Washington says no despite ‘frantic’ talks between diplomats, as bodies lie in street and army battles gun-toting gang members
      • Justin@lemmy.jlh.nameEnglish
        0·
        1 year ago

        It sounds like UN and French aid would be welcome, too. The article talks about the US’s refusal to send military aid.

        The US would be well-suited to send military aid in the near-term, they have military bases with helicopters in range of Haiti. They could secure the capital from the rebelling gangs within a day.

        I’m not familiar with the situation in Haiti, but keep in mind that organized crime is inherently fascist. I would like an explanation from the developed countries in the area why they don’t think they should prevent an entire country from tumbling into fascism.

    • sailingbythelee@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      1 year ago

      1. Haiti is not strategically important.

      2. Haiti is a failed state. It isn’t just a matter of re-establishing peace. The whole society has to be re-built.

      3. The US invested billions and billions and BILLIONS of dollars and a ton of social capital trying to rebuild a failed state in Afghanistan and it didn’t work. Not only did it not work, but the US has got nothing but scorn for it. No one thinks it would be any better in Haiti.

      The US had a moment of glory when it won WW2 and then rebuilt both Japan and Europe into world class economic powers. Of course, those were highly civilized, sophisticated, and industrialized states and so America’s job was easier. Places like Afghanistan, Haiti, and most of Africa…not so much.

      Any Western government would be crazy to set foot in countries like that. Maybe send some humanitarian aid, but otherwise stay the fuck out. Let their cultural peers help them out.

      • KillingAndKindess@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
        0·
        1 year ago

        …The US had a moment of glory when it won WW2 and then rebuilt both Japan and Europe into world class economic powers. Of course, those were highly civilized, sophisticated, and industrialized states and so America’s job was easier. Places like Afghanistan, Haiti, and most of Africa…not so much.

        Sooo much ewww.

        How in the world, I wonder, did a beautiful island become suddenly swarmed and populated with an essentially non-homogeneous group of people from across the ocean? Surely their “uncivilized and unsophisticated” nature wouldn’t have allowed them to cross such a vast expanse. Such a mystery!

        Any Western government would be crazy to set foot in countries like that. Maybe send some humanitarian aid, but otherwise stay the fuck out. Let their cultural peers help them out.

        You’re right, it’s best that outisders remain totally uninvolved and let nature take its course amoungst this anthropologically typical country and neighbors… Well, I guess yeah, we can pitch in some goodfeels and be a tiny lifeline for a limited to few, after all, we gotta sleep at night.

        • sailingbythelee@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          1 year ago

          Your sarcasm is not appreciated, but yes, Haiti was created by European colonialism. No one is defending that. The answer isn’t more European colonialism. Western nations can provide the money to help, but some other nation that is more culturally similar needs to provide the boots on the ground. Do you have a better idea, Captain Sarcastic? Remember that the comment I was responding to asked why the US isn’t sending peacekeepers.