kjdib previously said:

"In the late 1820's, more than 15 years after Haiti gained its Independence, France extorted to what amounts to more than 21 billion dollars from Haiti. France did this by blockading Haiti with dozen of naval vessel holding more than 20,000 troops. It demanded that Haiti pay them an indemnity for its lost properties (slaves). "

Before you start making demands you really should get your facts straight. The monies that Haiti paid to France were not for slaves or other (personal) properties, or even crops. Personal property was specifically excluded from these claims. The monies that Haiti agreed to pay to France were to repay 1/10th of the value of the estates which were lost by the French plantation owners who lost their plantations during the slave revolts. I have studied this for many years and even have several of the claims (most of which were not paid even the 1/10th allowed because Haiti went bankrupt). These plantation owners were forced to leave their homes, most of whom were born in St Dominique, and flee, destitute to other countries.

generoso previously said:



Interesting allegations, I had read somewhere that what you state were the real facts of the promised payments to the plantation owners. Please elaborate and provide links and more details, and maybe the formula that was used to ascertain the value of the confiscated properties.
I know that Aristide tried to collect monies from the French government, claiming reparations, but this claim nowadays would be "an impossible dream", more so knowing the French and their ways.

perlurdom previously said:


Be careful how to handle such demands, Haiti may end up paying these plantation owners that were forced to flee. it's a tough call as the US was backing up the frenchies.

Pepe32 previously said:

The interesting point in all this is that if "Haitians" really defeated the French instead of Malaria (the true victor) ,why would "Haitians" pay the French if they proved they could defeat them?

Sort of like the 5 de Mayo in Mexico where a small group of French soldiers were "defeated" by a much larger group of Mexicans yet shortly afterwards the French sent an army that beat the Mexicans and took Puebla.

Also the American Revolutionaries "defeating" the British empire ,lead by General Washington who never won any real battles and who's army was freezing ,starving and ready to surrender until the French army and Navy joined the battleforcing the British who would have swept the floor with the colonials to defend against a real power.

History is full of fairy tales and everyone like the David and Goliath story but in almost every real life case David would have been destroyed .

Haiti's whole premise is based on this fantasy of defeating the French when any serious analysis of the events show other events played into Haitian hands but when face with a French blockade and French armies nearby the Haitians knew that luck would not always be there so they negotiated.

This case if real would be the only case where the "defeated" nation set the conditions and the "victor" had to bow their heads down and accept it but logic states this was not the case and afterwards Haiti (without the French) slowly sank to the level of any other West African state while France continues to be one of the principal nations of the world .

Pepe32 previously said:

The interesting point in all this is that if "Haitians" really defeated the French instead of Malaria (the true victor) ,why would "Haitians" pay the French if they proved they could defeat them?

Sort of like the 5 de Mayo in Mexico where a small group of French soldiers were "defeated" by a much larger group of Mexicans yet shortly afterwards the French sent an army that beat the Mexicans and took Puebla.

Also the American Revolutionaries "defeating" the British empire ,lead by General Washington who never won any real battles and who's army was freezing ,starving and ready to surrender until the French army and Navy joined the battleforcing the British who would have swept the floor with the colonials to defend against a real power.

History is full of fairy tales and everyone like the David and Goliath story but in almost every real life case David would have been destroyed .

Haiti's whole premise is based on this fantasy of defeating the French when any serious analysis of the events show other events played into Haitian hands but when faced with a French blockade and French armies nearby the Haitians knew that luck would not always be there so they negotiated.

This case if real would be the only case where the "defeated" nation set the conditions and the "victor" had to bow their heads down and accept it but logic states this was not the case and afterwards Haiti (without the French) slowly sank to the level of any other West African state while France continues to be one of the principal nations of the world .

Pepe32 previously said:

The interesting point in all this is that if "Haitians" really defeated the French instead of Malaria (the true victor) ,why would "Haitians" pay the French if they proved they could defeat them?

Sort of like the 5 de Mayo in Mexico where a small group of French soldiers were "defeated" by a much larger group of Mexicans yet shortly afterwards the French sent an army that beat the Mexicans and took Puebla.

Also the American Revolutionaries "defeating" the British empire ,lead by General Washington who never won any real battles and who's army was freezing ,starving and ready to surrender until the French army and Navy joined the battleforcing the British who would have swept the floor with the colonials to defend against a real power.

History is full of fairy tales and everyone like the David and Goliath story but in almost every real life case David would have been destroyed .

Haiti's whole premise is based on this fantasy of defeating the French when any serious analysis of the events show other events played into Haitian hands but when faced with a French blockade and French armies nearby the Haitians knew that luck would not always be there so they negotiated.

This case if real would be the only case where the "defeated" nation set the conditions and the "victor" had to bow their heads down and accept it but logic states this was not the case and afterwards Haiti (without the French) slowly sank to the level of any other West African state while France continues to be one of the principal nations of the world .

generoso previously said:



Interesting allegations, I had read somewhere that what you state were the real facts of the promised payments to the plantation owners. Please elaborate and provide links and more details, and maybe the formula that was used to ascertain the value of the confiscated properties.
I know that Aristide tried to collect monies from the French government, claiming reparations, but this claim nowadays would be "an impossible dream", more so knowing the French and their ways.

Pepe32 previously said:

The interesting point in all this is that if "Haitians" really defeated the French instead of Malaria (the true victor) ,why would "Haitians" pay the French if they proved they could defeat them?

Sort of like the 5 de Mayo in Mexico where a small group of French soldiers were "defeated" by a much larger group of Mexicans yet shortly afterwards the French sent an army that beat the Mexicans and took Puebla.

Also the American Revolutionaries "defeating" the British empire ,lead by General Washington who never won any real battles and who's army was freezing ,starving and ready to surrender until the French army and Navy joined the battleforcing the British who would have swept the floor with the colonials to defend against a real power.

History is full of fairy tales and everyone like the David and Goliath story but in almost every real life case David would have been destroyed .

Haiti's whole premise is based on this fantasy of defeating the French when any serious analysis of the events show other events played into Haitian hands but when faced with a French blockade and French armies nearby the Haitians knew that luck would not always be there so they negotiated.

This case if real would be the only case where the "defeated" nation set the conditions and the "victor" had to bow their heads down and accept it but logic states this was not the case and afterwards Haiti (without the French) slowly sank to the level of any other West African state while France continues to be one of the principal nations of the world .