6747: Re: 6738:Haitian Army, Dorce to JAALLEN (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

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~