A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
Looks like they're getting ready for whatever play they intend to make against the gangs and are trying to keep exacts on the hush hush to avoid the gangs being able to make preparations.
They're called gangs in print but it's worth remembering that these organizations have military training and equipment at their disposal far exceeding what you'd picture when someone says the word "gang", at this point it'd be more accurate to consider them warlord bands.
There's something off to me about the media exclusively referring to them as gangs.
I feel like if they were in another part of the world they'd be calling them paramilitaries or militant groups.
It's because they want to remove the political goals some of these groups have from their public narrative.
Which, you can debate how underhanded doing something like that is, or how good or bad based on what those narratives are.
You have any information about their political goals? I went looking not too long ago and I wasn’t really able to find much.
I don't have sources but I've heard tell the biggest gang right now is led by a guy who guys by BBQ, and his stated goals are basically a combination of Liberation rhetoric and demanding the government submit to his authority as the legitimate transitional executive.
Yes. Jimmy “Barbecue” Chérizier. Former cop. Alleged to have perpetrated massacres against the public killing dozens of people and burning down hundreds of homes. As a leader of G9 he publicly threatened genocide unless the prime minister of Haiti stepped down.
This is all information I got from Wikipedia. I don’t know the veracity of any of it. I don’t live in Haiti and don’t really follow the situation there. Whoever Jimmy is, he doesn’t have very good PR. That’s all I can say for sure about him!
Sounds like his political goals are “I want all the power”
Fairly standard political goals then
According the the Haitian guy who comes in from time to time where I work his family had to leave due to the gangs. Its what he calls them so I think that is what I should call them.
There’s something off to me about the media exclusively referring to them as gangs.
I think that "strongmen" or maybe "warlords" is normally reserved for people who control a lot more territory than this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gang_war_in_Haiti.svg
Each group here controls tiny patches of territory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gang_war_in_Haiti
By 2022, researchers estimated that about 200 gangs operated across Haiti. Of these, half were located in Port-au-Prince. The more influential gangs control large swathes of territory, including entire municipalities and communes.
There's something off to me about the media exclusively referring to them as gangs.
It's about fixing the narrative in the public mind. They do similar shit in almost every foreign news story, especially places, we are not supposed to like
If we call them that then we have to call their migrants refugees and give them asylum.
Ah, there it is.
I am very concerned about the situation in Haiti and the global public seems to have a very poor understanding of the situation. Media coverage of the crisis there has been very biased and superficial. This concerns me because the powers that be may not have Haitians’ best interests at heart and without public oversight these military solutions could end up creating further problems.
If anyone here lives in Haiti I would be very interested to hear any knowledge they could share of what is really happening and how they think it can be solved.
A couple of years ago I had a conversation with a Haitian native on this very topic. While I deleted my reddit account and no longer have access to that conversation, the gist was...
Americans don't seem to understand that every time they swoop in to 'save' Haiti, what they are really doing is enforcing the same colonial ideals that landed Haiti in the mess to start with.
There's no politician in play down there that isn't on the take. His opinion was just to leave it alone and let the gangs sort it out. Either they'll pull together a government or the last gang standing will.
His statement had a lot more anger and quite a few expletives.. They're just sick of all of us, y'all.
Americans don’t seem to understand that every time they swoop in to ‘save’ Haiti, what they are really doing is enforcing the same colonial ideals that landed Haiti in the mess to start with.
You might find the article reassures you on this point if you decide to read it!
The truth is that the United States outsourced the Haiti mission to Kenya. U.S. President Joe Biden has admitted as much: “We concluded that for the United States to deploy forces in the hemisphere just raises all kinds of questions that can be easily misrepresented about what we’re trying to do,” Biden said in May during a news conference with Kenyan President William Ruto, adding, “So, we set out to find a partner or partners who would lead the effort that we would participate in.”
Is there reason to think this is anything more than a fig leaf? The US is obviously heavily involved in directing this effort, even if Kenya is doing the dirty work.
What would convince you?
I mean you read the article right? It’s all about how the US has created this multinational coalition but that it’s really calling the shots. It almost seems like your excerpt was deliberately chosen to omit all of the other information that supports what I’m saying.
So, I guess there would have to be a large accumulation of information that the US was not directing these efforts, despite members of congress and others having already confirmed that fact.
Kenya as far as I know has no experience in operations of this type — do you think it's reasonable to expect them to do this alone? It makes sense that the US are helping to get this up and running. I expect a fuller handoff when whatever they're doing is in place.
I'm not making a statement about Kenya, I'm saying I don't trust the US's intentions in this case based on their historical actions in Haiti. But no, I don't think it would be good for Kenya to be involved unilaterally either. I would prefer to see a non-military solution.
I would prefer to see a non-military solution.
Me too, but that would only really work if Haiti had a functional government to maintain order. Unfortunately that ship has sailed.
Can you make 2+2=5?
Not saying it isn't a fig leaf, but does.kenya really have the ability to project peacekeeping and humanitarian efforts on another continent? It stands to reason they'd need a partner with the infra and equipment to actually make the mission happen. The US is literally best in the business on this topic, and is nearby.
That can be true, before and exclusive of US political meddling. (Which is for sure possible, I'm not discounting that, I'm just not addressing it here)
No of course not. But I don't see how that's relevant. Kenya is just a puppet here, they don't matter at all other than as a tool for the US. Kenya has no interest in this issue beyond what the US directs. The two countries didn't even have any diplomatic contact before this scheme was concocted.
To my understanding, Kenyans will be physically there. Kenya has interests. Thats pretty disrespectful of their commitment to suggest they " have no interest in this beyond what the US directs"
I’m just describing the situation as it exists. Whether it’s respectful to the Kenyan government or not is not my concern.
But I am curious what possible interest you think Kenya could have in this matter given that it is a regional power from the other side of the world that had almost no relationship with Haiti before last year. Besides, apparently, an interest in whatever the US is offering in exchange for this adventure.
Media coverage of the crisis there has been very biased and superficial.
Can you be more specific? Is there any particular coverage that you find biased and superficial?
I will admit that some outlets undoubtably cover this better than others, but that is the case in all conflicts.
The whole framing of this conflict as a “gang” issue is very problematic in my view, since these warring factions are more of competing political actors seeking to control the country. While they may or may not be engaged in traditional criminal activity, their primary goals are political, not merely economic as with typical organized crime. Yet there has been essentially no attempt to explain who the various factions are and what their goals are. They are just described as gangs that are going on killing sprees for no reason (with an unspoken implication that Haitians are just violent savages). From my limited research on the topic, this is highly inaccurate.
That said, I really am not too knowledgeable about the situation there which is why I was hoping someone from outside of the US media ecosystem could share some real knowledge.
Is there any particular coverage that you find biased and superficial?
Very hard to find one that is NOT biased. Canibal savage gangs? Sure
You mean Afghanistan 2.0?
a Kenyan-led security mission to Haiti
This is very odd, but also very intriguing. The President met with Biden a month ago, so this tracks. I kinda hope this happens just to see how it plays out.
Edit: this will also be a great test of who reads past the headline. There are going to be a lot of knee-jerk "Murica Bad" comments.
The President met with Biden a month ago
But....the president IS Biden......
OHHH!!! You mean the president of Haiti. Ok. Didn't realize they had a president. That whole sentence threw me for a loop.
I'm going to blame this heatwave frying my brain. I'm not stupid, I'm just.....stupid.
.......wait.
Ha, sorry about that — the President of Kenya, actually. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/05/23/fact-sheet-kenya-state-visit-to-the-united-states/
I'm just glad for once the US is letting some other country take the lead. Let the Haitians hate Kenya for trying to stabilize their country. I'm sure the US will be seen and the puppeteer pulling the strings though.
Idk why but I'm getting big deja vu from this story.
Russian warships in Cuba causes deja vu too.
There's no way the US is going to surprise invade, if that's the hidden question-headline here.
Foreign Policy – Bias and Credibility
Bias Rating: Least Biased
Factual Reporting: High
Country: USA
Press Freedom Rank: Mostly Free
Media Type: Magazine
Traffic/popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: High Credibility
MediaBiasFactCheck.com: About + Methodology
Ad Fontes Media Rating: Middle / Reliable
By: Pierre Espérance
Archive Link: 21 Jun 2024 22:32:15 UTC
