[AdamJacobMuller]

We did a poor job, especially in our most recent situations in Iraq/Afghanistan.

Granted, I'm not sure it's actually possible to do this job well, I think there are flaws in the system and human nature which intrinsically make it impossible to do it. See: Abu Ghraib among many other options.

[throwayyy479087]

We do a poor job because it’s not possible to square the circle with our stated rules of engagement.

Russia did a GREAT job with Syria, they’ve managed to nearly end the war. They brutally murdered anyone that was opposed to their puppets and didn’t follow rules about protecting civilians, but they did win. I don’t think purging corruption from Haiti is possible without something similar.

[AdamJacobMuller]

We could save Haiti by carpet bombing it, killing everyone there and hanging a "free land" sign on the door and telling the Dominican Republic to have at it.

I know you're not actually advocating that :)

My point is (and I think we largely agree) is that peacekeeping or nationbuilding missions like what we would need to do in Haiti are incredibly difficult, if not impossible. Too permissive and the opposing forces have free reign and take over. Too harsh and you turn the average population against you and they start supporting the opposing forces and now you're just fighting a whole country. It's a lose/lose.

[cafard]

The USMC imposed order in Haiti in the 1920s. The rules of engagement were pretty damned loose.

[AdamJacobMuller]

Somehow I didn't know about this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_occupation_of_Ha...

The parallels to the current situation are uncanny. I hope we don't make the same mistakes again.