Do you support US action in Haiti?

[Minstrel Boy]

Poll question: Do you support US action in Haiti?

Simple question: As you understand the situation, do you support the US government's role in toppling President Aristide, and the deployment of American troops to Haiti?

[Loonman]

1. Trick question

Nice try.......

[Minstrel Boy]

2. Please enlighten me.

Nothing up my sleeve here.

[Don Claybrook]

3. Where's the "hell no" option?

It's becoming apparent to me that Democrats can't just win back the White House and try to fix Bush's messes all over the world. In order for ANY of the world to ever trust us again, we're going to need to prosecute and send some people to prison for a long time. Without taking this step, the PNACers will still be eligible for high office, and they'll still be a threat to us and to the rest of the world. I wonder if our candidates have given much thought to this issue.

[LeahMira]

4. Of late...

As you understand the situation, do you support the US government's role in toppling President
Aristide, and the deployment of American troops to Haiti?

I don't support anything the U.S. government does.

I figure that way I'll be on the right side of the issue about 99% of the time.

[terryg11]

5. Did we actually topple him or just get him out?

Last I knew we didn't supply the rebels and can't imagine we would then send in our own troops if we had done something clandestine to help with Aristide's departure. I know there are some conspiracy theories out there but right now have my doubts as to their legitimacy.
AS far as supporting the action, I support getting Aristide out of there if it will truly bring the country back to a semblance of peace. If the situation degenerates into one of civil war and chaos then MAYBE we made a mistake

[Don Claybrook]

9. You can't imagine we'd send our own troops if...

...we'd done something clandestine?

Ever heard of Panama? Greneda? Iraq?

By conspiracy theories, you must be referring to the words of two elected representatives in the United States Congress. And Rumsfeld and McClellan said this was a conspiracy theory, and they wouldn't lie to us, well except for the 168 other documented lies they've been caught in, I mean.

[terryg11]

11. in Panama and Grenada we supplied one side...

only to get right back in it within a matter of days with our military on the other side? Didn't know that. As far as Iraq goes, it took a few years to realize what a horrible choice we had made but your point there is good enough.

I wonder what our goal was to destabilize Haiti so much that Aristide was ousted?

[lpbk2713]

6. It's appropriate to protect American nationals and diplomatic personnel.

Only as to keep them out of harm's way. It is not appropriate for the US to involve itself in Haitian internal affairs or to take any hostile military action.

[el_gato]

7. too late for that

US has been all over Haitian internal affairs for years and years

[el_gato]

15. some background by Stan Goff

For the few of you who don't know Stan Goff was a part of U.S. Special Forces in Haiti and walked away with deep knowledge of how things really work.

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/43a/184.html
Haiti was the world's first independent Black republic. It won that independence in a bloody revolt of slaves, who prevailed against the three dominant European militaries. This shattered the myth of white supremacy at a time when slave labor was still the economic foundation of every surrounding country, to include the new United States. As punishment, Haiti has been attacked, exploited, and vilified every since.

That vilification is continuing apace. Unfortunately, the US press has been led to uncritically collaborate in the distortion and stereotyping of Haiti. The US foreign policy establishment's agenda for Haiti is largely determined by the orthodoxy of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. The IMF and World Bank just became the target of massive protests in Washington DC on the 15th and 16th of April. So it may be timely to begin demystifying Haiti's current situation with that in mind.

The International Monetary Find and the World Bank are dominated by the United States, and the dominant stakeholders in those institutions are American finance capitalists. In simple terms, the IMF and the World Bank have much in common with loan sharks. They do not come to countries' rescue. They hold out loans to desperate countries to restructure their debts, and take on more debt-which they can ill afford-in exchange for acceptance of draconian adjustments to economic structures that are beneficial only to a small local elite who are working with transnational corporations (TNCs). These are called structural adjustment programs (SAPs). What's the US objection to Aristide? He might not support this sterling program. The vast majority of Haitians already object to it, but that doesn't fit with Uncle Sam's notion of manageable democracy. Their fear is not that Haiti will fail in the absence of structural adjustment. The fear is that they will progress. That's a very bad example. It's Haiti being independent again, and it won't be tolerated.

[BOHICA06]

8. The alternative was ...

what? Rwanda!

The French said, "No No, not till its safe!"

The UN said, "Revolutionaries, Indy. You go first!"

Aristide failed to understand both the situation & his limitations.

Gen Patton, "A good plan now is worht the perfect plan in 10-minutes"

[Don Claybrook]

10. Hey, I remember you!

I mean, the '04' on the end of the name is new, but the rest is the same, same name, same positions, everything. Welcome. And remember: the bugs that don't fly directly into the zapper tend to live longer.

[ret5hd]

12. The alternative was:

1)to free up aid from world bank, etc.
2)NOT arm and supply the rebels in the first place
3)RESPECT a democratically elected leader as being the wish of their people, even if we don't particularly like him

[bicentennial_baby]

13. That about sums it up

:thumbsup:

[BOHICA06]

14. the nice aid from the ...

90s built some pretty houses according to ABC last night.

The opposition dosen't look very well armed - so far I've seen everything from the 40s to 90s in weaponry.

Where to you draw the line between an elected leader and hacking up civilians - which historically was the next big event in Port a Prince.