It depends on what you mean. Do you mean a 7.0 earthquake, or a disaster that killed over 2% of the population?
If you mean a 7.0 earthquake, then my answer would probably be no, because the death toll wouldn't have been nearly as severe. A couple 7.0 quakes have happened in the U.S. over the past few decades. We dealt with it ourselves. We didn't get a dollar of aid, but there haven't been all that many countries who have been better off financially than the U.S. over that time, so that makes sense. It was a big deal to us, of course, but I doubt any other countries in the world cared or remember it today.
If you mean a natural disaster that destroyed our entire infrastructure and killed more than 2% of our population, a single event that was that big would probably be big enough to affect surrounding countries. They would probably take priority over us, because other than Canada and the US, north and central America is pretty messed up financially. So again, we would probably be left to our own devices.
As an aside, I think it's funny sometimes when people differential between Haiti and "Western" countries. The distinction kind of makes sense if we're talking about China or Iran, but Haiti? It's literally between the U.S. and Europe.
You clarified, and everyone still would've known what you meant even if you hadn't, but I just thought that was interesting how words can come to signify something completely unrelated to their literal meaning.
