Actually, during the road construction etc. many years ago, the only prostitues there to service the contruction people were Dominican. The Haitian women did not prostitute themselves. Times have changed.
- Thread starter Eddy
- Start date
Commonwealth of Haiti territory of the USA
Actually, during the road construction etc. many years ago, the only prostitues there to service the contruction people were Dominican. The Haitian women did not prostitute themselves. Times have changed.
Just announced! Bill Clinton named special envoy to Haiti. (Source: CNN) Hmmmm.
He and the missus have sure spent a lot of time in Casa de Campo over the years. Since we are in 'speculation land' let's just suppose that Haiti will get some of the US government largess to enable Haiti to get stronger. A more comprehensive government of Hispaniola would be an excellent way to move the Caribbean forward!
Note, other than the Bill Clinton item above the rest is just speculation. But it's fun!
He and the missus have sure spent a lot of time in Casa de Campo over the years. Since we are in 'speculation land' let's just suppose that Haiti will get some of the US government largess to enable Haiti to get stronger. A more comprehensive government of Hispaniola would be an excellent way to move the Caribbean forward!
Note, other than the Bill Clinton item above the rest is just speculation. But it's fun!
With regards to Haiti, and Bill Clinton's appointment. An article today from the Canadian News wire. Personally I think cooperation, and collaboration would be good for both countries. But Haiti becoming part of a US Commonwealth so to speak won't happen in this century. Look at puerto rico, they already spend a bunch there, and don't receive much in return. Haiti would cost the US way more than puerto rico. As far as Aid goes, in the long run, aid to haiti is beneficial to the DR, what would be even more beneficial if DR companies could bid on aid contracts to Haiti there is U$S 335 mill, from the US, an equal amount from Canada, and probably an equal amount from Europe being spent in Haiti annually as aid. $1 billion in aid, means there are a lot of contracts to help distribute it.
"New UN envoy Bill Clinton says Haiti has best chance in decades to escape poverty
UNITED NATIONS _ Former U.S. President Bill Clinton said Monday that Haiti has the best chance in decades to escape poverty and political upheaval and he will seek in his new job as U.N. special envoy to improve life for the estimated 9 million Haitians.
Haiti is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere and was in the throes of a food crisis and political deadlock when four tropical storms battered it last fall, killing some 800 people and doing $1 billion in damage. Hunger worsened, poverty deepened and hard-won stability threatened to come apart five years after a bloody rebellion.
Clinton said he will try to do in Haiti what the U.N. attempted to do when he was the top U.N. envoy promoting recovery from the devastating 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami _ ''to leave things better than they were before the natural disasters.''
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who appointed Clinton to the US$1-a-year post on May 19, told a news conference that ''no one is better placed'' than the former U.S. president to help Haiti's president and prime minister promote their new economic development program and to help ensure that governments deliver on the US$335 million they pledged in April for Haiti's recovery.
''Haiti is at a turning point,'' Ban said. ''It has a real chance for stability and potential prosperity. ... And we wanted to send a message to the international community: Haiti needs and deserves our help.''
Sitting beside the secretary-general, Clinton said that even after the devastation caused by last year's storms ''I think Haiti ... has the best chance to escape the darker aspects of its history in the 35 years I have been going there.''
He said this was because of the leadership of President Rene Preval and Prime Minister Michele Pierre-Louis, the ''good job'' done by U.N. peacekeepers and international police in improving security, U.S. legislation passed last year giving Haitian products ''extraordinary access'' to U.S. markets, Ban's interest, and the success of the donors conference.
Clinton said he will follow the ''very impressive program'' produced by the Haitian government _ which is similar to one commissioned by the U.N. but focuses more on immediate needs _ and work to generate new jobs and improve the availability of basic services.
Schools, hospitals, housing, public facilities, roads and infrastructure will be ''built back better'' and improvements will be made to prevent and mitigate future disasters and speed recovery, he said.
Clinton said he will also encourage international investment, make Haiti a more attractive prospect including by improving power supplies, accelerate efforts to promote clean energy, encourage donors to honour their commitments, and put the spotlight on ''both the pain and the promise of Haiti'' and its economic opportunities.
''I will be accountable in this work to the secretary-general and the United Nations, and to the people of Haiti and their governmental leaders,'' Clinton said.
He said he had read speculation in the Haitian press that his job ''was somehow an imperialist plot to take over Haiti.''
''All I want to do is help the Haitians take over control of their own destiny,'' Clinton stressed. ''That's all I have ever wanted for Haiti, and that's all the secretary-general wants.''
Haiti's Foreign Minister Alrich Nicolas read a letter from Preval praising Ban for focusing attention on Haiti's urgent needs and saying ''our country and our people could not hope for a better friend and advocate than President Bill Clinton.''
Clinton said he would be putting together a small staff over the next few days and hoped to visit Haiti ''pretty soon.''
In response to a question, he said both the White House and the State Department had given a green light for him to take the U.N. job. ''I would not have done this otherwise,'' Clinton said."
"New UN envoy Bill Clinton says Haiti has best chance in decades to escape poverty
UNITED NATIONS _ Former U.S. President Bill Clinton said Monday that Haiti has the best chance in decades to escape poverty and political upheaval and he will seek in his new job as U.N. special envoy to improve life for the estimated 9 million Haitians.
Haiti is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere and was in the throes of a food crisis and political deadlock when four tropical storms battered it last fall, killing some 800 people and doing $1 billion in damage. Hunger worsened, poverty deepened and hard-won stability threatened to come apart five years after a bloody rebellion.
Clinton said he will try to do in Haiti what the U.N. attempted to do when he was the top U.N. envoy promoting recovery from the devastating 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami _ ''to leave things better than they were before the natural disasters.''
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who appointed Clinton to the US$1-a-year post on May 19, told a news conference that ''no one is better placed'' than the former U.S. president to help Haiti's president and prime minister promote their new economic development program and to help ensure that governments deliver on the US$335 million they pledged in April for Haiti's recovery.
''Haiti is at a turning point,'' Ban said. ''It has a real chance for stability and potential prosperity. ... And we wanted to send a message to the international community: Haiti needs and deserves our help.''
Sitting beside the secretary-general, Clinton said that even after the devastation caused by last year's storms ''I think Haiti ... has the best chance to escape the darker aspects of its history in the 35 years I have been going there.''
He said this was because of the leadership of President Rene Preval and Prime Minister Michele Pierre-Louis, the ''good job'' done by U.N. peacekeepers and international police in improving security, U.S. legislation passed last year giving Haitian products ''extraordinary access'' to U.S. markets, Ban's interest, and the success of the donors conference.
Clinton said he will follow the ''very impressive program'' produced by the Haitian government _ which is similar to one commissioned by the U.N. but focuses more on immediate needs _ and work to generate new jobs and improve the availability of basic services.
Schools, hospitals, housing, public facilities, roads and infrastructure will be ''built back better'' and improvements will be made to prevent and mitigate future disasters and speed recovery, he said.
Clinton said he will also encourage international investment, make Haiti a more attractive prospect including by improving power supplies, accelerate efforts to promote clean energy, encourage donors to honour their commitments, and put the spotlight on ''both the pain and the promise of Haiti'' and its economic opportunities.
''I will be accountable in this work to the secretary-general and the United Nations, and to the people of Haiti and their governmental leaders,'' Clinton said.
He said he had read speculation in the Haitian press that his job ''was somehow an imperialist plot to take over Haiti.''
''All I want to do is help the Haitians take over control of their own destiny,'' Clinton stressed. ''That's all I have ever wanted for Haiti, and that's all the secretary-general wants.''
Haiti's Foreign Minister Alrich Nicolas read a letter from Preval praising Ban for focusing attention on Haiti's urgent needs and saying ''our country and our people could not hope for a better friend and advocate than President Bill Clinton.''
Clinton said he would be putting together a small staff over the next few days and hoped to visit Haiti ''pretty soon.''
In response to a question, he said both the White House and the State Department had given a green light for him to take the U.N. job. ''I would not have done this otherwise,'' Clinton said."
You can be assured that Bill Clinton will absolutely be working very closely with the Secretary of State (Hillary) and the president with regard to the issue of Haiti's recovery.
I also think this might indicate a retrenchment of sorts for the US. It might signal a return to the Monroe Doctrine's original intent, which was to ensure the security of this hemisphere and to provide an adequate ring of defense.
Perhaps the Obama administration is rethinking its strategic global policies, and might have recognized the importance of having a stable base of support close to home.
After all, some analysts have noted the lack of attention that previous administrations have given to Latin America. It is no secret that the emergence of Chavez and other new Latin leaders have given the US government reason to question the policy of benign neglect for this region, over the course of the past 8 to 10 years.
These are just my thoughts, and I can offer no references to substantiate them.
I also think this might indicate a retrenchment of sorts for the US. It might signal a return to the Monroe Doctrine's original intent, which was to ensure the security of this hemisphere and to provide an adequate ring of defense.
Perhaps the Obama administration is rethinking its strategic global policies, and might have recognized the importance of having a stable base of support close to home.
After all, some analysts have noted the lack of attention that previous administrations have given to Latin America. It is no secret that the emergence of Chavez and other new Latin leaders have given the US government reason to question the policy of benign neglect for this region, over the course of the past 8 to 10 years.
These are just my thoughts, and I can offer no references to substantiate them.
The UN appointed Clinton, not the State Department.
And based on the track record of the UN...including Haiti where Clinton spent considerable attention as POTUS statring with the 1994 Operation Uphold Democracy invasion and aftermath (my best friend, a retired full Col., was a commander there at the time)...I don't expect much but a lot of talk and squandered resources, UN style.
Does this mean the current US President is going back to Monroe Doctrine days? I dunno. Let's see how he deals with Chavez who is cozying up to countries who are openly hostile to the US. That should tell us a lot.
I just don't know how Haiti, like a few other really horrible humanitarian situations on the planet, can be fixed. And unless the economic opportunities in Haiti can be lelvated to being equal to the DR-and I give them 0% chance of doing so-there will continie to be an illegal Haitian immigrant problem in the DR. We might as well deal with it as best as we can, for better or worse.
Labor always flows toward capital. And because of oceans, that labor flows to the DR.
I agree that the UN and hot air go hand-in-hand etc. It is a political body, mired in endless and meaningless debates, while the pressing issues are usually settled in other ways. But they are the only game in town at the moment, so I guess the US decided to play a few hands and see what happens.
I also understand that the UN appointed Clinton, and he is as much of a political hot air balloon as anyone. However, the appointment itself doesn't mean much of anything, except the UN was the entity that had a position that fit the job that needed to done. If the US government didn't want Clinton in that position he wouldn't be there.
Perhaps you are correct in suggesting that not much can be done to alleviate the present situation in Haiti. However, since a destabilized Haiti is only going to hurt the US in the long run, and could very well lead to even greater alienation between the US and its Caribbean Basin trading partners, the US has no choice but to do something, even if it's wrong.
As you said, "we might as well deal with it as best we can". In this case, it is probably best to have the UN take the more visible lead role in the process, but have no doubt that the US is the prime mover on this deal.
We'll have to wait and see if Clinton will be more affective than he was in the past, but he's the guy the US chose to do the job, and we'll be able to tell soon enough.
I also understand that the UN appointed Clinton, and he is as much of a political hot air balloon as anyone. However, the appointment itself doesn't mean much of anything, except the UN was the entity that had a position that fit the job that needed to done. If the US government didn't want Clinton in that position he wouldn't be there.
Perhaps you are correct in suggesting that not much can be done to alleviate the present situation in Haiti. However, since a destabilized Haiti is only going to hurt the US in the long run, and could very well lead to even greater alienation between the US and its Caribbean Basin trading partners, the US has no choice but to do something, even if it's wrong.
As you said, "we might as well deal with it as best we can". In this case, it is probably best to have the UN take the more visible lead role in the process, but have no doubt that the US is the prime mover on this deal.
We'll have to wait and see if Clinton will be more affective than he was in the past, but he's the guy the US chose to do the job, and we'll be able to tell soon enough.
The US didn't pick Clinton. The UN did, unless by "Clinton" you mean Hillary.
I'm not so sure Haiti is really hurting anyone much besides the DR. And it's not "hurting" the DR, really, like I don't see Mexican illegals really hurting the US. Like their Mexican counterparts in the US, their cheap labor is somewhat offset by costs of healthcare, criminal activity, etc.
But I'm sure "talking" in the absence of any real action makes a lot of folks ~feeeel~ better...
You got that right.
From a pragmatical point of view, what Haiti could use right now is an improvement in the security situation, which will then reap all types of rewards for the Haitian people. There are many, many people (Haitian expats and French, etc) who would love to have a home, vacation and or invest in development in Haiti.
"The US didn't pick Clinton. The UN did,"
So you don't think the US had anything to do with that selection?
Give me a break.
So you don't think the US had anything to do with that selection?
Give me a break.
:cheeky:According to this article it was Clinton's track record with Haiti that got him picked by Ban.
Clinton named special envoy to Haiti | csmonitor.com
Also, suggesting that the Obama administration with the help of Hillary made this happen doesn't really reflect that well on them - you sure you don't want to rethink this stance then?
No conspiracy whatsoever, but if you think the US doesn't have any influence when it comes to these type of appointments, then I've got a bridge to sell you.
By the way, extrapolating the mention of a political reality into a pretext for crying "conspiracy theory" is taking a pretty big step, even for you.
Frankly, it is something in your repertoire of discussion tactics you should probably save for a more pressing issue. As I stated earlier, these are just some thoughts to consider. It is not an issue I consider to anything but fun speculation. However, if you feel you have to "win" this one, then you won.
By the way, extrapolating the mention of a political reality into a pretext for crying "conspiracy theory" is taking a pretty big step, even for you.
Frankly, it is something in your repertoire of discussion tactics you should probably save for a more pressing issue. As I stated earlier, these are just some thoughts to consider. It is not an issue I consider to anything but fun speculation. However, if you feel you have to "win" this one, then you won.
And Chip, why would I want to change my opinion? You are making assumptions based on absolutely nothing.
You don't know me, nor do you know my political beliefs or affiliations. You can think whatever you want, or should I say, whatever is easiest for you to think, but you are so far off base it's pathetic.
You don't know me, nor do you know my political beliefs or affiliations. You can think whatever you want, or should I say, whatever is easiest for you to think, but you are so far off base it's pathetic.
My only point was seeing how the previous administration was hammered by the press for political favors, it would seem the Obama administration would go out of their way to make sure it doesn't happen.
As far as winning for the sake of winning, please don't confuse your modus operandi with mine.
As far as winning for the sake of winning, please don't confuse your modus operandi with mine.
Chip, at least be honest. That wasn't your point at all, or if it was, it was so misstated it was completely unfathomable.
And you also win the "winning" issue. Keep up the good work.
And you also win the "winning" issue. Keep up the good work.
Does everything have to be spelled out for you? I thought you were the genio of the board.
Geez guys! Why did everyone skip over my Aid money bit? There's a billion dollars heading next door, and a lot of it through consulting firms. Does anyone think that DR companies have any chance at receiving these contracts from US, Can, or Euro aid money??
Does everything have to be spelled out for you?
Okay, if you insist.
Also, suggesting that the Obama administration with the help of Hillary made this happen doesn't really reflect that well on them - you sure you don't want to rethink this stance then?
My only point was seeing how the previous administration was hammered by the press for political favors, it would seem the Obama administration would go out of their way to make sure it doesn't happen.
In what way are those two statements in any way the same, or even similar?
All I see in the second is you laying down cover for the first.
And the first was clearly meant as an attempt to make it seem as if my opinions are based solely on what might be considered favorable to the Obama agenda. It's a well-worn tactic, and is often used to undermine principled opposing opinions.
You were questioning if I wanted to rethink my opinion based on what might or might not reflect poorly on the Obama administration, weren't you?
Okay, if you insist.
Also, suggesting that the Obama administration with the help of Hillary made this happen doesn't really reflect that well on them - you sure you don't want to rethink this stance then?
My only point was seeing how the previous administration was hammered by the press for political favors, it would seem the Obama administration would go out of their way to make sure it doesn't happen.
In what way are those two statements in any way the same, or even similar?
All I see in the second is you laying down cover for the first.
And the first was clearly meant as an attempt to make it seem as if my opinions are based solely on what might be considered favorable to the Obama agenda. It's a well-worn tactic, and is often used to undermine principled opposing opinions.
You were questioning if I wanted to rethink my opinion based on what might or might not reflect poorly on the Obama administration, weren't you?
I don't think the US govt would really have that much to do. Bill Clinton is a very smart guy, for some reason if the US govt were trying to push to have him somewhere it probably wouldnt be for special enoy to Haiti. The article I posted states that after being offered the position, he checked with the state department if it was ok (i.e "honey, can I go to Haiti). Bill although being a democrat, was touring around with George Bush Sr. to help get solidiraty for some issue (blurry today), and also was in charge for the Tsunami relief. It seems that he takes a somewhat non-partisan stance when it comes to huminatirian issues. Being in Haiti is somewhat political - it would be even bigger if he were special envoy to the middle east, but he's not. I dont think there's too much to read into this.