going on, aid distribution must be a nightmare. Even the locals have apparently been advised by the Haitian authorities to kill the thugs if they get the chance, which is going to be difficult, given the weapons the thugs have gotten their hands on.

    There's no doubt that combat troops are necessary in this situation, so I don't see any reason for anyone criticising their being there.


  • #79
    Cunny-Funt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,748 ✭✭✭Cunny-Funt


    I don't wanna get involved in the discussion on "We're americans we're better than Ireland cause our army can kill loads more people then yours ha ha ha" etc. Ireland's not an empire, and I'm actually proud of that.

    I just wanna say though fair play to America for helping out, yes they are closer etc etc. I still say fair play, and acknowledge that yes its a country filled with nutjobs who'd have no problem with their gov invading half the planet. Its also filled with good hearted people who just want to help out.

    Steyr wrote: »
    Well done to the Aid effort the US is doing at the moment in Haiti i think its absolutely brilliant to see, if it wasnt for their Military prowess id say damn all would have been done by now, i dont see .


  • #80
    Degag
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,158 ✭✭✭✭Degag


    Amazing. The US destroyed Much of Afghanistan and Iraq in air raids, killed hundreds of thousands and destroyed many more homes..... and they're trying to rebuild Haiti????????


  • #81
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Degag wrote: »
    Amazing. The US destroyed Much of Afghanistan and Iraq in air raids, killed hundreds of thousands and destroyed many more homes..... and they're trying to rebuild Haiti and Iraq and Afghanistan
    Yes. /FYP


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Degag
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,158 ✭✭✭✭Degag


    Overheal wrote: »
    Yes. /FYP

    Does that make everything ok or something?


  • #83
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,926 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    admiralofthefleet wrote: »
    a military base on haiti in preparation for a future invasion of cuba?
    You mean like the one they have at Guantanamo Bay? Already in Cuba?


  • #84
    ejmaztec
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,369 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    Degag wrote: »
    Amazing. The US destroyed Much of Afghanistan and Iraq in air raids, killed hundreds of thousands and destroyed many more homes..... and they're trying to rebuild Haiti????????

    How much is much?:confused:


  • #85
    Degag
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,158 ✭✭✭✭Degag


    ejmaztec wrote: »
    How much is much?:confused:

    You want a persentage or something?:rolleyes:


  • #86
    Earthhorse
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,728 ✭✭✭✭Earthhorse


    A few people have mentioned the US being the only ones to have done anything and others mentioned that Israel were the first to send people in so I just thought I'd post this.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UX-UmrFAWNw


    To be honest, I don't think most countries are geared up to act in situations such as this. It's remarkable anyone can do it.

    Haiti has a lot more to overcome than this earthquake, too.


  • #87
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Degag wrote: »
    Does that make everything ok or something?
    You would rather we left them in ruins?


  • #88
    ejmaztec
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,369 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    Degag wrote: »
    You want a persentage or something?:rolleyes:

    What kind of percentage are we talking about - would it be as much as 500%?


  • #89
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Where do you get 500%?

    The only thing I know that has 500% is my Left4Dead stat for my grenade accuracy..


  • #90
    My name is URL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,626 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    I just stumbled upon this -

    http://www.msf.org/msfinternational/invoke.cfm?objectid=3C88FF1B-15C5-F00A-2553FE4164F002B5&component=toolkit.article&method=full_html

    MSF cargo plane with full hospital and staff blocked from landing in Port-au-Prince, Haiti

    Despite guarantees, given by the United Nations and the US Defense Department, an MSF cargo plane carrying an inflatable surgical hospital was blocked from landing in Port-au-Prince on Saturday, and was re-routed to Samana, in Dominican Republic.

    I guess flying in armed troops is more of a priority to lifesaving equipment


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Degag
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,158 ✭✭✭✭Degag


    Overheal wrote: »
    You would rather we left them in ruins?

    Who is "We?" Are you American? Or British for that matter, seeing as they were involved also?

    Anyhow, no i would not rather if they were left in ruins. I did not state anything like that in any of my posts. I don't think the US should be getting credit for rebuiding Afghanistan and Iraq when they are the ones who caused the damage. Seems abit of a faux pas when they are trying to rebuild Haiti.


Advertisement
Advertisement