Image

Communist apologist Patrick Cockburn is failing us - again!

User avatar
Greetings Comrades! This article came up in my Government & Politics class, so I thought I'd cross-post here for Party Approved Collective Enjoyment.


Image Mr. Cockburn, as a time-tested liberal raised by a socialist father would almost be remiss not to blame the US, but there are several flaws in his logic. First, why is it the fault of the US? We are not required to do anything for any other nation, but we are in the position to help, and do so from a culture of compassion and concern for humanity. We have much and are geographically the closest out of the wealthy nations, and are not the type to ignore such a tragedy without rendering aid. Cockburn accepts that the fear of looting and crime require armed troops to be among the first to arrive on the ground. How can any NGO, charitable organization, or even US military medics provide medical aid or search for survivors while in danger of having their supplies looted or their personnel attacked or kidnapped for ransom. People become desperate in desperate times, and one must ensure safety for aid providers and survivors alike. The 82nd Airborne, already overtaxed by two wars, is performing this mission without complaint.

His arguments concerning Aristide, Papa Doc, and Baby Doc run parallel to current criticisms of US policy toward Chavez and Zelaya wherein the evil imperialist US counters the will of the people and props up puppets, thus preventing a peace-loving socialist and "friend of the people" from saving their populations from the greed of GOP backed multinational corporations and plantation owners by enacting "progressive" policies and equal distribution of wealth. History shows that a left-wing dictator is just as bad as a right-wing dictator. It's not the policy that is the problem- it's the concept of the dictator. The US has never overthrown the will of the people of another nation by removing a progressive leader selected through free and fair elections. If that were true we would have gone to war with most of Europe and indeed the rest of the world. It is foolish to expect any country to act contrary to its national interest and the US is no exception. We have supported freedom loving people throughout the world, including in Haiti, known for its successful slave rebellions. Particularly during the Cold War, why should the US have been expected to support radical regimes in its own back yard, especially close to Cuba? It is perhaps the withdrawal of our protective hand that caused some of Haiti's governmental problems, not support for gangs by certain unnamed GOP members (which is distinct from official US policy) as asserted by Cockburn.

He denounces the speed at which heavy equipment has arrived, comparing it to New Orleans as too little, too late. The journey by sea takes time. Ships must be prepared and outfitted for extended deployment, ground forces organized, heavy equipment consolidated from around the Eastern seaboard, and finally shuttled to the island nation at slow maritime speeds. Once it arrives, how does it make land as the port has largely been destroyed? Divers must inspect the port to ensure it is safe and repairs must be made. We're moving as fast as we can. Movement by air for heavy equipment is equally troubled. Equipment and crews must be consolidated and prepared for a lengthy deployment. Heavy-lift air assets must either be diverted from their wartime mission or called up from the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve. Fuel must be carried along with maintenance supplies. Further complicating matters is the destruction of the airport. Without runway lights, landing beacons, control towers, etc., landings must be made by day at considerable risk. Who wants to see their sons and daughters killed flying bulldozers to Haiti due to a lack of infrastructure at the receiving end? Again, we're moving as fast as we can. However, with each aid worker who arrives, more food, water, quarters, etc. must be carried. Fuel must be sent to power generators. What would Cockburn do, aside from denouncing President Obama, to speed up this process?

Finally, he blasts the NGOs who are to provide aid, saying their operating overheads are too high, and comparing them to straw men in the guise of notional corrupt Haitian ministers. Haitian ministers don't have to film and broadcast fundraising commercials, pay staffs, or fly equipment around the globe, so of course they don't see the same overhead. However, Cockburn might be surprised to learn that he, at least in part, agrees with Rush Limbaugh, who also warns of possible corruption by large organizations (from The Guardian: https://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/j ... h-limbaugh). The smaller organizations he promotes might require less money to run their operations, but do they have the same visibility, reach, or capacity to provide aid?

I will agree with Cockburn on one point. The key to Haiti's success after this crisis is resolved will be found in its people forming an honest, legitimate government to provide opportunities for success and safeguard the rights and freedoms of its people. It is in the interest of the US to help such an endeavor to succeed.


Image NOW BACK ON YOUR HEADS!!! TO YOUR SHOVELS!! Those beets aren't going to harvest themselves in accordance with our 5 year plan by themselves...

-Commissar Obamissar Vodkavich

User avatar
A nice idea to form an honest government and I wish them well. But it won't happen there any more than it will happen in Mexico.

User avatar
Comrade Obamissar Vodkavich,

We can always use yet another journalist to vilify and rant against the evil USSA for never helping other nations enough. I believe we should immediately pull out of Haiti and stop meddling this minute. Oh, how I wish Dear Leader would turn the USSA into a half-starved banana republic like Cuba or Haiti sooner, then it would be impossible to meddle as we are now doing in Haiti.

Image
I didn't know who this Cockburn was until this post. I looked himup and found out he is Irish. Well, this explains a great deal. He ought to start a club of journalists who see fit to pee on us. Well, that's what he was doing, wasn't it?

User avatar
I looked him up too and found a wealth of similar dribble. An Irish Commie.... And what exactly is Ireland doing to help? This useful idiot sure is... useless.

Theo- you're right.

Leninka - I loved your rant about how to properly use the People's Blog so I thought I'd help by showing these proles how it's done. Granted, mine isn't very funny but at least has substance. Thanks for giving me props in the "people who don't suck" section. Your bitter, light-skinnedness without dialect does you well.

-COV

User avatar
If you compare Miss Resentment Michelle with Janet Reno is it possible that they were separated at birth? Look at the jaw.

mi
User avatar
Commissar Obamissar V wrote:History shows that a left-wing dictator is just as bad as a right-wing dictator. It's not the policy that is the problem- it's the concept of the dictator.

Actually, that's not quite true...Contrast Pinochet -- the very first nominee for the title of "right-wing dictator" in everyone's mind -- with, say, Castro. Pinochet's death-toll is about 3200 people, vs. Castro/Guevara combined hundreds of thousands. But as a result of Pinochet's policies, Chile experienced an economic miracle, while Cuba's economy continued to stagnate, even while the USSR was helping them in earnest.

Today Chile is Latin America's top economy (despite competitors like Brazil or Argentina having much more usable geography), while Cuba remains a basket case. Unlike most dictators (except those appointed by Roman Republic for a particular task), Pinochet resigned on his own...

For another, less obvious, example compare Franco's Spain with a left-wing dictatorship of any Warsaw-block state. Though Fascist and otherwise unpleasant, Franco's Spain has not experienced the mass-murder, that befell many USSR-aligned countries. Nor has it ever attempted a genocide -- neither before, nor after WW2. (In fact, during WW2 Spain was the safest place for Jews in Europe.) As for economy, though lagging under his rule, as soon as Franco fell, Spain quickly caught-up with the rest of Europe -- in contrast with, say, Russia that is still (after nearly two decades) struggling to match the poorest of the Western Europe, despite having vast natural resources.

Comparing Hitler to Stalin is harder, because Hitler himself was rather Left-wing. But even there, the number of Hitler's victims is dwarfed by the Stalin's. And economically Germany was before and quickly became after the war much better off, than the USSR.
<br>Today's continuing right-wing dictatorship in Myanmar is truly revolting, but still seems benign compared with North Korea. Seriously, would a left-wing dictator tolerate opposition like San Suu Kyi? Keeping her merely under a house arrest?

The historical verdict is clear -- if a particular people has to be punished, a right-wing dictator just wouldn't do... To truly reverse the progress back to hunter-gatherer ideals, the Dear Leader must be a Communist.

User avatar
Let's not forget that the minimum number of murders of communism is 100,000,000--some say twice that.

Stalin murdered people who came back after WWII lest they tell people how much better things could be. The Brits forceably repatriated I believe about 800K Russians, who went to their death.

But to me the biggest argument is that there is always a fence around a left-wing dictatorship to keep people in. There is a fence, or ought to be, around America, to keep people, from left-wing places, out.

User avatar
Commissar Obamissar V wrote:I looked him up too and found a wealth of similar dribble. An Irish Commie.... And what exactly is Ireland doing to help? This useful idiot sure is... useless.

Theo- you're right.

Leninka - I loved your rant about how to properly use the People's Blog so I thought I'd help by showing these proles how it's done. Granted, mine isn't very funny but at least has substance. Thanks for giving me props in the "people who don't suck" section. Your bitter, light-skinnedness without dialect does you well.

-COV

Thank you Comrade Obamissar V. You trained me well. We went through a very dark period on the Cube. The blog became a runny river of YouTube diarrhea, and if weren't for my DENOUNCEMENT training, by you and others, I would not have been so qualified to make such a post.

User avatar
Comrades,

This quote from Humberto Fontova's website is very telling of what happens when a Caribbean island nation is switched from a right wing dictatorship to a left wing dictatorship. I hope this post isn't too dictatorial.

"And what kind of omelet resulted from all this Communist breaking of Cuban eggs? Well, Castro and Che converted a nation with a higher per capita income than half of Europe, the 13th lowest infant-mortality rate in the world, whose industrial workers earned the eighth-highest wages in the world, whose peso was valued higher than the U.S. dollar, into a pesthole that repels Haitians. This "revolutionary" process also graced Cuba with a lower credit rating than Somalia, fewer phones per capita than Papua New Guinea, fewer internet connections than Uganda, and 20 per cent of her population gone - all at total cost of their property and many at the cost of a horrible death by exposure, drowning and/or sharks. This from a nation that formerly enjoyed a higher influx of immigrants per-capita (primarily from Europe) than the U.S. Prior to Castro/Che rule, more Americans lived in Cuba than Cubans in the U.S."

User avatar
Humberto Fontova is obviously wrong--Comrade Michael Moore would never tell the truth a lie.


 
POST REPLY