Haiti Earthquake

[secondwind]

Just about everything is going to be top priority for quite a time to come.  I hope the money keeps flowing in, and that people don't just give something once or twice and then forget about it or think the problems have gone away.  On a positive (if small) note, the kids (excuse me, "young musicians") of Classical Revolution D.C., who get their kicks playing great music to unappreciative louts in places like bars and restaurants, announced that they were donating all tips from their January evening at La Porta's restaurant this month to Haiti relief efforts.  They played Sunday evening, and they have announced a $350 donation to Hope for Haiti today.  So if we could just multiply that by thousands. . . and keep it coming.

[Lilas Pastia]

That's really great, Secondwind! That kind of spontaneous unselfish gesture is something that is quite new to the disaster aid scene.

In a sense, I think the whole world is fascinated by the prospect of rebuilding a whole country from scratch. How will it be done? What will they make of it? It's like a lab experiment on a huge scale.

[Scarpia]

In a sense, I think the whole world is fascinated by the prospect of rebuilding a whole country from scratch. How will it be done? What will they make of it? It's like a lab experiment on a huge scale.

Rebuild?  It is interesting to look at Port au Prince on Google earth.  A large fraction of the city consists (or consisted) of ramshackle structures that a person in a developed country wouldn't consider suitable for livestock, let alone human beings, that and villas on the hills owned by the few rich people.  It was a country blessed with abundant natural resources which became the most poor, most desperate place on earth.  Are the developed counties to step in a rebuild that pathological society?  This is a place where a Roman Catholic Priest who became President (Aristide) encouraged his supporters to seek out political opponents and literally burn them alive.  I feel for the people there and their urgent needs must be met, but I feel uncomfortable with the idea of pouring limitless resources into that place.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

In a sense, I think the whole world is fascinated by the prospect of rebuilding a whole country from scratch. How will it be done? What will they make of it? It's like a lab experiment on a huge scale.

It's been done before - post-WW2 Europe comes to mind.

[Scarpia]

It's been done before - post-WW2 Europe comes to mind.

In post-WW2 Europe there was something to rebuild.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

In post-WW2 Europe there was something to rebuild.

You have a point there. Yes, "restoring" Haitian society to its previous condition hardly seems worth it.

[secondwind]

Rebuild? . . .  A large fraction of the city consists (or consisted) of ramshackle structures that a person in a developed country wouldn't consider suitable for livestock, let alone human beings, that and villas on the hills owned by the few rich people.  It was a country blessed with abundant natural resources which became the most poor, most desperate place on earth.  Are the developed counties to step in a rebuild that pathological society?  . . .  I feel for the people there and their urgent needs must be met, but I feel uncomfortable with the idea of pouring limitless resources into that place.

Scarpia, you are entirely correct that the status quo pre-earthquake was pretty wretched.  However, Haiti did not become such a wreck of a nation without a lot of help.  Without belaboring the history of the country, I'd just say that IMHO certain developed nations, specifically France and the US, have a moral and ethical obligation to pour in some resources.  Of course, everyone's morals and ethics are a bit different, and I'm aware that not everyone will agree with me on this point.

[Scarpia]

Scarpia, you are entirely correct that the status quo pre-earthquake was pretty wretched.  However, Haiti did not become such a wreck of a nation without a lot of help.  Without belaboring the history of the country, I'd just say that IMHO certain developed nations, specifically France and the US, have a moral and ethical obligation to pour in some resources.  Of course, everyone's morals and ethics are a bit different, and I'm aware that not everyone will agree with me on this point.

There are two possibilities.  Either we simply make resources available.  These will be largely stolen and used to build even grander villas on the hills or sent to overseas bank accounts.  The other is we go in an rebuild their country for them.  But treating the inhabitants of a country like children doesn't create a functional country.  Maybe we do have an obligation, but we should understand that the money is sent to make us feel better about ourselves, and for no other purpose.

[Lilas Pastia]

Cynicism is king. Nothing new here. After all, we're only talking about human beings.

Yes, "restoring" Haitian society to its previous condition hardly seems worth it.

The same could be said of Cuba, Cambodia, Sudan  .

Many cynics put the blame on the haitian people at large even though 50% were not eve born when Aristide was president, and less than 25% when Papa Doc Duvalier run the country. But dreadful things happened then, so the hell with the whole lot, down to the 7th generation. Sure. Next post, please...

[Scarpia]

Cynicism is king. Nothing new here. After all, we're only talking about human beings.

The same could be said of Cuba, Cambodia, Sudan  .

Many cynics put the blame on the haitian people at large even though 50% were not eve born when Aristide was president, and less than 25% when Papa Doc Duvalier run the country. But dreadful things happened then, so the hell with the whole lot, down to the 7th generation. Sure. Next post, please...

No, I wouldn't say that.  But if they their situation will improve, they will have to do it for themselves.   That is not to say that wealthy countries should come to their immediate aid in the aftermath of the earthquake.  But if they are to "rebuild" their country they must do it, not the US or any other country.

[Anne]

Someone needs to teach them how to build homes that don't collapse in an earthquake.  Let them do the work but teach them how.

I am concerned about their starvation.  It looks like their area could grow food crops year around.  They would need seeds, hoes, and plows.  I wonder if potatoes would grow there?  I saw a video on computer showing the beautiful crop of onions they were growing.  Right now I'm thinking of the people starving in the countryside.  They could be taught how to can food for use in the off-season.  Their excess crops could be sold at market and the cash used to buy their other needed items.

We have the vegetable farmers now.  They would also need pig farmers, and cattle farmers not only for the meat but also for the milk.  Last but not least they would need some chicken farmers and NOT for cock fighting! but for meat and eggs.  I don't know if rabbits live that far south; they are prolific breeders - a necessary idea to hurry up and have meat for sale quickly.  (My father brought home a buck and three does and turned them loose in the barn.  It was not long before we were overrun with rabbits.  Toward the end I remember playing with 36 baby bunnies on the front lawn.  All of the were about the same size.  It was three litters of bunnies.  The 2 men I saw trying to roast a cat would likely eat rabbit.)  Grain crops would need to be grown for the livestock.

There was an article on the internet showing how shipping containers can be used to make their homes.  A retired college teacher and his class procured and built for the Haitians a school made of 4 of the shipping containers.  From start to finish the school was ready for occupancy by the students in a matter of weeks.

That retired teacher said he would be ready to go to Haiti to help.  For a home several containers could be used to create more space if needed.  The men did joke that the metal containers might make a lot of noise together.  I thought they could use rubber inserts to solve that problem.  Maybe someone has better ideas.  There are just ones that I heard about in reference to Haiti.

  I guess the US does not need the containers any more and they can be bought for less than $1,000.  Doors and windows can be added to the containers.  The containers are standardized.
The roofs being could easily be manufactured.  They would need sound proofing when it rains.  We have  about 5 skylights in our house and they definitely are noisy when it rains.  They mentioned making the floor of rubber.  At the time I was concerned about their homes being struck by lightning and the rubber floors sounded like a good idea.

Other than that, as a woman, and probably the one to do the cleaning, I might not be so keen on rubber floors.  In my mind I see reused vehicle tires and I see pitch black infant's knees from crawling around on those floors.

Does anyone know if there are better rubber floors than I have envisioned?  My husband had a friend who was always trying to find a use for discarded vehicle tires.  He was thinking of grinding them up and use them with asphalt for the highways.  I don't know if he ever succeeded.  We lost contact with him over the years.

[Lilas Pastia]

The subject of who will do what and with what money is a delicate one. At the Montreal Conference (a hastily convened mini summit) haitian authorities firmly expressed the will and desire to be in charge of the reconstruction efforts. The other countries present confirmed it should be so. But in reality, I don't think haitians have the slightest idea where to start.

Obviously foreign expertise and direct involvement will be necessary. It will be hard not to step on anyone's toes there. Today's friends and rescuers could become tomorrow's bullies. OTOH, money, manpower and technicians of all trades will be needed and a strong coordination  will be needed.

Canceling Haiti's foreign debt has been mentioned. Fine. But more money - tons of it - will be needed. The country has no capacity to repay. Realisticallly, I don't think Haiti will have much of a choice.

As Anne mentioned, they will have to be taught a few things. But I don't know about building earthquake proof buildings.  The 1995 Kobe earthquake was 6.9 in magnitude (vs 7.0 in Haiti), and the tremors lasted only 20 seconds. It made a lot of damage (120000 homeless, 200000 buildings destroyed, 10 trillion yens in damage (over 100 billion in USD$), or 2.5% of the country's GDP. Only 3% of the losses were insured. Analysts blame the quake for Japan's 'lost decade'-. Only 6434 lives were taken, probably on account of better home building practices. Japan is a country where quakes are frequent and building regulations are the most stringent on the planet. When a big one hits, especially in an urban area, no amount of fancy technology will stand in Mother Nature's way.

Containers are made of steel. Humidity and salt will cause its corrosion in a matter of just a few years, especially if openings are made - doors, windows, holes for water or electricity connections, etc. Most of Port-au-Prince's buildings, including houses, were made of cement blocks. In theory it should be solid. But cement was of poor quality: too much sand, and too much salt (from beach sand), which make the structures more fragile and corrodes wires and pipes. I suppose the retired college teacher is busy promoting his idea - it looks promising, at least as a useful stopgap.

[Cristofori]

Cynicism is king. Nothing new here. After all, we're only talking about human beings.

The same could be said of Cuba, Cambodia, Sudan  .

Many cynics put the blame on the haitian people at large even though 50% were not eve born when Aristide was president, and less than 25% when Papa Doc Duvalier run the country. But dreadful things happened then, so the hell with the whole lot, down to the 7th generation. Sure. Next post, please...

No, truth is king. And what Scarpia said about Haiti was basically the truth, whether we like it or not.

Also, you seem to be very biased and defensive about all things Haiti. That's understandable if your Haitian, but there are many other terrible goings on in the world that receives little to no attention from the media or the world at large. We can't possibly help them all, so we just pick and choose our causes. Right?

Sorry to say though, but much of the civilized world really isn't interested in the place as much as you'd like them to be, or who was in charge at what time. The place seems to continue to remain a perpetual hellhole regardless, and it's largely NOT our fault.

If it wasn't for the earthquake, hardly anyone would even be talking about Haiti.  I'm sorry if this insults you, but it's the truth.

Also, your comments about our military "not knowing what they are jumping into" "not being organized enough" "needing to blend in more" and the U.S. and other 1st world nations not doing enough to help in general, are a little annoying to say the least. I think our military is indeed aware of what they are jumping into, and are doing a fairly decent job under the circumstances.

I also think the Haitians should be eternally grateful for as much help as their getting from us and other 1st world nations, considering the recession and the host of other current problems. Many other nations are either unable, or unwilling to help Haiti at all. Again, none of what has happened was our fault.

I also don't mean to sound unsympathetic to what has happened down there, but there is nothing I can do about it right now, and I'm afraid that a large portion of the monies going there probably will never reach those it was intended for, which is usually the case with places like that. Even if it did, would it really change anything? Taking a long hard look at Haiti's history, the answer to that question may be a resounding no.

Give it a rest already.

[Maciek]

Reading some of the posts in this thread I begin to wonder if people ever travel anymore...

[Lilas Pastia]

The subject is obviously a foregone conclusion for you, so YOU can give it a rest.

Developed countries the world over give aid to poorer countries. Year after year. There are international and national budgetary targets for that. The notion that countries should not do anything anywhere because it's nobody's fault is ludicrous. The international aid following the 2005 tsunami was double that given to Haiti. No government in the "civilized world"  felt any kind of obligation to help with money, volunteers, medical crews etc.

[Cristofori]

The notion that countries should not do anything anywhere because it's nobody's fault is ludicrous.

Where did I say that countries should never do anything anywhere to help others if it's not their fault? My point was that you seem to be complaining endlessly that they (we) aren't doing enough for the Haitians, and you seem to think you have all the solutions.

There were also statements made that suggested the U.S or the west in general were somehow mostly responsible for the Haitian's consistently less than desirable state, and therefore we automatically have an obligation to always bend over backwards for them (and others) without question. I disagree.

This doesn't mean that I think Haiti should not be helped to some degree, and they are being helped.

No government in the "civilized world"  felt any kind of obligation to help with money, volunteers, medical crews etc.

OK, I'm sorry I used the term "civilized world". I should have used a more politically correct term. I don't want you to have to keep using the  icon again, as you have so many times already with anyone who doesn't tell you what you want to hear.

The international aid following the 2005 tsunami was double that given to Haiti.

Is it possible that the Tsunami victims got double the international aid than Haiti because the "developed world" (is that better?) wasn't in a huge recession in 2005? Could it be that the Tsunami disaster effected a vastly larger area than Haiti? Could it be that some Asian countries in that part of the world, with their huge economies, had more of a direct interest in what was happening there? Also, this whole mess with Haiti is still far from over. Aren't you being a bit premature and judgmental about everyone's efforts so far?

And what supreme rule or law states that any nation where disaster strikes should always be entitled to the same amount of international relief? If there is such a U.N. resolution, it's certainly based on socialist fantasy, and can never be seriously enforced, as you have already shown. And whether you like it or not, people and countries have their own special interests and biases. I'm not saying that this is always a good thing, but true nonetheless.

If a person genuinely wants to help another out of the goodness of their heart, then I'm all happily for that. But I'm opposed to those who assume for others that it be made mandatory, or attempt to ridden us with guilt and/or insinuate racism if they cannot help according to their specifications and standards.

[Cristofori]

Reading some of the posts in this thread I begin to wonder if people ever travel anymore...

Maybe so, but I strongly doubt that Haiti would be anywhere near the top ten list of most peoples travel destinations, if they were going to travel.

[Lethevich]

http://news.google.com/news/more?pz=1&cf=all&ned=uk&cf=all&ncl=dLDHQ5fntFd0QZMhcezchLDkhq27M

It seems that not all of them were even orphans, they were just kidnapped by these nutters.

[Lilas Pastia]

Same ploy as the Darfur orphans. Well-meaning individuals who either cut corners ( a no-no thing when you're in a foreign country), or they believe they have some kind of divine right to right wrongs. In any case, it doesn't work that way.

So far, every single day since the earthquake, our evening news have opened on Haiti news. Networks have invested heavily in the coverage - small miracles, big problems - and I suppose they feel an obligation to cover everything. Or at least something.

Just as the Kobe earthquake turned into Japan's lost decade, I'm afraid this will be a decade-long quagmire. Great things will be achieved, but there will be discouraging letdowns - lots of them.

[Cristofori]

http://news.google.com/news/more?pz=1&cf=all&ned=uk&cf=all&ncl=dLDHQ5fntFd0QZMhcezchLDkhq27M

It seems that not all of them were even orphans, they were just kidnapped by these nutters.

These were no "child Traffickers" or "kidnappers", just a group of christian missionaries who were perhaps a little over zealous in attempting to help these children.

It sounds like the orphanage they ran in Haiti had collapsed and they were trying to get over to the Dominican Republic where there was another orphanage being run by another group of Baptists.

Also, I'd be a bit suspicious of the testimony of an 8 year old Haitian via 2nd or 3rd hand from the internet. He may have been telling the truth, maybe not. He could have been coerced to say anything by the Haitian officials. If he had parents, why was he at an orphanage run by Christian missionaries? Did those missionaries know he had parents? Was he a runaway? We don't know the whole details.

Either way, I'm not convinced they were just randomly grabbing any Haitian child they saw to "smuggle" out of the country, which is what the media makes it sound like.

Funny how with all the REAL crimes, child trafficking and other incalculable problems going on over there, and with the almost non-existent police force and functional government, they are wasting their time and resources arresting these well meaning American's, who probably did more for those kids then they ever would have.