New Orleans

Remove all ads!

I also have an article and a link:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9156612/

[ September 02, 2005, 06:30: Message edited by: Chandos the Red ]

 

There's a number of problems. Most pointed out already. First off was the vulnerability of the city. Secondly, the Storm was more vicious that anyone could have imagined. Beyond that, yes, the Government was caught with their pants down, and a key point in their infrastructure got destroyed. These things combined have made disaster relief difficult.

Add to this the human element--Greed of the looters, desparation of the victims, the Reporters caring more for the story than the people, and people firing on aid workers. It's like what was described in the thread on some of the African nations--right in your own back yard! The National Guard should be ready to apprehend lawbreakers and punish them to the fullest extent of the law.

Further, there are poisonous snakes and Aligators displaced from their habitats, and looking for meals wherever they can find them. Add to this, the sewage backup, dead bodies that can't be disposed of properly and other disease causing agents.

So to put this in perspective, imagine you guys out there (I hope you ladies can envision this) took a heavy shot to the twins, had *******s throwing things at you and suddenly had to barf your guts up. What could you do in those circumstances other than flip off some mouthy jerk?

Also, Fellinoid has a point, even though maybe not a pleasant one, nor was it phrased that well. However I doubt that it was deliberate on Nature's part. While there has always been wars, plagues and disasters which have reduced population, I do not believe that Nature was responsible for that...

 

Well I don't know about incompetence, these sort of things come allways as a surprise and there is no more competence anywhere else either. It's tragic though that usually the response is just "let's close our eyes and hope it goes away" which usually does not work all that well. At first I thought that the storm was not doing so much damage but now after reading the news after a couple of days it seems it did quite a lot of damage and that almost the entire city is more or less under the water. Truly a tragic event.

 

What I find remarkable is (a) how quick order dissolved and (b) how quick youth gangs filled the vacuum and started looting. There must have been something seriously ill socially in New Orleans.

That is a thing that would seriously worry me.

In the sense, when the local authorities weren't able to 'hold' New Orleans after such a deisaster, how can they think to be able to do that in some other place?

 

I hope this lets Americans have more empathy towards Iraqis, as they have these conditions every day, but no-one cared. Still people are showing their support, even Hugo Chavez has offered a large sum of funds, and cheaper oil.

I remember people critizing Iraqis, for the violence when their security was dissolved, but not this is happening closer to home.

While I can understand the looting a little (no jobs to go back to etc), I find it disgsting that people would go as far as commiting rape, in a time such as this.

I found it amazing that clean water and food was not brought within the first 2 days, which are the most critical. These things should have been thought of.

 

The more and more I read about what's going on in New Orleans, the less and less I'm against the death penalty. Or at least giving the police and the military the orders to fire. Armed rioters who kill, rape and steal, should be shot upon sight. Every single policeman or soldier is precious, as is every single peaceful citizen that might be saved. Those guys are not. They have made their choice and they should be held to it. Getting supplies when you need them and there's no shopkeeper to pay is one thing. What those people are doing is another. If it means the whole city should be indicted and tried, be it. Armed robbers and other gang members who shoot at medical aid workers should only be captured alive if this can be done without endangering the police/military troop's mission -- and if the troop's numbers are reduced, its mission will be endangered. Besides, sometimes people must be shown that if they fire at the police, the police will fire back.

@Splunge: Yes, it's so sad that such beasts roam the face of the planet. I don't even call them animals. Animals don't get this low. I am tempted to say they should be shot, quartered, strangled by their genitals... but what would that do? It won't undo anything and they won't understand anything. The society won't learn any lesson, it will only have its lust for vengeance satisfied... until the same people who shouted "hang them! hang them!" do the exact same thing when they are left without the police watching. What to do with them? Send them somewhere? Eliminate? I don't know. I might give up my desire to harm them in return, but I don't want such people walking on the streets on the bright new day that finally comes. Well, perhaps there would be one lesson: that there is on impunity and that they *will* get you if you start running rampage. And I'm not sure it would be a bad idea to teach the general public such a lesson.

[ September 02, 2005, 12:25: Message edited by: chevalier ]

 

Did anyone see the prisoners still locked well into the disaster? All crammed up on the top floor...

 

Should they re-build?

Is anyone else wondering about the wisdom of rebuilding New Orleans in the same place? How many times does mankind need to be taught that Nature will eventually overcome technology before the lesson finally sinks in? The worst part is that it was really just a matter of time before something like this happened - they don't call that area the 'Hurricane Coast' for nothing - and they still weren't prepared. Can you imagine the horror if Katrina had actually hit directly, in the worst-case scenario?

If I lost everything that way, I'm almost positive I'd pick a new location to start over. I sincerely hope that people think of their alternatives before calling the contractors.

 

Death penalty, mob justice and lynching are barbaric anachronisms, it is revenge not justice.
When so many guns are available it is inevitable that they are going to be used in such situations. Errors are bound to happen, and they will. You can't have law enforcers go trigger happy either, they have to protect the public and this is quite a task. I do respect people who devote their lives to law enforcement, but I know what it means to be treated like a suspicious character because of your looks or origins. I don't have a police record I never committed any offence, it didn't prevent me from being searched and questioned on numerous occasions for no reason by police officers just because they thought I looked suspicious. Starting to shoot at people on the assumption that they could be criminals is not such a good idea. Shooting at somebody to prevent that person from committing a crime is another matter.

The police DO fire back, there has been so many blunders so many innocents killed (I'm not refering to the US only -think about what happened in London) that although I can understand the feelings Chevalier voiced I can't stand such statements.
I am appalled at the way things have turned out. Such situations make the worst things come out of people.

 

Seeing the chaos and looting in Iraq a friend of mine remarked that in the first time he, a very liberal guy, understood that "Looters will be shot" has actually a rationale behind it.

Being against death penalty myself I can understand such a rule under martial law or in a situation like in New Orleans.

The scenes of looting in New Orleans only underline that rationale. The state ultimately has a few very basic functions, and one of them ist to mainain enough order for a peaceful coexistence of all indivudual citizens. Once unable to maintain order, the state looses one of it's key legitimating functions.

Order is crucial for individual freedom. In New Orleans freedom to own property has been trampled and replaced by the law of strongest, or most heavily armed. That's the ultimate fallacy of the Anarchists: Lawlessness isn't freedom, but merely freedom from laws. But you cannot live without at least some basic laws. I'd rather prefer a Pinochet's rule (though I despise his facism) over the multi-party carnage of Beirut, as the least bad of the bad options.

Rally,
why not rebuild New Orleans in a new start? For a change, Americans could utilise stone for building more durable structures Wooden houses are crap If it's about natural disasters a change in building techniques and emergency preparations would be a good start, and preferrable to depopulating the entire Tornado Alley in an attempt to yield to the forces of nature. After all, a Katrina doesn't come around every day

And then, I wanted to post the 'broken window' line too, but LNT was faster ...

[ September 02, 2005, 14:46: Message edited by: Ragusa ]

 

@Caradhras: Being searched because they think you look suspicious is not something that should happen in a democratic state. It doesn't happen where I live unless you've been detained in violent circumstances on concrete suspicion or if it's drug possession or there's a risk of self-mutilation.

I didn't mean to say the police and the military should run around searching people and firing at random targets. I just said they should be allowed to deal harshly with resistance in order to protect themselves and their mission (a decimated police unit won't do the job in a riot).

And yeah, Rally has a point. A new location could do better.

 

What the HELL is going on here! This is not supposed to happen in a first world country. We have people dying in New Orleans because of dehydration. Bush came out and called it "not acceptable" and wins the award for the understatement of the year. Yes, it is "not acceptable" George, and you are the person with the authority to provide the federal aid. Congress has to pass to bill for the money, but you can send in emergency supplies without their authorization. Oh, and a chemical plant blew up this morning as if these people needed more to deal with. Unbelievable.

EDIT: This is the now the worst natural disaster in North America that I have witnessed in my lifetime. It isn't worse than last year's tsunami, but like I said - in North America.

 

Well, during such a situation of emergency you could say that they practically do have the freedom. With all the noise generated - and probably deservedly so - about looters, rapists etc. no one will really blame them if someone is shot, unless it becomes like an actual bloodbath between gangs and the law-enforcing agencies.
While it might be wise to "move" New Orleans, I doubt it would be completely practical in every situation. After all, how do we move the Netherlands? IIRC most of its territory is below sea level. Still, they aren't likely to have a hurricane, but you never know with this weather...

 

The Netherlands have fabulously engeneered levees, their crownprince has even studied levee engeneering. The durch full well know of their dependency on their levee system and spent and continue to spend billions on it.

As a matter of fact, the Louisianans must have known too. Part of the discussion will be the spending priorities of the last years: Did New Orleans Catastrophe Have to Happen?

 

...which is why it *is* entirely possible to rebuild NO, even if it lies below sea level. Or is Dutch engineering so far beyond the capabilities of Americans?

On a related note, someone needs to wipe the smirk of GWB's face...

 

Amazing. So many comments have degenerated to 'GWB is the problem here'. Of course, it must be the republicans who are at fault -- heaven knows the democrats (who were in power for eight years and could have done something) are not responsible. But I digress (as others have).

Think this through. The routes to New Orleans are quite limited -- certainly not capable of providing adequate routes for the THOUSANDS of trucks required to get water and food to the people in need. After the resources get to New Orleans, just how are they supposed to be delivered to everyone? Sure, the press can hop in a john boat and get to remote locations, very noble of them to get out there with cameras instead of food. Until the big and very slow, amphibious vehicles come from the Navy and Marines adequate supplies just can't be delivered. I doubt many people here have much experience at moving MILLIONS of pounds of supplies to anywhere and I'll tell you it is a daunting task that takes days, not hours. I have not heard what condition the docks are in, obviously getting the docks up and running is critical to the relief effort so barges can bring the necessary supplies (one tug can bring supplies that would normally take a thousand trucks -- but they move slow).

By the way, it also takes a few days to call up reserve and guard units. People just can't walk away from the jobs and families on a moments notice -- the military must first ensure the families are taken care of.

I said it before, a criminal element is always ready to take advantage of any situation. We've seen it in every disaster. It should not be surprising.

 

Of course, there's plenty of blame to spread around, and it involves state and local gov'ts as well as federal. But W is ultimately at the helm (or not); as a far more politically brave president once emphasized, "the buck stops here."

1) Nat'l Guard: as it is, up to half of a state's NG can be shifted overseas; only a revolt by state governors prevented the pentagon from shifting even more NG resources to Iraq than they already have. Sure they have to leave their jobs. But that's the other side of the coin, no? Plenty of NGs are paramedics, firefighters, etc in civilian life. Great that they're in Iraq and not in LA, no? And why should the NG be overseas anyway? Another example of Rumsfeld doctrine war on the cheap. No need for the wealthy to support the war, no sirree...

2) The feds have reports up to the ears as to what would happen if a category 4 or 5 hurricane hit NO. That W could say "noone could anticipate this would happen" is utter BS.

3) I'm not going to defend Clintonian environmental deprevations, but the W admin has simultaneously gutted the EPA, turned it into a pro-business lobbying group, and, to be safe, sicked it's attack dogs on "environmental wackos" who worried about LA and MS wetland development, the lack of flood control, etc. And now W says what's going on is "unacceptable." Damn straight, I say.

4) The W admin just recently cut the Army Corps of Engineer budget for NO levees by more than 1/2, meanwhile funding, for example, a massive and arguably unnecessary bridge project in Alaska (which has two powerful Repub senators). Sure LA has it's Repubs, but not quite as powerful and wealthy as the Alaskans, apparently. (And, yes, LA and MS politicians are know for giving pork to developers which doesn't help, and which also wants to make me slap Barbour for acting so pious...)

Look, the situation would have been ugly whatever the preparations. But it didn't have to be anywhere near this ugly.

And it really annoys me that the right is trying to circle wagons around the idea that "looters" are responsible for the terrible situation. And of course the old canard that we should never question our leaders when 1) they are Repubs and 2) their pants are down around their ankles. Complete BS.

 

I actually agree with you Bion, I just get irritated that so many just want to point fingers at the closest target. Damn silly.

The preparations were the responsibility of the state. Period. The federal government can move in and take over a state operation like this, but it is rarely done. Residents of states don't look very kindly on federal interferance, but quickly put their hands out and point fingers when the states fail ('the federal government should have stepped in but we would be spitting mad if the feds stepped in when we didn't need it'). Give me a break.

The State of Louisianna and City of New Orleans were responsible to upgrade those levees. They didn't want to raise the funds themselves and instead decided the American people should augment the funds necessary to cover the project. Well, now we will and I fully blame the politicians of Louisianna.

 

Agreed, but it will have a reduction in the number and severity of them.

Hurricanes are created when high summer temperatures cause an increase in evaporation and transpiration rates. I understand that the water temperature in the Gulf of Mexico this year averages over 30 deg C. I can't find any other data, but the news program stated this was unusual and likely to lead to more large ones.

There were large & devastating hurricanes last year and it looks like this year will be similar. I don't recall how long before that there were such large ones, or so many. When I was in Florida, May last year, they were talking about ones 50-ish years earlier and the effect they had on Naples(?).

Global warming does exactly what it says on the tin, it raises the temperature. What is the Kyoto protocol intend to achieve? A reduction in global warming. Working to be compliant with Kyoto wouldn't have prevented this, the damage has already been done. However I believe if the world keeps acting as it currently does, Florida and the Gulf of Mexico can expect a lot more large storms in the years to come. How the USA deals with this is up to them, but the warning is there.

I believe the issues with Bushy-Boy is the fact he hasn't been seen to do anything about the situation, regardless of what is actually going on behind the scenes. It's always a matter of perception - he received a guitar from someone or other rather than devoting his ful attention to a national disaster. Same happened in the UK when Blair didn't cancel his holiday after the bombings. It only takes one politition to stand up and say that *blah-blah* has been mobilised. (And heaven knows there's enough off them to want to appear on the media).