Printable View
I was watching the news last night and Bush has now accepted aid from everyone. He finally admitted that Katrina is a big problem and is accepting aid.
It is also one of the reasons that the Bush administration has been so heavily criticised, not only because they were so slow to react but also because they would not accept help until they were pressured by the American people. Never mind eh, at least now they can start the cleanup
Foreign Nationals evacuated under cover of darkness by US military:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4214746.stm
Now why would the US military fear for the lives of the very people who are citizens - hence friends- of the US allies?
Well now we know why. He stayed because he was poor and did not have the resources to leave.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valleysboy1978
Capitalism at its best.
If they didn't have the resources to leave why did they not go to the safety zones? It also doesn't explain why a week on people still refuse to leave their house!?!Quote:
Originally Posted by yrwyddfa
Perhaps a lack of education?
These people were warned that that the some allocated places were just too dangerous:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4217022.stm
If you were subject to the sort of sub-third world conditions that are (were?) around at the time would you leave your house?
If my house was made of wood I would have taken my chances in a concrete superdome. Besides, even if I had stayed at home, I certainly wouldn't stay there now I'd go with the rescuers
In some cases (see above link) the rescuers would only rescue you if you were female and flashed your breasts . . .
Why does this not surprise me? :(
I think it's disgusting how so many people can exploit a situation like this for their own benefit. It gives you a good idea of the mindset they live by.
Bit of a sweeping statement considering 'they' could be 300 million people.Quote:
Originally Posted by penagate
The worry is how quick the social fabric fell to pieces. I think that's what's surprised the most people
Well, "they" being those people that are turning this to their own advantage, such as the looters (the ones that are actually looting, not taking essentials such as food).
It did sort of go pear shaped very quickly. Guess there will (or needs to) be a rethink of the infrastructure.Quote:
Originally Posted by yrwyddfa
Your point's taken. I think it might just be a little better to be more specific. I can't see, for instance, the majority of Americans gracing this site getting up to the kind of abhorrent behaviour that we're seeing on the news.Quote:
Originally Posted by penagate
As far as I can tell - even though I don't like to fella, and I don't like his policies - Bush actually has no responsibility for the operation at hand. This was meant to be delegated down to the local state level where they should have had contingency, and emergency planning already organised (years before a disaster like this comes along) It appears as if the planning they had was either ill-thought out or non-existent.Quote:
It did sort of go pear shaped very quickly. Guess there will (or needs to) be a rethink of the infrastructure.
It's probably helpful to mention that the disaster area is the size of the UK. Logistically planning for this must be a nightmare.
That is not to excuse Bush, however. He is, after all, the leader of the country. When it was self-evident that the local authorities couldn't cope - about three hours into the hurricane - he should have immediately intervened on the basis that early action might have saved lives.
I think the evacuation could have been a bit better organised. As has already been mentioned countless times, the number of people that were left right in the path of the hurricane was huge, and many of them had no way of leaving the city. They could have organised carpools, buses, etc., to pack as many people out as possible, theoretically. But can you see that happening in real life? I think hardly any authorities in the world would be efficient enough to get that sort of mass transport organised, in the time they had to do it. So what other, real, early action could they have taken?
As I said in #66 they had three days warning of what was coming.
If the organisation was good (and assuming that the American weather authorities passed on the information in a timely manner) then you could stand a chance of performing such a mass evacuation.
I am no Bush fanboi, but this commentary pegs my feelings about the blame game going around currently.
http://www.washtimes.com/national/pruden.htm
I think it is all BS that this is, as usual, being used as political fodder by all the extremes. It's hard to get feelings like that until it actually affects you or someone you know. It has got me really steamed that my family has lost alot and the left and right want to duke it out.
My apologies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cander
There will be plenty of time to slug it out once the dust is settled, I guess.
I mean the politicians in particular. As a normal citizen you achieve no gain playing the blame game so I am not concerned. It is the politicians I take exception to slinging the blame around, if you understand what I mean.
From http://www.boblonsberry.com/writings...tory=1739&go=4 :
to be continued...Quote:
part 1 of 2
Today's Column
LOCAL, STATE FAILURES DOOMED NEW ORLEANS
One of the astounding aspects of the Hurricane Katrina tragedy has been the profound incompetence of Louisiana’s politicians. Never has it been more clear that winning an election and being a leader are two completely different things.
From the run-up to the storm to the events since, Louisiana’s governor and New Orleans’ mayor have been useless, far more concerned with taking political advantage and misapplying blame than with saving people’s lives and doing their duty.
And, with incredible gall, this pair has led the ungrateful and dishonest charge against the federal government and President Bush. They, along with various race-baiters and a great many hateful celebrities, have turned this catastrophe to their political advantage, recasting it as an event of racist neglect instead of what it is – the largest relief effort in the history of the United States.
Those with blood on their hands dare to indict the rest of us.
And, yes, they do have blood on their hands.
The woeful mismanagement by the city of New Orleans of the evacuation, the shelters and the relief effort undeniably cost lives. What remains to be seen is how many lives.
Let’s take the evacuation. Though information has been shifting and hard to come by, it seems clear that while the city did run inadequate transit buses for free to evacuate residents before the storm, the much larger school bus fleet was left idle. In fact, it was not even moved so that it not only did not carry any people to safety, it was lost to rising flood waters.
Literally thousands of people were left to face the storm and its aftermath because the city didn’t send its largest transportation tool – the school buses – to get them.
And the two city-established shelters – the convention center and the Superdome – quickly turned to misery and violence because the city failed to supply and supervise them in even the most rudimentary way. The city told people to go to the shelters, but the city did nothing to make such a move safe or healthy.
It did not send in emergency supplies of water, food, blankets, cots, medicines or anything else that would be considered essential. It didn’t even send in port-a-potties. And it left the shelters understaffed or completely un-staffed. There was no organization, no security, no city officials assigned to be in charge.
There was no provision for the people in the shelters to eat, drink, sleep, be safe or go to the bathroom. And yet the city sent tens of thousands of people to them, directly causing misery and death.
In the wake of the storm, the city’s public safety response was confused and ineffective. Blaming its failures on communications gaps, the city astoundingly had no electrical back-up for its police and fire radio system. And it apparently had completely ineffective commanders.
Police officers were able to move around in the city, but did so pointlessly, uselessly and sometimes criminally. As looters gained the upper hand, some New Orleans police joined them.
And some New Orleans police simply ran off.
Nearly one in every seven members of the New Orleans police department abandoned their posts and abandoned their city. Some even stole police vehicles to make their escape, leaving the people they were sworn to defend to suffering and despair.
see comments:Quote:
part 2
The cowardice and dishonor of this is all the more obvious when contrasted with the actions of emergency workers on September 11.
The New York firefighters ran in and the New Orleans police ran out.
And the New Orleans mayor is no Rudy Giuliani.
Strength, courage and leadership were absent in New Orleans. Instead of inspiring by their example, the mayor and governor were visibly shaken and afraid. They acted like frightened children. Stupid frightened children.
The governor did little before the storm and little after the storm. She failed to use her National Guard effectively or expeditiously and she refused to let anyone else use it either. She complained that the federal government was doing nothing while refusing to authorize the federal government to operate freely in her state.
Federal officials can only work in a city with the permission and cooperation of state and local officials. That has largely been withheld. Instead, Louisiana’s politicians have made excuses for themselves and made repeated and dishonest attacks against the federal government.
And beyond Louisiana, those whose bread is buttered by racial division and distrust sowed the hateful lie of racial prejudice in the pace of the response. Completely ignoring the enormity of bringing massive amounts of equipment, supplies and aid workers into the devastated region, they told the people of New Orleans and the gullible of the country that this massive relief effort was something to be hated, not appreciated.
In the words of one idiot, “George Bush doesn’t like black people.”
And in the words of Jesse Jackson, standing with a bunch of refugees to whom he brought no water or relief: “This is the hold of a slave ship.”
And that is a lie.
What happened is that one of the largest storms ever to hit the American mainland struck the Gulf Coast. It hit a city which, incredibly, is built below sea level. It hit a city and state whose leadership fundamentally failed to prepare or effectively evacuate. It hit a city and state whose leaders then provided no effective relief for the displaced, and whose incompetence was demonstrated by the collapse of basic institutions like law enforcement.
What also happened is the United States and its people moved with compassion and speed to provide relief. Hearts, wallets and homes were opened. The largest relief effort in the nation’s history was launched and it saved thousands and thousands of people. It is now feeding, housing and clothing those people, and it will eventually reclaim and rebuild their city.
That’s what happened.
But you won’t hear that on the news.
All you’ll hear on the news is the complaint and ingratitude of people who have blood on their hands.
- by Bob Lonsberry © 2005
http://www.boblonsberry.com/readcomments.cfm?story=1739
Now Hillary Clinton is calling for a commission. Now if they want to investigate the failures in general, it makes sense. But it is WAY to early for this and is using our tax dollars for the blame game.
How can they waste money like that then have the gaul to blame lack of aid and responsiveness?
It seems to me that all sides are acting rationally within their own viewpoints.
Consider the people robbing hospitals. This may seem incredible to us, but look at it from their point of view. There is a segment of this society that has nothing but what it can win, often by force. This same segment has nothing, and therefore, lost nothing in the storm. For those who have nothing, this is an opportunity to get something. A storm moving through and disrupting the social order does nothing but free them from the influence of those forces that have kept them from attaining the ends they want by the means they have. In their context, robbing a hospital makes complete sense.
Does it really surprise people that this element of society exists? If so, come to Idaho, Montana, Utah, or some of the other states that harbor segments of the population that live by a code unlike the rest of society. These folks are not connected. They do not see a hospital as something that provides a benefit to them in being, but rather, they see it as an opportunity and nothing more.
This is no different for them than it is for the politicians. From their perspective, their actions are rational.
Perhaps a little unfair.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
If I were diabetic and needed drugs I would indeed 'rob' the hospital.
If I were hungry and I needed food I would 'loot' the supermarket for it
If I were wet/cold then I would 'steal' from the clothes shop.
Not that I believe everyone looting, stealing, or robbing was doing it out of need alone . . .
The phrase "needs must" comes to mind.
I think that morality is based upon the society in which it exists. It is becoming clear that society collapsed completely in the wake of Katrina. What is moral (and what isn't) is therefore very different to what, we, those who are peering in through the goldfish bowl, think.
The question, I think, is not what did people do when placed into very extreme circumstances - although anthropological psychologists are bound to make a career out of it - but rather "what/why/when/how/where" were the circumstances that lead to the complete disintegration of society in the world's most affluent, and powerful nation.
There must be, I am sure, lessons to be learnt for every other nation who believes it can sit back on it's laurels.
"world's most affluent, and powerful nation" - This may very well be the problem. Most westernised countries (including Western EU) expect a level of service from their government and so we rarely have to learn how to survive. So desperation sets in once we have no government on which to rely on to get our power, water etc.
morals, as I've said before, solely depend on the timeframe, the prevailing culture and society.
As, sadly, has been proven once again.
I think, Yrwydsummatorother (:)), that the keyword is "priorities"...
Was I unfair? I didn't understand to whom your refered with that statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by yrwyddfa
What I was saying was that there is a section of the people in this country that are not members of what is being considered society in this thread. These people do not have expectations of receiving help from the government, but instead have a feeling of alienation. For them, this was not a breakdown of the social strucuture in which they were members, but a removal of a social structure that prevented them from attaining their desires. They didn't lose anything, they gained a form of freedom. To the members of society, this appears to be anarchy, but we forget that there are folks who do not see society as being beneficial to themselves.
What desires are they being prevented from attaining? You certainly can't be referring to all the people screaming "gimme gimme gimme". Those people have never had to help themselves in their lives, why should they now? Not saying they don't need or deserve help now, but part of the reason they have no concept of helping themselves is because it's not necesarry. Our tax money gets to provide for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
And yet, when the rulership of Iraq was removed, we saw looting and lawlessness also emerge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valleysboy1978
This, then, seems to indicate its not a "Westernizied country" issue, nor does it seem to relate to being the "world's most affluent, and powerful nation".
Its just that theres a barbaric element in every society that resorts to rape, pillage, and plunder whenever opportunity arises.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotLKH
Exactly. It is that element that I was refering to. Loose the bounds that hold them in check, and they revert to what they want. I have no idea whether they scream "gimme gimme gimme" at other times or not. They probably do not see any opportunity in normal society, either because it is not there, or because they simply do not see it. However, take away normal society, and they see plenty of opportunity. Now they are taking it.
I accept that it is not just westernised countries, but you have to admit it was all the more stark being in the US. Possibly because in Iraq most of the population didn't get much from the country so they have learned to live with very little. Much of the Katrina-hit population do not know how to survive without the creature comforts which explains the speed at which society broke down
I think the point is that much of the population of LA, MS and AL already live without creature comforts. So, the opposite of what you are saying explains the speed at which society broke down. Have you been to LA, MS or AL? If so, you would understand how poor a lot of these people are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valleysboy1978
Again, you have to understand that this population has ridden out hurricanes for years. It is ingrained in them to stay. Where I live, there are a lot tornados. I'm not afraid of tornados because I have been exposed to them for my entire life. I'm not saying I wouldn't go to my basement if I saw one coming my way, but in general, I'm not afraid. Same mentality.
I wonder, are you hearing about all the good that is happening now with the relief efforts?
Yeah, fair credit to the BBC they tend to give pretty good coverage. The relief workers are obviously working flat out but it's a bit of an uphill struggle. It just seems ridiculous that the politicians are more interested in laying the blame elsewhere than just getting on with their jobs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Malim
Agreed. From what I understand from reports, it was the Governor of LA who refused Federal Government help, because she would have to give up some state power to the feds. Not a time to play politics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valleysboy1978
Who woulda thunk relocating the entire city of NewOrleans woulda been an uphill struggle :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Valleysboy1978
That's what politicians do, they complain about someone else when they screw up. The govenor of LA and the Mayor dropped the ball big time. They ignored GWs advice to force a mandatory evacuation and did not give the Federal government the authority to take over in time. The also completly ignored the checklist that millions of dollars was spent making. You know, "the one that laid out the most effective strategy to take if a CAT4-5 hurricane ever hit and destroyed the Levee". :rolleyes: Whadda bunch of morons. I guess winning an election doesn't make you a leader. You don't see this kind of crap happening in Texas, Florida, Alabama, or Mississippi.
Not to mention when advised to build a stronger levee that can withstand a cat 5 hurricane, they saved some cash and went with a cat 3 levee instead. But, they did buy a private plane and invest in a casino with the savings. These people went bananas because there was no police presence. They were not controlled which is exactly what's needed and what is expected. The government is expected to take care of them and to control them. Take both away and the results are not suprising.
I just read an article that 200 million in Federal tax due to Washington State will be lost and sent to Louisana because they didn't use their disaster prevention money for a new levee. Wow thats freaking great considering the citys of Seattle, Olympia and Tacoma are sitting on volatile fault lines, surrounded by active volcanos with hundreds of rivers and streams that flood every year before the national forests around here catch on fire. The Govenor of Louisana is going to kill a lot more people in a lot of other states on top of the ones she "murdered" in New Orleans.Quote:
Originally Posted by demotivater
I wouldn't lay the blame in one location. If anybody thought that LA could handle this alone, they had their heads up their butts. Forget about asking for aid, that's mostly more of the blame game. Nobody was ready. The feds shouldn't have been sitting on their thumbs waiting to be called, and only then begin to mobilize. We have far too much experience with hurricanes of this strength to be fooled in this way. The time to begin the disaster relief was a few days before the storm struck, not a few days after.
There was no question that there would be damage, and there was no question that the damage would be extreme. The only question was exactly where the damage would occur. Even the state that would take the biggest hit was unclear up until the storm struck (they can change direction and size quickly). This was a federal disaster because it was guaranteed to cross state lines. We have never been hit by a Cat 4 or above without requiring federal intervention. The cleanup from any hurricane of that size will be larger than the annual budgets of most states. Why was it not simply assumed that federal aid would be needed this time?
Bush was not entirely blameless here, there's plenty to go around. I moved to FL a few weeks after Andrew in '92. We have had years of experience with this. We knew what would be needed. And we were NOT ready!
That's simply not true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
The English MET Office had it down to a 60km error rate 3 days in advance - and they advised your National Hurricane Centre of the same.
Everywhere, both 60km E and 60km W (which includeds New Orleans) of expected landfall could have been evacuated earlier if the people in question (charge?) had listened to the meteorologists advice.
Wouldn't it be more sensible to take a little from the 45/46 other states than it all from one?Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterBlaster
e.g.
Take $1m from each state = $46m
Take $46m from Washignton state = $46
Same money but I doubt Washington is too happy about the 2nd choice, the first choice wouldn't really harm each of those states