Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Ron Paul votes "No" to US long-term Haiti aid


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1    Karlis

Karlis

  • Member
  • 8,614 posts
  • Joined:19 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 24 January 2010 - 05:48 AM

trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com said:

The House voted to express its condolences to Haiti for devastating earthquake, commending international relief efforts, calling for a long-term U.S. commitment to rebuilding the hemisphere's poorest nation, and urging Haiti's creditors to cancel its debts.The vote was 411-1.

Posted Image Read more...
Citing the short article:

The lone holdout? Rep. Ron Paul of Lake Jackson - the former GOP and Libertarian contender for president and advocate for the most limited federal government possible.

"Certainly I am moved by the horrific destruction in Haiti, and would without hesitation express condolences to those who have suffered and continue to suffer. As a medical doctor, I have through my career worked to alleviate the pain and suffering of others," he said.

But he expressed grave misgivings about the "possibility of an open-ended US military occupation" and said voluntarily donations should suffice to help Haiti recover.


Ron Paul was the only one who voted "No". Would you agree with his vote, or not?
Karlis


#2    Corp

Corp

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 6,951 posts
  • Joined:19 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ottawa

Posted 24 January 2010 - 05:57 AM

Why in God's name would the US want to occupy Haiti?

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse...A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

#3    Wickian

Wickian

    Doppelganger

  • Member
  • 3,900 posts
  • Joined:11 May 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

  • Save it for Queen Doppelpoppellus!

Posted 24 January 2010 - 06:19 AM

Unless they need and ask for the extra help to keep the peace from looting and such I see no reason for military occupation.


#4    The Silver Thong

The Silver Thong

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,233 posts
  • Joined:02 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary Alberta Canada

Posted 24 January 2010 - 06:55 AM

View PostCorp, on 24 January 2010 - 05:57 AM, said:

Why in God's name would the US want to occupy Haiti?


Why is the U.S. in Cuba? Haiti means a closer link to Venezuela. Oil is the answer.


No, the U.S. did not cause the earthquake.

Edited by Not the 1, 24 January 2010 - 06:59 AM.

Sittin back drinkin beer watchin the world take it's course.


The only thing god can't do is prove he exists ?

#5    Pseudo Intellectual

Pseudo Intellectual

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Banned
  • 5,607 posts
  • Joined:31 Dec 2008
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 January 2010 - 07:22 AM

That isolationist nut is at it again!

Can't wait for Graney to take his seat come March.


#6    el midgetron

el midgetron

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,936 posts
  • Joined:26 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:the middle of the mitten

  • saturnalian brother

Posted 24 January 2010 - 07:23 AM

Quote

I rise in reluctant opposition to this resolution. Certainly I am moved by the horrific destruction in Haiti and would without hesitation express condolences to those who have suffered and continue to suffer. As a medical doctor, I have through my career worked to alleviate the pain and suffering of others. Unfortunately, however, this resolution does not simply express our condolences, but rather it commits the US government “to begin the reconstruction of Haiti” and affirms that “the recovery and long-term needs of Haiti will require a sustained commitment by the United States….” I do not believe that a resolution expressing our deep regret and sorrow over this tragedy should be used to commit the United States to a “long-term” occupation of Haiti during which time the US government will provide for the reconstruction of that country.

I am concerned over the possibility of an open-ended US military occupation of Haiti and this legislation does nothing to alleviate my concerns. On the contrary, when this resolution refers to the need for a long term US plan for Haiti, I see a return to the failed attempts by the Clinton and Bush Administrations to establish Haiti as an American protectorate. Already we are seeing many argue that this kind of humanitarian mission is a perfect fit for the US military. I do not agree.

Certainly I would support and encourage the efforts of the American people to help the people of Haiti at this tragic time. I believe that the American people are very generous on their own and fear that a US government commitment to reconstruct Haiti may actually discourage private contributions. Mr. Speaker, already we see private US citizens and corporations raising millions of dollars for relief and reconstruction of Haiti. I do not believe the US government should get in the way of these laudable efforts. I do express my condolences but I unfortunately must urge my colleagues to vote against this resolution committing the United States government to rebuild Haiti.

http://www.ronpaul.c...-occupation-no/

Personally, I don't trust the government to have the best interests of the Haiti people at heart.



Posted Image

"Feels good to be breaking the laws in America again" - Kenny Powers


#7    Fluffybunny

Fluffybunny

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,136 posts
  • Joined:24 Oct 2003
  • Gender:Male

  • "Of all the tyrannies that affect mankind, tyranny in religion is the worst."
    Thomas Paine

Posted 24 January 2010 - 07:43 AM

I see no reason to spend money we don't have all over the world. Haiti included.I feel horrible for what happened there. They do need help. But t can't be all us. Send a few million in medical supplies that would otherwise expire, offer some short term help, but good grief we cannot go there and spend endless money. We just don't have it to spend...this isn't the old days; we are broke. People don't seem to understand that, because it hasn't hit them personally...but we are not that rich country with the platinum credit cards anymore; we are over our limits, and our car is about to be repossessed...

Too many people on both sides of the spectrum have fallen into this mentality that a full one half of the country are the enemy for having different beliefs...in a country based on freedom of expression. It is this infighting that allows the focus to be taken away from "we the people" being able to watch, and have control over government corruption and ineptitude that is running rampant in our leadership.

People should be working towards fixing problems, not creating them.

#8    AmbientSoul

AmbientSoul

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 679 posts
  • Joined:19 Feb 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:chicago

  • Your thoughts mould reality. We live inside God's mind. We are one.

Posted 24 January 2010 - 08:03 AM

yes I agree with Dr.Paul's decision and would like to add that he's the most sensible man in politics today.

Who is John Galt?

#9    Karlis

Karlis

  • Member
  • 8,614 posts
  • Joined:19 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 24 January 2010 - 08:08 AM

Ron Paul was the only Congressman out of 400-plus Congressmen who voted "No" for long-term aid to Haiti. Is it possible that Ron Paul is the only one Congressman correct in his conclusions? Also, why did all the other Reps vote "Yes"?

Just pondering,
Karlis


#10    preacherman76

preacherman76

    Humble Servent

  • Member
  • 10,905 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Parts Unknown

Posted 24 January 2010 - 11:06 AM

View PostPseudo Intellectual, on 24 January 2010 - 07:22 AM, said:

That isolationist nut is at it again!

Can't wait for Graney to take his seat come March.


We have already been acused of occupying Haiti by several countries. We have taken over millitarily 4 major airports. But RP is a isolationist cause he's against it?? You are the nut.

For the second part, LOL, you actualy think anyone but Christ himself is going to beat Ron Paul in Texas? Again, you are the nut.

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.

#11    Pseudo Intellectual

Pseudo Intellectual

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Banned
  • 5,607 posts
  • Joined:31 Dec 2008
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 January 2010 - 11:38 AM

Yes, we have been accused of that... but by who? Chavez. The French. The usual suspects. They've been accusing us of such things since... well, for decades, really. Who cares what they think?

And I know Paul's district. He's had it easy these past few years, running against far lefties, and giving his people no choice but to elect him. Now we have Graney, who's basically just like Ron Paul, except sane. We'll see who wins. :tu:


#12    Cadetak

Cadetak

    Defender of the Universe

  • Member
  • 6,371 posts
  • Joined:25 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cleveland, Ohio

  • Sometimes It's Darkest Just Before Dawn

Posted 24 January 2010 - 11:41 AM

View PostKarlis, on 24 January 2010 - 08:08 AM, said:

Ron Paul was the only Congressman out of 400-plus Congressmen who voted "No" for long-term aid to Haiti. Is it possible that Ron Paul is the only one Congressman correct in his conclusions? Also, why did all the other Reps vote "Yes"?

Just pondering,
Karlis

It was a mess before the quake but now and without help Haiti will completely collapse.

Reconstruction takes many months, not weeks. The Military has  the personel, tools, and expertise to do such a thing effectively.


Oh they probably all voted Yes because voting No would make them look bad...and you know...votes.

Between Red Team and Blue Team I stand colorblind

Posted Image

"The opposite of the religious fanatic is not the fanatical atheist but the gentle cynic who cares not whether there is a god or not."-Eric Hoffer


#13    Karlis

Karlis

  • Member
  • 8,614 posts
  • Joined:19 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 24 January 2010 - 12:33 PM

View PostCadetak, on 24 January 2010 - 11:41 AM, said:

It was a mess before the quake but now and without help Haiti will completely collapse.

~~~ ...
...

Oh they probably all voted Yes because voting No would make them look bad...and you know...votes.
That's more or less what I also think ... so much has changed since the Founding Fathers. Sad.

Again -- just my opinion,
Karlis


#14    The Silver Thong

The Silver Thong

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,233 posts
  • Joined:02 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary Alberta Canada

Posted 24 January 2010 - 03:49 PM

As the old saying goes " you can't help others if you can't help yourself"  Now there are ways of helping but not getting caught up in the help by making it political. As Fluffy said, send some money and medical supplies and let them use it to rebuild as they see fit. They can hire contractors as the military has a track record of helping for a reason and it's not humanitarian. If they waste what is given, so be it.

Edited by Not the 1, 24 January 2010 - 03:49 PM.

Sittin back drinkin beer watchin the world take it's course.


The only thing god can't do is prove he exists ?

#15    Corp

Corp

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 6,951 posts
  • Joined:19 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ottawa

Posted 24 January 2010 - 04:39 PM

View PostNot the 1, on 24 January 2010 - 06:55 AM, said:

Why is the U.S. in Cuba? Haiti means a closer link to Venezuela. Oil is the answer.

So if the US gets involved in helping a country it's because they want their oil, and if that country has no oil it so they can try and control other country's oil? Sorry but I don't buy that. Oil is not the answer for every single thing the US does. As for being in Cuba they have one military base back during the time when they actually controled Cuba, so the two cases aren't really similiar.

Haiti is a horrible mess and has been for years. Massive amounts of money is going to need to be poured in for them to get back on their feet so whatever possible advantage the US might have in gaining control of the country would be massively outweighted by the debt they would build up trying to run the place.

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse...A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users