|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 112 responses total. |
lowclass
|
|
response 63 of 112:
| 
Feb 19 22:43 UTC 2006 |
Bru, they can't BUILD a levee system to withstand a force 5 hurricane, if
the government won't FUND a levee system to withstand a force five Hurricane.
|
happyboy
|
|
response 64 of 112:
|
Feb 19 22:54 UTC 2006 |
bru...IT WAS BUSH'S FUCKING JOB TO TAKE
THE AUGUST 6 PDB SERIOUSLY.
I'M TIRED OF IDIOT BOOTLICKERS.
|
naftee
|
|
response 65 of 112:
|
Feb 19 23:11 UTC 2006 |
whoa ; guys. cool heads prevail
|
nharmon
|
|
response 66 of 112:
|
Feb 20 00:35 UTC 2006 |
Thank you Johnnie for posting that. It looks like she choose her words
poorly, and I believe that is what the investigation will eventually
conclude.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 67 of 112:
|
Feb 20 01:55 UTC 2006 |
Bap, you missed the point, the facts and the truth in #62. Even if
everthing you say is true, the bottom line is that the organizations
responsible for identifying and responding to major public health
catastrophes were utterly unprepared and ineffectual. This for a PREDICTED
EVENT. Given how badly they botched Katrina, I shudder to imagine the
number of lives that will be lost due to the administration's incompetence
in the event of a successful attack.
|
bru
|
|
response 68 of 112:
|
Feb 20 12:56 UTC 2006 |
My point is they are always going to be unprepared and ineffectual. There
is no way any government agency can handle a catastrophy like Katrina. And
If you think Katrina was bad, wait till SAn Fransisco starts rocking with a
major earthquake, or the EAst Coast takes a Tidal Wave.
All any government agency can do is respond. They can't know how to respond
until they see what has happened. Other than storing supplies and
transportation to move same in a few select locations, government can only
do so much.
Ot os the people who have to respond and help each otehr, who have to buckle
down and rebuild.
Thats why every single one of you should have a minimum of Three days, THREE
DAYS of food and water stored in a way that you can easily transport it. One
gallon per person per day of water. In your house, right this very second.
IF you do not, you are irresponsible. You do not deserve any government help.
You need to be weeded out of the gene pool.
Preferably, you should have a years supply of food in storage in your house.
yes it might get destroyed in a fire or major catastrophy, but if everyone
had it in an emergency, we would have enought to share with those who lost
it all.
YOU CANNOT REALLY ON GOVERNMENT TO SAVE YOU!!! HAVE A PLAN IN PLACE!!! IF
you need help coming up with a plan, I am more than willing to come out for
a consultation to tell you what you need to do here in the ANN ARBOR area.
|
jadecat
|
|
response 69 of 112:
|
Feb 20 13:48 UTC 2006 |
Bru- what if you don't live in a house? What if you live in an apartment
and simply do not have room for these things?
|
keesan
|
|
response 70 of 112:
|
Feb 20 17:04 UTC 2006 |
Why do we need to store water when we live near a river and there is lots of
dead wood around to boil the water with?
|
happyboy
|
|
response 71 of 112:
|
Feb 20 18:03 UTC 2006 |
"weeded out of the gene pool"
nice christian attitude there, dingleberry.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 72 of 112:
|
Feb 20 18:26 UTC 2006 |
Re #68: I disagree that the government is as powerless as you suggest. You
even contradict yourself by noting correctly that the government can have
been "storing supplies and transportation to move same in a few select
locations".
Katrina, and a California earthquake (and a Missouri earthquake too, for
that matter), are among events that are known to be probable. Therefore it
is possible to have supplies, transporation arrangements, allocation of
personnel (who drops what to go where to get things moving),
communications centers, civil communications, and ungoing training, all in
place and kept current. Yes, this is all expensive, but less expensive
than the increased deaths and destruction that ensue from an event for
which preparations are not in place.
Billions are being put into anti-terrorist measures, for events that are
even more problematic than natural diasters. The same thinking should be
put in place for natural disasters that are expected.
|
tod
|
|
response 73 of 112:
|
Feb 20 18:48 UTC 2006 |
re #68
Wouldn't it just be easier to have enough rounds to take 3 days of rations
from the well prepared neighbor? That's how they did it in NOLA.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 74 of 112:
|
Feb 20 19:31 UTC 2006 |
We have plenty of Wally Marts 'round here to l00t.
|
bru
|
|
response 75 of 112:
|
Feb 20 20:06 UTC 2006 |
you willing to foot the bill there rcurl? So you want to have a national
emergency department with 100,000 on staff doing nothing until a disaster
strikes and then moving in to take over from the locals?
What we do is fill such positions in an emergency with military personell on
a temporary basis. But they do not have the training to handle such missions
as a primary skill set. There job is actually just the opposite, to kill
people and break things, not save people and fix things.
and each situation is different, even unique. The streets in baltimore are
diferent than the streets in New Orlians are different from the streets in
Ann Arbor. Even the basic services are different in each city. The FEDERAL
government cannot know these things. They cannot spend their time learning
them to lay out a plan. It i up to LOCAL government to know these things.
Thats why all the FEDERAL government can do is back up the LOCAL government.
Thats why in an emergency, where martial law is declared, the person in charge
is slated to be the LOCAL SHERIFF. He is supposed to know where to allocate
the incoming support resources.
The Federal Governemtn does do a good job if storing and transporting supploes
where they are needed, the problem comes in the method of distribution.
The biggest problem comes from our modern society...COMMUNICATION. Think
about what would have happened if Some disaster would have happened to detroit
100 years ago.
Who would have known first?
How would the Federal Government have responded?
What would the locals have done?
Where would the refugees have gone?
When would we have known?
Would the Federal Government come in and save everyone?
|
mcnally
|
|
response 76 of 112:
|
Feb 20 20:16 UTC 2006 |
re #75: where is the local sherriff supposed to find resources to
provide temporary housing for 500,000 people? how's he supposed to
arrange supply convoys while whatever force remains to him is trying
to maintain some semblance of law and order?
Nobody (well, nobody worth listening to) thinks that local and state
operations don't have a large role to play in disaster response but
you're deliberately presenting a false dichotomy (between "the feds
can't do it all" and "the feds therefore have no responsibility.")
|
cyklone
|
|
response 77 of 112:
|
Feb 20 20:29 UTC 2006 |
Not to mention the ever-worshipped by conservatives private sector has learned
how to move goods and services around the country (and the world) on an
as-needed basis. I don't think the learning curve would be all that great if
the feds decided to take their responsibilities seriously and learn a bit more
about the knowledge that already exists.
|
crimson
|
|
response 78 of 112:
|
Feb 20 21:45 UTC 2006 |
Re #77: You're begging the question. What's under discussion here is whether
"their responsibilities" is a reasonable description. I seem to recall hearing
on NPR in the week or so following Katrina that the city of New Orleans (or
perhaps the state) had a detailed plan, which was not followed in the least
description. In any case, because the federal government has such a large
area that it is responsible to some degree for, and several areas that it is
intensively responsible for (such as the national parks and Washington, D.C.),
intensive responsiblity clearly lies with the state and local governments.
(That last sentence was all general theory; if the federal government decided
beforehand to take more responsibility than necessary, then it still bears
the responsibility for its failure after the fact.)
|
mcnally
|
|
response 79 of 112:
|
Feb 20 22:30 UTC 2006 |
re #78: In your opinion, then, what *is* the responsibility of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, if not to respond to emergencies?
Whatever it is that you believe them to be responsible for, do you
believe they did a reasonable job of it in the case of Hurricane Katrina?
When they have been called upon in the past to respond to similar
emergencies (e.g. Hurricane Hugo) did they do a better or worse job?
|
cyklone
|
|
response 80 of 112:
|
Feb 20 23:55 UTC 2006 |
Re #78: I was respinding to bap, who said "The Federal Governemtn does do
a good job if storing and transporting supploes where they are needed, the
problem comes in the method of distribution."
My point, which you seemed to have missed, is that if an epidemic breaks
our, or a terrorist attack requiring a massive logistical response occurs,
Katrina has proven the Federal government is incapable of responding. I
not at all pleased to hear bap making excuses for why American citizens
should not expect the feds to deliver crucial medicine and other supplies
that may be needed.
|
tod
|
|
response 81 of 112:
|
Feb 21 03:12 UTC 2006 |
re #75
Local sheriff? Dude, you're smoking too much crack
Incident commander is whoever happens to show up first on the scene. Its
always been that way. As for emergency preparedness, it is supposed to be
a joint effort between municipal, state, and federal agencies.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 82 of 112:
|
Feb 21 03:24 UTC 2006 |
The initial incident commander is whoever shows up, Todd. But after
that, especially if it is a major event, incident command will move to
whatever jurisdiction has responsibility. For example, you wouldn't have
a police officer coordinate a major building fire, nor would you have
the fire department search for a missing plane.
|
tod
|
|
response 83 of 112:
|
Feb 21 03:32 UTC 2006 |
re #82
I wouldn't have a Sheriff stick his nose into the operations of the county
emergency management division, neither. NOLA was fucked up by FEMA, hands
down. Municipal and state called for emergency and FEMA responded a day late
and a dollar short.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 84 of 112:
|
Feb 21 03:42 UTC 2006 |
This response has been erased.
|
crimson
|
|
response 85 of 112:
|
Feb 21 05:09 UTC 2006 |
Re #79: The federal responsibility IMO is to coordinate interstate responses,
and to provide a very limited level of direct support. It seems like you're
expecting them to provide a lot of support, but if multiple disasters occur
they're involved in all of them, while each local level is only involved with
itself.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 86 of 112:
|
Feb 21 13:26 UTC 2006 |
You didn't answer mcnally's last two questions.
|
other
|
|
response 87 of 112:
|
Feb 21 16:36 UTC 2006 |
There are supposed to be plans in place with a coordinator at the county
level. The emergency response coordinator in Cook County, IL is a
dental hygienist. (This was mentioned in a seminar on emergency
preparedness for dental professionals that I shot.)
There is a huge amount of inter-jurisdictional coordination and
decision-making involved in appropriate emergency planning. We can
argue all we want about what went wrong after Katrina and who was
responsible, but I dare say that none of us is adquately informed to
really know the compound complexities of the failure.
We do know that there was corruption and graft at the local level which
prevented resources from being allocated in advance and people being
properly trained and instructed regarding their roles and functions in
such circumstances, and we also know that there was a massive failure at
the highest federal levels to both understand the scale of the problem
and to respond in a timely manner with appropriate resources.
What we don't know is what interations were supposed to happen and
between which persons and in which capacities. We don't know what
resources were supposed to be where and when, and how they were supposed
to get there. We _can_ see that at least some people who were supposed
to know these things also didn't know them, and that is a compound
failing at both local and federal levels.
To claim that this was either and exclusively federal or exclusively
local (and/or state) failing is evidence only of the partisanship of the
claimant. However, to suggest that local and state authorities should
be largely responsible for dealing with a disaster covering an area
running across four states is just as unrealistic as suggesitng that the
federal government should be responsible for managing a disaster
constrained to four city blocks in an urban center. The response in
both cases depends on coordination between officials operating outside
their normal functions, capacities and even lines of communication.
This is why emergency planning and response professionals exist, and why
they should be employed at every level of government in position that
have at times been filled by political patronage.
|