Even Bush says, “The results are not acceptable.” The president said he is “satisfied” with the federal government’s response to the Katrina disaster, although there is not “enough security in New Orleans yet.”
Government’s response: 1,000 National Guard troops (when were they deployed?)
10,000 people evacuated, 50,000 remaining
So please tell me what you would’ve done. I’ll give you 24 hours and unlimited resources. Now, 24 hours out you really don’t have an exact idea of where Katrina will hit. She zig to the left or zag to the right just a few hours before landfall. You’d better plan on evacuating at least ten million people just to be on the safe side. Bear in mind, however, that at least some of these people do not want to leave. Let’s say a million want to “ride it out.” The choppers are scrambled and ready, the buses are idling outside your door…what do you do? I’ll click the stopwatch…you can knock on the first door as soon as I say ‘go’…GO !
You know, I moved this back to [GD for you. If your going to behave as if this is the Pit, I’ll simply move it back.l
[ /Moderator Mode ]
Stephe96, you’re still being disingenuous.
You are the one making snide and ill-informed comments. I have simply pointed out the flaws in your failed attempts at irony.
My last post was not ‘ironic.’ I’d like to know where you would’ve started evacuating people, and how you would have accomplished the task.
Did the mayor arrange for transportation on city buses? Did the governor deploy the National Guard to assist with the evacuation?
What would you have done?
New Orleans has a large majority Black population:
It’s most likely that the racial makeup of the very poor is even more heavily skewed towards Black residents, and that is almost certainly due in large part to racism. But I just don’t see that the rescue efforts are tainted significantly with racism. If someone can show that helicopters were diverted from Black neighborhoods to White neighborhoods, that would be one thing. But all we have so far is wild speculation.
Sorry…I didn’t realize the comment was so out-of-line. I don’t post often enough to have both a Pit mode and non-Pit mode, so you’ll have to excuse me.
No. It was a hasty attempt to get serious to CYA on your earlier remarks.
Tell me: where do you see some racism as the cause?
Are you implying that the mayor is racist because he didn’t do this?
Um. I believe the mayor of New Orleans is black. And, no. I’m not implying anyone is racist.
Since I have not made any claim that racism was a cause, (monstro’s point had to do with the way the reporting and treatment of the issue has unfolded, not with the causes of the disaster), you appear to be simply looking for a fight without even paying attention to what has been posted.
Please understand, I don’t think racism is the cause of the disaster–the hurricane and the levee breaks are the cause (and I think you know I didn’t mean that, but I just wanted to clarify). Nor do I think the government is actively profiling those it rescues or conciously considered race in its preparations for relief. Nor do I want to point blame at any one man or organization–because I don’t have an answer as to what I would have done differently.
That doesn’t change the fact that the response was remarkably late to arrive, something I think is decidedly unreasonable in this day, age, and place. And I can’t help but see a connection between the race/class of the majority of the victims we’re seeing at the facilities in downtown New Orleans. To those who say it’s coincidence, just circumstance, I just shake my head.
Again, the question that frames it perfectly for me is, how is it the country that sent men to the moon was unable to save so many citizens of one of its own cities? The answer I’m hearing from most people is that “it’s really, really hard.”
You know, I’m just looking at the coverage like most everyone else, and the pictures tell me there’s a lot more to the story besides “it’s a coincidence” and “it’s really, really hard.”
September 12, 1962: President Kennedy promises to send a man to the moon and return him safely to Earth.
July 21, 1969: that man arrives on the moon.
Elapsed time: slightly less than seven years.
August 29, 2005: A category 5 hurricane hits a city that is largely below sea level.
As of September 2, relief is on the way, and the number of people saved will be better tomorrow and the next day and the next day.
Elapsed time: not even a week.
Shut up about the freakin’ moon.
Nope, I don’t buy it. People in the hurricane community have been talking about New Orleans for years. It’s been the quintessential example of the ultimate hurricane disaster waiting-to-happen. But really, you can take your pick. As I said before, at this point in the war, we were halfway to Baghdad. You can try all you want to explain how these things are “easier” than sending a convoy of trucks into a major American city partially flooded under 8 feet of water. I’d give you fifty years to get to the moon and you still would not have made your point.
Exactly. Through NPR’s coverage, I’ve heard an ex-Marine (waiting to be rescued) state that the situation in New Orleans rivals what he saw during his service. Everyone has the same question - why is it taking so long to get people out? Today’s progress has been amazing… if this kicked in from Monday, we might only have a small number of people still left.
If it’s so hard and difficult, a leader needs to get up front and explain why it is. And when people can expect relief. I’m not exempting the municipal government from this, either.
Even if we give them the benefit of the doubt about how hard it was to get the trucks in, I fail to see what’s so difficult about doing air-drops of food, water and supplies to forestall the death and suffering that one would know was going to occur in the meantime. Given today’s progress, you’d think our trucks run on media coverage instead of gasoline. It simply doesn’t make sense.
Ah, another relevant example.
How long did we have to plan the Baghdad assault, and assemble the forces? Sure, we were halfway to Baghdad in three days; that was the tip of the iceberg. When did we start sending troops over? when did we start planning the assault?
Now, your point about New Orleans being a known problem for years is true.
It isn’t meaningful, however.
When was the last time a Category 5 hurricane hit New Orleans?
By that, I mean to point out the very human fact that ANY coastal city in the Gulf or the south-eastern seaboard is vulnerable to a huge storm. Consider September 8th, 1900, in Galveston. What might happen today if a similar storm struck Galveston? Are we prepared?
Only three Category 5 hurricanes had struck the US before now in recorded weather history: The Labor Day Hurricane of 1935, Hurricane Camille (1969), and Hurricane Andrew in August, 1992. None of them were as strong as Gilbert, which thankfully didn’t hit anywhere – but would have caused far worse devastation than Andrew if IT had been the one to careen across Florida.
We simply do not have the resources to hurricane-proof our coast. Listen carefully to that fact. Repeat it to yourself until you grasp it: we cannot adaquately prepare for a major hurricane. We can’t.
Now, in the aftermath, you whine about how we were not ready. But if, according to you, we should have spent millions fortifying New Orleans… what if the hurricane had hit the Outer Banks of North Carolina? Your decision to spend all that money fortifying New Orleans would seem foolish as hundreds died because we didn’t address North Carolina’s needs, wouldn’t it?
Your reaction is understandable, and human. But it’s ultimately founded on a poor assumption, or on basic ignorance of planning and logistics. NOW, after the hit, it’s easy to say we should have been fortifying New Orleans.
But if it was so blindingly obvious, please point me to a post you made before August 25th of this year calling for increased federal funding to New Orleans’ levee repair. If it was so clear and unambiguous a need, why weren’t you writing your congressman demanding that the federal government step up funding for the Corps of Engineers?
As a general principle, people do not seem to understand risk analysis.
If you wish to be utterly safe, then we need to evacuate and relocate *every single Gulf coast and eastern seaboard city. Also the West Coast, threatened by the San Andreas fault. And Lord knows when Mount St. Helens is going to pop again. We need to clear out that area as well.
Right?
What are your qualifications in logistics? How much do you know about mobilizing troops and supplies? What’s your experience in setting up supply lines and infrastructure?
You’re like a guy saying, “We can’t cure AIDS yet - it doesn’t make sense!”
It doesn’t make sense TO YOU because to you, these things just happen, by magic. And that magic includes some powerful crystal balls to see the future requirements.
Hundreds of people and machines cannot just be magically transported to a place and be effective.
What sort of real-world experience do you have with any sort of major mobilization effort?
I feel your anger, but I’m nit-picking this one.
Do you realize what’s involved with the feasability of airdropping food and water to these people? Granted, we did it a lot in Afghanistan, but they were on the dry ground. You want to air drop MREs and bottled water into hazardous, quite possibly deep and moving water? Bad idea. You’d have a panicked civilian mob trying to ford into danger for food and water, and would risk their lives with more casualties than necessary.
You can’t air drop food and water with the precision of a 500 lb. laser guided bomb.
Tripler
Trust me.