Well given recent thaws in Indian-Pakistani relations, I think that the US will find its image considerably burnished in the subcontinent. After all, this problem has been around a lot longer than the US has been on the scene and given the strong US presence in the region coupled with global efforts to stop terrorism, looks like the timing may be right. Chalk up another one for the evil Americans, though I am sure that somewhere some oil company has designs on the region for some pipeline.
In January, Vajpayee agreed to discuss Kashmir while Musharraf promised not to support terrorism in Pakistani territory directed against India. India accuses Pakistan of training and arming Islamic guerrillas fighting for Kashmir’s independence from India or its merger with Pakistan, a charge Pakistan denies.
Early this month, Indian Defense Minister George Fernandes said Pakistan’s government has taken effective measures against Islamic militant groups based in Pakistan, leading to a decline in incursions into Indian-controlled Kashmir.
Mongolia lived under virtual Soviet domination for seventy years, a generation longer than the satellite states of Eastern Europe, and public opinion is staunchly pro-American. At the time of the Iraq crisis the Mongolians staged no anti-war demonstrations. Indeed, they deployed a contingent of 175 soldiers to Baghdad last year, to help with policing efforts
Let’s just admit it people!!! The US is responsible for most damages. So it is just fairly understandable why should they clean their mess and why the world is irritated by the US. I just don’t agree why they should have the most powerful president in the world and why we should all accept the American currency as the international tender. Also, why does the US always needs to be involved in other countries’ problems…etc.?
Care to explain?[/quote]
Just look at Haiti. Bill Clinton installed a mentally unstable murderous dictator back into power after the people of Haiti threw him out. Therefore, it is all George W. Bush’s fault that Haiti is undergoing bloodshed now.
[quote=“MaPoDurian”]
Just look at Haiti. Bill Clinton installed a mentally unstable murderous dictator back into power after the people of Haiti threw him out.[/quote]
So you think the US should have supported the former Shida student -Raoul Cedras ?
There’s nothing that the US can do in Haiti except put out the more serious fires. The country is a complete basket case and unless full-scale colonization oh sorry nation building is the plan, then Haiti will continue to be the mess that it is. I also am skeptical about efforts to bring peace and democracy to Afghanistan. All we can hope to do there is keep it from being used as a launch pad tor terrorists. I am however confident that something can be done with Iraq. Eventually (say 10-20 years), it could reach the level of stability that say Turkey has today. With a little luck… After all 30,000 people killed during 10 to 20 years of the Kurdish insurgency have showed that such instability does not necessarily keep a country from progressing overall. I hope that with Iraq these kinds of numbers are not involved, but even if they are, progress is still very possible given the right path.
[quote=“chung”][quote=“MaPoDurian”]
Just look at Haiti. Bill Clinton installed a mentally unstable murderous dictator back into power after the people of Haiti threw him out.[/quote]
So you think the US should have supported the former Shi-Da student -Raoul Cedras ?[/quote]
Dump Aristide, and let a new government form around whoever can get elected – pretty much exactly what Bush is doing. Aristide was a corrupt thug, and his “reelection” was a fraud.
Why is it that the so-called “liberals” are so hot to support every two-bit criminal who manages to shoot and/or defraud his way to the top in a banana republic? Do they particularly LIKE to see third-worlders being killed and tortured?
Bring back Baby Doc Duvalier and let them stew in their own mess. Who gives a shit about Haiti. They’ve had 200 years to get their shit together and still can’t. If those Haitians in Miami are so concerned, why don’t they go back? There is a definite brain deficiency in Haiti. Good boat-builders though…
If Baby Doc is dead surely there is a Cousin Doc or another member of the Duvalier family out there to bring stability to to Hate-y? OK, so lots of people will get killed and human rights will be subjugated but who cares? It’s all about stability in America’s backyard isn’t it?
Naturally since we are all CITIZENS OF THE WORLD, Haiti would welcome any and all help from us. In fact, I just received an email asking for assistance during this crucial time from an ex Haitian official. Perhaps, I can forward it to you and YOU can do something. Interested? A great deal of financial assistance would be most appreciated. Perhaps you could take a bit out of each hour of teaching or buy one less beer per night and put the money in an envelope?
Monsieur Smith: I refuse to waste my hard-earned cash on Haiti. I think EVERYONE should just sit back and watch it completely disintegrate. 200 years is enough time for them to come up with something. Other countries have progressed from horse-back banditry to high-tech smart bombs and drive-by shootings and street muggings in the same time. The NYPD should be despatched to Haiti with baseball bats to help Guy Philippe restore order amongst his similarly brain-dead compatriots. It’ll make for good TV.
By the way, why do you assume I am a sexually frustrated teacher? I have never given any indication of being either.
Just heard that Jean-Claude ‘Baby Doc’ Duvalier is contemplating a return. Yippee!!! More great TV and more blood and guts on the pot-holed streets of Port Au Prince.
So does that mean you ARE a sexually frustrated teacher?
Just kidding.
Anyway, what exactly should the world community do about failed states such as Haiti? Do they have to host al Qaeda or other terrorists before we look at doing something for and about them?
I am seriously and genuinely interested in any sincere comments.
Fred Smith: The first step in garnering serious and dare I say it, intelligent comments, would be to begin a thread entitled Failed States - What to Do? As we are on the subject of Haiti, I think my theory on creeping Francophonia in the US Gulf States at Risk thread deserves far more attention than hitherto erm…got.
There are a couple of interesting issues here. One is do the people really want to be rescued and if they do how do they want to be rescued?
It’s not always the same thing we have in mind.
The other issue is I think some places are just currently beyond rescue. Haiti being one of them. Short of just going in and administering the place from the ground up, I don’t think pouring money and other help into Haiti is going to accomplish anything lasting in our lifetime.
There are a lot of innocent victims in places like Kosovo, Somalia and Haiti though. What I’d do if I were calling the shots is to establish an international force of kick-ass peacekeepers who would go into a place like Haiti and set up safe zones where women, children, old people and anyone who wanted to be a non-combatant could enter and be safe, free and fed until things had stabilized – if ever. No weapons allowed. No coming and going to join the fighting outside. A true neutral zone to protect the innocent and weak until the bad guys had sorted it out among themselves – hopefully by the process of attrition.
Do you think something like that would be sustainable? I mean, that place has been unstable for how long? Do you think the world could or would commit to an international force protecting safe zones? Wouldn’t this simply end up being a project for the US alone?
I think spooks suggestion of an international peacekeeping force is an excellent one. May I suggest allowing the Dutch Army to form the initial one for Haiti. It would help them redeem themselves from the debacle of Srebrenica in Bosnia (9 years ago?). They could hold the perimeter of the neutral zone by blowing marijuana smoke in the general direction of anyone threatening its security, mellowing them out considerably. Also, given Haiti’s climate, hundreds of thousands of the approximately 70% unemployed could be used to cultivate this under-appreciated peace-keeping tool. If the U.S. could just de-criminalise marijuana and open up that market to a legal dope trade, Haiti’s economy could pick up, everyone would be calm and happy, the U.S. could stop wasting taxpayers money on flogging a dead horse fighting soft drugs and given the creative virtues of smoking a spliff or two, Haiti could become a Bohemian centre for the arts nurturing poets and musicians etc. National elections could be held in conjunction with an international rock festival. Wacky? Not really. Just that no-one has the guts to do it.
Do you think something like that would be sustainable? I mean, that place has been unstable for how long? Do you think the world could or would commit to an international force protecting safe zones? Wouldn’t this simply end up being a project for the US alone?[/quote]
You couldn’t do it through the UN because the UN is too corrupt and ineffectual. It would best be a U.S.-led Nato effort. It would be an international service organization though in which anyone on earth who was mentally and physically fit for the task and willing to commit to two years could join up, be trained and equipped for the job. It would be funded by donations. I feel pretty comfortable in saying the money would be there if the fit and able organization were there.
I know I’d have no trouble morally, financially and personally backing an effective peacekeeping force with a proud record of protecting the innocent around the world. Sort of a combination Seal Team/Peace Corps/French Foreign Legion if you will. Its motto would be "Kill Each Other All You Want But Leave the Innocent Out Of It Or Else . . . " (Yeah, I know, the motto needs some work.)
I think there are plenty of people like me – like us – around. The problem is the modus operandi hasn’t been around. The choice so far has been between futile nation-building, worthless brigades of spineless blue helmets, or doing nothing.
Very interesting points. So the US could go into Haiti say by the invitation of the people (but who would be doing the official asking?) and then of course as soon as the US stepped on some of these gangsta’s toes, we would of course no longer be welcome and should leave exactly when and by whose command?
I personally believe that Haiti is a failed state with no hope whatsoever and that any effort there would be wasted or temporary but does that mean that it is all right to just let those people rot away? I also feel that given the US commitments around the world that this little mess is best suited for some country like France or Belgium or Germany (or say whoever opposed us in Iraq and is not there now?)
