SectionsAmerica steps up to Haiti relief, but Americans should have more of a say
J.D. Garretson
Issue date: 1/19/10 Section: Opinion
So, am I the only person who kind of, sort of, just a little bit, deep down, secretly doesn't really, you know, care about Haiti?
I don't mean Haitians or the result of the recent earthquake. To call the sheer devastation shocking is like calling Rush Limbaugh fat. Some statements serve only to reveal the limitations of the English language.
Perhaps with 200,000 dead, people buried alive in rubble, total collapse of the government, bodies used as roadblocks, widespread starvation, the totality is staggering.
The images of broken humanity, men and women screaming in anguish, crying in pain, digging through rubble for loved ones and food. I'm not sure God exists, especially in light of this tragedy, but I pray I never have to experience anything like the people of Port-au-Prince are living through right now.
And I should say I completely disagree with Limbaugh's stance on donations to Haiti. To say the donations are going to the Obamas is idiotic.
To claim, like Bill O'Reilly, that the money will only go into the hands of corrupt administrators is heartless. And to say, like Pat Roberson did, that this is because of God only further deepens my doubt of him.
But all that being said, the only reasons Obama gave for "Why Haiti Matters" were that it's an opportunity for America to be altruistic, and that the nation's government was about to turn some corner and finally see peace, stability and prosperity.
But, in 2008, after catastrophic hurricanes, the American government responded with over $30 million in aid.
In 2004, we had to tamp down insurrection in the nation with a wave of 20,000 troops. The masses were overthrowing Jean-Bertrand Aristide. Again. A decade prior, Clinton sent forces in to reinstate the leader during a violent coup. In the early 1900s, America began an almost 20 year occupation of the nation after - you guessed it - a violent coup.
The country is one disaster after another. And, yeah, maybe the nation's coffers were plundered during American occupation, but I turn a blind eye to Sherman's March too. We all do. In that time, we dramatically increased basic infrastructure and education, kept the peace, and the nation was (relatively) prosperous.
I don't mean Haitians or the result of the recent earthquake. To call the sheer devastation shocking is like calling Rush Limbaugh fat. Some statements serve only to reveal the limitations of the English language.
Perhaps with 200,000 dead, people buried alive in rubble, total collapse of the government, bodies used as roadblocks, widespread starvation, the totality is staggering.
The images of broken humanity, men and women screaming in anguish, crying in pain, digging through rubble for loved ones and food. I'm not sure God exists, especially in light of this tragedy, but I pray I never have to experience anything like the people of Port-au-Prince are living through right now.
And I should say I completely disagree with Limbaugh's stance on donations to Haiti. To say the donations are going to the Obamas is idiotic.
To claim, like Bill O'Reilly, that the money will only go into the hands of corrupt administrators is heartless. And to say, like Pat Roberson did, that this is because of God only further deepens my doubt of him.
But all that being said, the only reasons Obama gave for "Why Haiti Matters" were that it's an opportunity for America to be altruistic, and that the nation's government was about to turn some corner and finally see peace, stability and prosperity.
But, in 2008, after catastrophic hurricanes, the American government responded with over $30 million in aid.
In 2004, we had to tamp down insurrection in the nation with a wave of 20,000 troops. The masses were overthrowing Jean-Bertrand Aristide. Again. A decade prior, Clinton sent forces in to reinstate the leader during a violent coup. In the early 1900s, America began an almost 20 year occupation of the nation after - you guessed it - a violent coup.
The country is one disaster after another. And, yeah, maybe the nation's coffers were plundered during American occupation, but I turn a blind eye to Sherman's March too. We all do. In that time, we dramatically increased basic infrastructure and education, kept the peace, and the nation was (relatively) prosperous.
Viewing Comments 1 - 3 of 4
Terrence S. Kiolbassa
posted 1/19/10 @ 8:33 PM CST
I really do not know how much is enough for Haiti.
What I do know i do not trust Americans to not line their pockets.
As for reconstruction aid for Haiti I want to see a general from the Chinese People's Liberation Army acting as an auditing Czar. (Continued…)
nathanael bassett
posted 1/20/10 @ 12:13 AM CST
What we really should be doing, J.D., and what you should be writing about, is how Haiti deserves reparations for being forced to repay France's costs during the slave rebellion which FREED Haiti from colonialist oppression. (Continued…)
The Standard
posted 1/20/10 @ 12:20 PM CST
This article was incorrectly labeled as being written by J.D. Garretson when it was actually written by Gabriel McLaughlin.
Post a Comment