• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Unrest in Haiti, Again

Retired AF Guy

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
365
Points
910
Thread necro rather then create a new thread. Gangs in Haiti have virtually taken control of critical infrastructure to the point to Haitian ambassador to the US is requesting a US/canada security force be deployed to the country to battle the gangs and regain control
I can see that as something our present leaders might get behind.
Bah, we’ll be fine!! What could possibly go wrong?

Just deploy a small contingent to be embedded with a lead force to “advise & assist them in their efforts to restore law & order, and critical food aid, to the people of Haiti.”

And use all the buzzwords & buzzphrases like ‘establishing safe areas’, delivering aid, etc. Dont use ugly words like ‘kill’ or ‘destroy’ but rather state we are ‘creating the conditions for a more peaceful tomorrow’ and ‘neutralizing threats to innocent civilians’.

And highlight how awesome we are for having our French units, a unique capability we offer to the world. Not to mention Canada is stepping up to that ‘up to 200 person QRF to the UN’ we offered up, etc

Only commit to a 3 month initial rotation during the ‘smash bad guys phase.’ Who doesn’t enjoy making the world a better place by cleaning it up from time to time?

Then offer up a platoon or 2 worth of troops on a continued rotation so people getting in (especially reservists) have an actual deployment they can do if they want.


Is this a terrible idea? Sure is!

But stepping up for the UN, battling street gangs so civilians can get the aid they need, a focus on French Canadians, increased retainment due to folks having a deployment they can work towards, and an organization that reimburses us most of the money we’d spend anyway?

Still a terrible idea, but it checks sooooo many boxes. Let’s go for it anyway…



(Is CBH99 being sarcastic or not?) 🤨😈
Better hope someone from GAC not reading this thread; might give them ideas.
 

Humphrey Bogart

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
7,438
Points
1,360
How about the UN funding some Caribbean, Central American of African Nations to go in. They typically like the money.
Here is the thing, none of the CARICOM countries want anything to do with Haiti because:

A. "They are a bunch of Thieves" as some of them have mentioned to me.

B. "We have our own problems to deal with and don't need to be involved in Haiti's"

C. "The French, Americans, etc should deal with it because they are the ones that messed it up in the first place"
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
1,801
Points
1,090
Carried in the left breast pocket to ensure you can’t get to it in a hurry :)
Who needs plates when you can just have enemy rounds impact your own mags??

#budgetitemeliminated


Actually yes. 10 at the most for "self defence". In my world that translates to "you better have a sucking chest wound before you call for permission to shoot back"
How are we supposed to bang bang all the gangbangers with only 10 rounds each? Are you sure we can’t shoot first?

Statistics show that 10/10 gunfights are won by the people who aren’t shot…

(Especially if we’re using mags as heart shields)

#winning
 

OldSolduer

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
6,701
Points
1,110
Didn't seem to help, how?
If you don't change the leadership of the nation - and they all are a corrupt lot - then change in the population isn't going to happen either.

IF you are operating under a UN ROE it can be difficult to respond to situations.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Reaction score
11,684
Points
1,260
If you don't change the leadership of the nation - and they all are a corrupt lot - then change in the population isn't going to happen either.

IF you are operating under a UN ROE it can be difficult to respond to situations.
In fairness to the UN, all missions specifically allow for self defense. Some made the mistake of not including a more LEO oriented Defence of Others aspect to the Deadly Force aspect of the ROE.

I’d argue that without Defense of Others - it’s simply an observer job that doesn’t accomplish much in those situations.

From Cyprus’s idiotic ROE and Weapons State - the CAF did the weapon state all by itself, and then the CAF muddled exactly what Self Defense was in terms of ROE for FYR and created its own nightmare.
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1,775
Points
1,060

dangerboy

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
897
Points
1,160
Or heard anything from Former governor general Michaëlle Jean about us helping out.
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
1,801
Points
1,090
More ammo didn't solve the problem.
But the ‘problem’ was not solved because said troops weren’t allowed to use said ammo…not because they didn’t carry enough of it.

All kidding aside, I know they were deployed as blue helmets & the mission was security assistance/humanitarian in nature.

And I’m not actually proposing we go into Haiti.


Do we answer Haiti’s call for help…yet again?

If we do, what does success look like? Who would be our partner forces in theatre? What is the objective, and do the ROE’s allow for that objective to be reasonably accomplished?

Since it’s the UN banner this is currently being discussed under, I’d lean towards a hell no. It would be messy either way, but the UN would make it even moreso.
 

Ostrozac

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
366
Points
930
All kidding aside, I know they were deployed as blue helmets & the mission was security assistance/humanitarian in nature.
MIF-H (Op HALO, Haiti, 2004) was not a blue helmet mission. The follow on, Brazilian-led, force was UN, but the US/French/Chilean/Canadian intervention was not a UN mission. In many ways, it felt like a NEO that sort of decided to hang around after the evac was done. Somewhere between trying to make ourselves useful and mission creep.
 
Top