If Russia deployed a large number of troops to Haiti, DUers would be speculating about their motives

[howard112211]

Regardless whether the recent comments of Hugo Chavez were justified, IMO they show one thing:

The long-term rebuilding of Haiti must be done by the United Nations.

Providing immediate disaster relief is one thing, but a long-term presence of national troops of
any single country is going to raise suspicion. The USA is no exemption to this, given that its
track record is less than perfect (a new sharp looking face at the helm does not negate this).
European countries such as France, England, Russia etc. or China would equally raise charges of colonialism.

Also, such suspicions would ultimately probably be justified against any country. Countries
generally don't use their national armies for selfless acts that don't lead to any advance in
national interests.

Also, I think it is not wise to declare international crisis relief as an integral part of the
mission of the US military from now on. All that would do is justify a further inflation of the military industrial
complex. Such matters should be delegated to the UN. Countries that want to contribute should provide funding.

[Gman2]

1. When the ball is hit to right/center field, someone has to call it.

[HeresyLives]

2. Absolutely agree.

It shouldn't be any one nation doing this, and it also shouldn't be the confused collision of 30 or so nations we usually get.

Only one group should be responsible for helping in these events, and that's the UN.

It needs to be properly set up, and funded, but we have to end the confusion of who is doing what. People die that way.

[TornadoTN]

3. The Russians have sent troops and equipment

Mainly search and rescue and logistics support troops.

[Democrat_in_Houston]

4. The U.N. is turning away search and rescue teams saying they have "enough"

"The Texas unit, which has been on standby at Ellington Field in southeast Houston, was made up of 80 members including doctors and engineers. Four dogs were also part of the team."

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6821324.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+houstonchronicle%2Flocal-state+%28chron.com+-+Local+%26+State%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo

This unit has been on standby and ready to go since Thursday.

What the hell is going on?

Liz (my first post)

[HeresyLives]

7. There are teams in Canada as well that haven't gone.

Pretty well every country in the world has search and rescue teams available, but they can't use them all.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

9. Part of the problem is the airport. Great post about it here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7494389#7495680

the rest of the thread shows how the logistics of the situation is not well understood

[inna]

13. Warm welcome to the DU!

Good to have you here! :hi:

[ProgressiveProfessor]

5. When its in your backyard and you have the resources, the right thing to do is step up

The UN will get there eventually, but will never have the ready reaction capability of the US or other major nations

The issue of control is actually where the UN could do some good. Developing standard plans that could be implemented so there would be an outline of what the roles on the ground are would be a good thing. It already exists for SAR and other areas.

[HeresyLives]

8. The UN has been there from the beginning.

And it should be equipped with everything necessary to do the job. Everything in the world is everybody's back yard.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

10. Been there, yes, effective???

The UN does not have much expertise on the ground in the immediate crisis. This is due in large part to their lack of resources and experience. They do better once the immediate crisis is over as a long term solution coordinator. They could add value in helping to develop templates for such operations and even allocating areas of responsibility the way it is done with SAR.

I am not sure it would be cost effective or realistic for the UN to have pre-staged aircraft, personnel, and stockpiles around the world.

[HeresyLives]

12. Yes.

The UN is not an autonomous outfit that operates on it's own. It's made up of all the countries in the world, and can only do what they allow it to.

They should have a rescue unit available 24/7/365 ready to go anywhere and provide anything needed.

It would prevent this nonsense of 30 countries all bumping into each other in the effort to gain headlines and look good. The current way means there is duplication, arguments, confusion on where to send money, no plan, no coordination....their radios aren't even compatible.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

24. No they haven't been...in something like this effectiveness is measured in resources brought

to the table. A better approach would be to go with something like how international SAR is done

[EFerrari]

16. The two top UN mission leaders were killed in the quake. n/t

[HeresyLives]

18. They have other mission leaders.

[EFerrari]

20. Of course but that would traumatize any team. n/t

[HeresyLives]

21. Natural disasters by definition are traumatizing.

But it's their job to put that aside, and get on with the rescue.

[EFerrari]

27. Yes, that is their job.

[Igel]

30. It means they're victims.

We tend to cut the victims of unexpected massive trauma a bit of slack.

Yes, I also cut the Haiti police who aren't doing a heck of a whole lot slack.

"Gee, do I risk my life fighting those people and restoring order, or do I try to rescue my wife and kids and find them food and water?"

[Abq_Sarah]

28. Or it would mobilize them to action

[EFerrari]

29. That's right. Some people do mobilize in emergencies.

All the women in my family tend to be like that. We should have all been EMTs or something. All that adrenaline, wasted. :)

[TxRider]

15. Yup

We have the ability to get there quickest, with the most aid, and are doing so.

Anyone interested in the people in need would not be slowing us down.

[HeresyLives]

19. Again it becomes a pissing contest.

Many countries showed up, and fast, with lots of aid. This isn't a contest, and there are no medals.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

23. Doesn't have to be

International SAR responsibility is allocated to nations, lead for natural disasters should be done the same way. Much the same with "templates". Not hard to build international contingecy plans,

Part of the problem is that the UN has had a hard time not considering itself the centerpiece of everything it does. Under its current format it would be better to allocate a lead nation with transition to the UN once the immediate/realtime crisis has passed (week?)

[TxRider]

6. Sure I would

But occupation of Haiti would not be among the speculations... ;)

[anonymous171]

11. The Military Industrial Complex wants wars, not humanitarian missions

They sell weapons after all. There is no money in bread.

[inna]

14. exactly. see this, it's chilling:

http://www.gregpalast.com/the-right-testicle-of-hell-history-of-a-haitian-holocaust/

[leftstreet]

25. +1

Thanks for posting that link again

It IS chilling

[malaise]

17. Excellent post

I'll say one thing for the Obama administration - they did not arrive without signing the protocols. Chavez is not the only suspicious person - CARICOM is pissed that our aircraft weren't allowed to land since Haiti is a member of CARICOM. I'm giving Obama and the UN the benefit of the doubt for now because people are in need.

[jpak]

22. Disaster Relief = Colonialism, Obama = Bush, Up is Down, 6 is 9

Now I HAVE heard everything...

What horseshit

:thumbsdown:

:puke:

[qazplm]

26. there were posts on here

about how the military wasnt being used enough, that we should have moved quicker, now we have posts that say our military shouldn't be involved, we moved too quickly to put troops in.

I dont know how collectively we dont get electronic whipflash.

[Robb]

31. Red scare and charges of American imperialism, all in one post.

I have to say I'm impressed.

[spanone]

32. really? not me.

[Odin2005]

33. FAIL!