Take it to ATMB if you have a problem. You opened with a straw man, then attacked other posters for responding to you. I can well believe that it was off the cuff, but you are the one who dug in your heels and enlarged your mistake to a rude exchange.
Knock it off.
[ /Moderating ]
When you say that “they are the cause of their own misery” or something along those lines (as you did here) you are implying that the US has not done anything wrong to Haiti, and thus, Haitian misery is not the US’s concern. My reply was that humanitarian aid isn’t based on “historical wrong” reasoning.
If you are talking about the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. It (and the aftermath) completelydestroyedSan Francisco.
San Francisco had a pop of 400,000 in 1906 (the entire state of California was 2,377,549 in 1910) while Port-au-Prince has/had more then a million.
The earthquake struck almost the entirety of Haiti, not just Port-au-Prince.
I know it’s politically incorrect to say this, but it’s mighty stupid to blame shoddy construction of Haitian buildings on ineptitude. I would have guessed that it was poverty that lead to the shoddy constrution of buildings. Anyways that is pretty mute when such well constructed buildings like the port-au-prince UN Headquarters can crumble like a house of cards.
I would also think that the biggest issues are the cultural barriers. However both the USAand Canadahave large Haitian communities in the their countries (something that is lacking in Senegal). Refugees could even be brought in on the bases of family re-unification. What’s wrong with that?
I repeat: It is not an either/or issue (Senegal or USA/Canada).
We’re trying to lower the heat in this thread, not raise it.
Keep to disagreement with out adding insulting critiques.
[ /Modding ]
It is also true that the U.S. has done historical wrongs to Haiti, e.g.: Refusing recognition and boycotting trade with Haiti after it became independent in 1804; occupying it 1915-1934; supporting the [1957-1986; and supporting the coups that ousted [url=Jean-Bertrand Aristide - Wikipedia]Aristide](]Duvalier regime[/url) in 1991 and again in 2004. How big a role all this history plays in Haiti’s current troubles is debatable, but not dismissable.
Sure. I’ll behave.
I moved these two posts into this thread, per orcenio’s request, because they were more related to this topic.
mswas was talking about the Loma Prieta earthquake in 1989, which struck during the World Series that year. It was of the same magnitude as the Haiti quake and did plenty of damage but did not kill many people or destroy many homes compared to Tuesday’s earthquake. That may not be a valid comparison, though: California gets a lot of earthquakes, so their construction codes take them into account, but Haiti doesn’t have many earthquakes. I also wondered if shoddy construction caused some of the wreckage in Haiti, and it can’t have helped, but if the presidential palace, and the UN headquarters and the main cathedral all collapsed, this one probably would have destroyed a lot of other buildings regardless.
What was the straw man? A poster pointed to rich neighboring countries then named the USA and Canada, both of which could be considered largely white countries. mswas then simply pooh-poohed any responsibility those countries might owe as part of the theoretical White Man’s Burden.
What’s the problem? What’s the big deal?
No one posted that the U.S. or Canada should help because they were white.
No one even posted, to that point, that there was any reason beyond normal humanitarian concerrns for any aid to be offered.
Playing the “White Man’s Burden” card, (historically irrelevant in this case, as it was, but more particularly because it attacked a point not raised prior to his post), was a hijack and then claiming that responses to his hijack were strawman arguments was a further hijack.
If you have a problem with the Moderating, take it to ATMB and stop interrupting the thread.
[ /Moderating ]
Aw c’mon… in my experience everything comes down to race eventually.
If you have a new parallel to Godwin’s law, demonstrate it with evidence. Otherwise your experience is nothing but a red herring based on your limited life situation.
I implied nothing of the kind.
But this thread isn’t about humanitarian aid, which the US is the largest donor and deliverer of. No one disagrees we should be providing humanitarian aid.
Not actually. Look at the maps again. Haiti surrounds a big bay which Port-au-Prince is at the mouth of. There is a larger land mass above the bay which is farther from Port-au-Prince. The large portion of land is outside of the ring from the epicenter. Though most of the population is around Port-au-Prince.
Poverty and ineptitude come hand in hand. The reality is that the Haitians are desperately poor and illiterate. But you make a valid point regarding the better constructed buildings.
So you are suggesting the US put an active brain drain on Haiti and let the rest of the people rot?
Obama already allowed immigrant amnesty. That’s pretty much what you are talking about. Accepting the entire population is not a good idea.
Heh, far from stupid points. Extremely relevant.
Oh well then, we should just hamstring ourselves over making reparations like we obviously owe to the rest of the world. Though of course the implementation of reparations would cause cries of neo-colonialism from leftists as well. The US just wouldn’t be able to win.
It’s a valid point. Haiti isn’t used to Earthquakes. I suppose an Earthquake in New York would be catastrophic as well.
Maybe I missed it, but the answer is no we should not, and what to do is tell them just to walk to the other side of the island where there is a much better run place they would fit in fine because it is the same peoples. If Haiti later recovers, it would also be easy to return. Problem solved.
With all our technology and money people get in the USA so I am quite sure a crossing point to the D.R. can be found, just don’t send everyone to the same point.
They are not the same peoples and having to handle the Haitian crisis would crush the Dominican Republic.
Crossing point? It’s an island you can walk across.
According to this WSJ article; the US has given something called TPS which is a 18 month long temporary amnesty, to around 1-200,000 people who are already currently in the US. New comers will/are being turned away.
It also has a quote about Canada
I’ll be very interested to see what Harper bangs out.
We’ve got some of that technology and money here in Canada too. We’re going to use it and cross over into the US, OK? We’ll be there for supper.
That is not an accurate portrayal of refugee re-settlement nor immigration. If Haiti is to improve it needs foreign investment. The whole idea of granting Haitians TPS status if so that they can legally work in the US and sent money back home. That is what immigrants do. It’s called remittances and it is the cause of the yearly flow of 100 of billion of dollars to the developing world. That influx of money makes a big difference to poor countries. Here is a quote from a World Bank commissioned report of Haitian remittances. [
](http://isim.georgetown.edu/Publications/RCRCCPubs/Orozco/Understanding%20the%20remittance%20economy%20in%20Haiti.pdf)(here’s an interesting presentation on the same topic).
An immigrant amnesty would be great, but that is not what Obama did; he declared a temporary amnesty. That is less spectacular.
Relevant to no one, but yourself. Are you implying that Haitian refugees will somehow “ravage” the US? You are merely spouting some points about the poor Haitian political realities; you make zero connections between them and anything else.
BrainGlutton was correcting me by stating historical fact. The US did commit some huge political/economic wrongs towards Haiti including invading/occuping the country (for ~ 20 years), refusing recognition/boycotting trade with Haiti after it became independent in 1804, actively supporting the Duvalier regime 1957-1986, and finally supporting the coups that ousted Aristide in 1991 and again in 2004. This was neo-colonialism, relevant or irrelevant to the current discussion about accepting Haitian refugees.
However, you find comfort in using these facts to scream “we don’t owe the rest of the world nothin” without acknowledging that no one used these real, historical, points as reasons for accepting refugees, nor did anyone say the the US alone should accept refugees, nor should the US extend this action to non-neighboring countries not struck by a natural disaster. You are pretty much making your own arguments to argue with yourself; and you are losing.
How is this different from what Chavez says any other Monday? Also how is this relevant to the OP??
If it’s a good deed on Senegal’s part to offer this sort of aid, why would it not also be a good deed on our part to do the same? Surely we can afford it as easily as Senegal, and surely Senegal has no more moral or historical obligations toward Haiti than we do. Likewise, if, as What the … !!! alludes, Cuba wants to take in refugees, they can go ahead and do so, too.
Just because the rest of the world is capable of doing good is no reason why we shouldn’t, too.
