Comments on: Hell in Haiti: a Post-Mortem

By: TK

TK — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 20:51:18 +0000

“African county” to a Republican = poor, useless country with no oil. To clarify, by “Stable” I also meant competent. IE. not Bush.

By: valdobiade

valdobiade — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 19:33:13 +0000

“The major difference between America and many third world countries is a stable government.”
That reminds me that “tea party” don’t want a government at all, like in the Bush era, when the government couldn’t even help its own people when Katharina hit the US. At that time, I think that Bush didn’t want to send help because it looked like Katharina hit some African country.

By: Taliesin Knol

Taliesin Knol — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 15:25:26 +0000

The US didn’t end up like other freed colonies because of the North. The industrialized, modernized portion of the country, whereas the South is more like Mexico than Europe. Agricultural base, poverty, little to no industry or education, instigator of civil wars… The imperialistic, greedy, industrial giantism of America has, so far, kept it among the first world, thus distancing us from some of the major problems of the third world, or at least reducing(replacing) them. By and large, our government is stable, (in comparison to others) our population is educated, *(results may vary)* and we have the highest standard of living in the wolrd. (if you don’t count the poor, but who does?) The US isn’t dependent on a single cash crop or industrial export for its entire economy, and we don’t have a civil war every generation when our leader dies, or is deposed. The major difference between America and many third world countries is a stable government. Haiti, as mentioned, has not had stable governments. Note the plural, governmentS. Haiti should be a metaphor for instability, both geologicaly and culturaly. Neither ends well.

By: Rick Bayan

Rick Bayan — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:54:27 +0000

You’re such a cynic, Valdo. You’re right that each country’s aid to Haiti will give rise to different theories about the “benefits” to be derived from that aid. (The U.S. is already being accused of “occupying” Haiti.) But that shouldn’t discourage any country from offering help. The victims in Haiti don’t really care about international politics; they just want food, water and shelter.

By: Rick Bayan

Rick Bayan — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:47:22 +0000

TK: Not all countries that win independence end up as basket cases. (Look at the U.S.) That said, you’re right that Haiti had so many strikes against it even before the earthquake. And yes, I see Haiti as a kind of canary in the coal mine: a warning about the fate that awaits any land with a broken-down government and infrastructure, widespread corruption, no money and too many people. Scary thought.

By: TK

TK — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 01:18:48 +0000

(cough) Haliburton (cough)

By: valdobiade

valdobiade — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 23:49:35 +0000

I don’t believe that helping poor countries doesn’t come with “strings” attached.
If France would get to give Haiti help, maybe it would be interpreted as neo-colonialism.
If Russia are willing to help Haiti, it doesn’t mean that Russia is not looking to get something from Haiti.
If US are helping Haiti, I don’t think that there are not ways to profit from that “help”.
The “help” between countries is just smoke and mirrors, hiding the actual monetary benefits from disasters.
In wars as in disasters, there is always some who’ll benefit giving “help”.

By: TK

TK — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 00:31:37 +0000

Haiti “asked” for their problems when it “asked” for its freedom. These things go hand-in-hand. I think maybe France should step in to help, maybe with about 21 billion or so in aid… Problems like Haiti has had, poor government, and poorer people, are constants in former European colonies. When you leave a country to fend for itself, and don’t train anyone to run vital things like infrastructre, the country collapses. Haiti was left with nothing, and tried to make-do with the resources it had, like wood. Unfortunately, with no government to regulate them, the Haitians misused its resources, as humans are apt to do. The Caribbean is close to the “Garden of Eden” in many ways, fertile land, abundant sea-life, but the people there overpopulated and overused the land, because there was nobody to tell them not to. This a common problem with the Human Race in general, the entire planet is overpopulated, and all its recources are being squandered making TVs. Is the entire Human Race asking for the planet to shake us off? Do any of us or all of us deserve it? Do us Americans, who consider a mile out of walking distance, eat four three-course meals daily, and throw-out tons of garbage weekly, deserve this more than people who didn’t know better?