Ryan Schuchart's paper endorses our role in Haiti. He believes that the US is responsible for Haiti because it possesses a vital responsibility in protecting the democracy and well-being of the hemisphere through OAS (Organization of American States). He believes there is definitly a problem in the American mindset; the citizens of the United States who criticize the maintaining of democracy in other countries take their own state of democracy for granted.

Randy Samuelson, on the other hand, believes we should not have intervened. He does not regard Haiti as a threat to the U.S. and does not understand why we had to neutralize a threat that did not exist. He feels the U.S. had nothing to gain by intervening in Haiti's affairs.

The third view point does not argue the ethics of U.S. intervention in Haiti. Rather, it uses the Haiti situation as a reference. This paper, presented by Kristina Martinez and Ritu Singh, questions why the U.S. did not use the same set of rules with Bosnia as it did with Haiti. They believe that the situation in Bosnia was very similar to the one in Haiti, if not worse. In both countries, human rights were being violated, and either political or ethnic sources were destroying the country. Yet, the U.S. has ignored all Bosnian pleas. Their paper ponders the inconsistency of U.S. actions.

If you want an update on the Bosnian situation click here to recieve the latest AP news.

For more information concerning US Foreign Policy click here.