[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
6747: Re: 6738:Haitian Army, Dorce to JAALLEN (fwd)
From: LAKAT47@aol.com
In a message dated 01/22/2001 6:59:15 AM Pacific Standard Time,
JAALLEN181@aol.com writes:
<<Allow me to try one myself: The United States did not need an army. The
Vietnam War was therefore a failure in terms of its own defined goals but was
simply a bad idea. How does this sound? Congratulations if you picked
simplistic. >>
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Are you comparing the US to Haiti? I hardly think that is even possible or
if possible, it is not meaningful. The Haitian Army at its prime couldn't
defend Haiti against invaders from other countries (not even the DR). And
it was never meant to do that. It was formed to keep the social order. When
I hear those in defense of keeping the Army (assuming they are Haitian), I
know they are from the minority classes. The non-Haitians who defend the
Haitian Army, I am not sure what to think about them. But it seems that
they do not regard the majority class as capable of determining their own
best interests.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
JAALLEN:
<...>
<< The fact that we have allowed our armed forces to degenerate to such
levels does not mean that we don't need an army; I am convinced that we do
need a professional army that can defend our interests. If we subscribe to
Mr. Lawless' logic, we should now get ready to rid ourselves of the police
because so many of its members are crooks and have caused a great deal of
harm to the Haitian society. Mr. Lawless takes his argument to the absurd
when he mentions the riot gear that were used to hurt the poor and
powerless.
Were it not for riot gears, Seattle would be lawless during the World Bank
meeting (no pun intended). Poor countries need riot equipment just as much
Mr. L. >>
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
May I ask what interests a professional army would defend? I would like to
remind this group that Costa Rica was a country plagued by bloody coups, one
after another, until they got rid of their military. They enjoy a peaceful
existance now with a huge tourist industry and many Americans find it so
attractive that they retire there. The country is stable and also have more
land dedicated to conservation (by %) than any other country in the Americas.
You reveal yourself when you speak of riot gear. Does this mean you think
you need an army to keep the people down because there will be riots when
they find out their government means for them to stay in the state of misery
they are in now? Perhaps the army will not be needed if improvements are
made so that everyone may live a better life in Haiti. What riots?? No
riots when people have food, and work, and education, and a clean place to
live.
A military force should only be used for defense from without, never for
control within. Anyway, the people of Haiti (the ones who felt the abuse of
power from the military and paramilitary) are happy the army is dissolved.
We on the outside, including Diaspora, are just observers with opinions and
should not impose these on the people living in Haiti. Especially if they do
not agree with the majority.
Kathy Dorce~