Katrina survivor walks to saftey

[sgtmac_46]

Like I said, always one or the other, isn't it?

It's actually one, and not the other.

 

[heretic888]

It's actually one, and not the other.

I know this might be a radical suggestion for a lot of people, but...

Imagine. Just imagine. That maybe. Just maybe.

The answer just might be "both/and", not "either/or".

Imagine.

 

[sgtmac_46]

I know this might be a radical suggestion for a lot of people, but...

Imagine. Just imagine. That maybe. Just maybe.

The answer just might be "both/and", not "either/or".

Imagine.

Of course it is, but, just as you feel you need to balance out what you see is the excess of the right, I take the opposite position on the left. Together, we balance each other out. That just makes me feel all warm inside.

 

[heretic888]

Of course it is, but, just as you feel you need to balance out what you see is the excess of the right, I take the opposite position on the left. Together, we balance each other out. That just makes me feel all warm inside.

Well, as long you keep your warm insides away my lunch we should be fine. :supcool:

That being said, I try to put the whammy on extremism wherever I find it. As of late, its mostly been of the Conservative variety --- most probably because they've pretty much been running the show as far as all 3 federal branches and most state governorships were concerned.

I feel thought Clinton was an amoral scumbag and Moore is an opportunistic narcissist. Then again, I also think the Bush Administration is one of the most incompetent presidencies we've had in nearly a century. But, that's just me.

There was a poem posted some time back that pretty much echoed retro-Romantic, quasi-Liberal feelings on it. I slammed on that one, too.

Its just what I do. :ultracool

 

[sgtmac_46]

Well, as long you keep your warm insides away my lunch we should be fine. :supcool:

That being said, I try to put the whammy on extremism wherever I find it. As of late, its mostly been of the Conservative variety --- most probably because they've pretty much been running the show as far as all 3 federal branches and most state governorships were concerned.

I feel thought Clinton was an amoral scumbag and Moore is an opportunistic narcissist. Then again, I also think the Bush Administration is one of the most incompetent presidencies we've had in nearly a century. But, that's just me.

There was a poem posted some time back that pretty much echoed retro-Romantic, quasi-Liberal feelings on it. I slammed on that one, too.

Its just what I do. :ultracool

One thing I will say for you heretic, and this is a rarity indeed, you don't debate along party lines, you debate topics. That is refreshing. There are some who will hold the party line to the bitter end.

 

[heretic888]

One thing I will say for you heretic, and this is a rarity indeed, you don't debate along party lines, you debate topics. That is refreshing. There are some who will hold the party line to the bitter end.

What? You mean like defending the spineless Democratic Party, who sat idly by without so much as a decent public debate while we were launched into Iraq?? Who took a friggin' governor from Vermont (?!) to get their collective rear ends motivated??

Then again, it could just be Washington inertia behind it.

In any event, you won't see me defending Clinton any time soon.

Laterz.

 

[arnisador]

I saw that Bill Clinton lambasted the administration Iraq and Katrina. That's an unusual move--to criticize the sitting president so strongly--but there doesn't seem to be much coming from it.

 

[JannaB]

I think a lot of people on this thread are incredibly quick to judge. Would you leave your elderly grandmother alone while you went wading out in the water for three days... considering there was no power, no food, no clean water, and no security in New Orlreans? Would you drag little kids 85 miles down a highway with no food or water for three days? There were bodies floating down the street and people getting shot if they left their homes. Maybe more people should have left, but it's also very possible that many of them couldn't. Good for this guy, but we should stop judging the other people; we have no idea what it was like for them.

 

[heretic888]

Maybe more people should have left, but it's also very possible that many of them couldn't. Good for this guy, but we should stop judging the other people; we have no idea what it was like for them.

That, essentially, is my position on the situation.

As I stated before, there were a lot of reasons people didn't want to leave their homes. Unless we know the individual's basis for his or her decision, we can't really condemn them for their actions.

I know if I'd have to choose between getting out or letting my pet dog die, I'd stay with my dog for as long as possible.

Think about it. :asian:

 

[RandomPhantom700]

I think a lot of people on this thread are incredibly quick to judge. Would you leave your elderly grandmother alone while you went wading out in the water for three days... considering there was no power, no food, no clean water, and no security in New Orlreans? Would you drag little kids 85 miles down a highway with no food or water for three days? There were bodies floating down the street and people getting shot if they left their homes. Maybe more people should have left, but it's also very possible that many of them couldn't. Good for this guy, but we should stop judging the other people; we have no idea what it was like for them.

:cheers:

 

[Tgace]

That, essentially, is my position on the situation.

As I stated before, there were a lot of reasons people didn't want to leave their homes. Unless we know the individual's basis for his or her decision, we can't really condemn them for their actions.

I know if I'd have to choose between getting out or letting my pet dog die, I'd stay with my dog for as long as possible.

Think about it. :asian:

And would you then then blame someone else for not being fast enough with the rescue boats???

 

[michaeledward]

And would you then then blame someone else for not being fast enough with the rescue boats???

Spoken like a partisan who has been completely disconnected from the reality on the ground for three weeks.

It's not that the boats weren't 'fast enough', it's that rescue boats, not to mention others offering assistance, were turned away.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20050910&articleId=915

 

[Tgace]

Pour yourself an icy cold one and chill dude...

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=2496

For example, a long flotilla of trucks pulling boats “stretching over five miles” was heading to New Orleans two days after Katrina hit U.S. shores. It was organized by a Louisiana politician. It was stopped and turned back by FEMA’s deputized Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries rescue operatives.

The motorized caravan was bringing in 24-foot long aluminum boats supposedly to rescue elders – inappropriate sizes of boats deemed dangerous to navigate in the shallow waters of the flooded streets and narrow alleys of New Orleans. Adhering strictly to the plan, FEMA did not allow boats over 16ft. in length to participate in the rescue operations for safety reasons.

Had this politically organized flotilla of motorized rescue vehicles on the road been allowed – and the politician who organized it would have scored a planned publicity blitz -- more flood victims perhaps would have died in a risky operation made more unsafe by violating safety rules and regulations in the implementation of the FEMA rescue plan.

 

[Sapper6]

Spoken like a partisan who has been completely disconnected from the reality on the ground for three weeks.

It's not that the boats weren't 'fast enough', it's that rescue boats, not to mention others offering assistance, were turned away.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20050910&articleId=915

ok, i'll take your pitch. Tom is no more "disconnected from the reality on the ground" then, lets say, you. i think i'm more than qualified to clarify for you how things REALLY went. regardless of whatever link you decide to throw in people's faces, it's BS.

allow me to preface my argument with where i'm coming from, as to not lead you to think i'm full of it:

i work full-time for the missouri army national guard. contrary to what most believe, our first mission is state security/disaster relief. i personally work on a daily basis with the fine folks at MO-SEMA (missouri state emergency management agency). i am an aviation operations NCO for an aviation battalion here in missouri. our battalion and the brigade we fall under sent over 150 personnel, 5 aircraft (2 UH-60 blackhawks, 2 UH-1 Hueys, 1 OH-58 Kiowa), 30 trucks (tactical ambulances, water trucks, fuel trucks, personnel cargo trucks, M998). the state as a whole deployed 1350 soldiers to the area, all occurring on the same day, all fell under the same OP order. the soldiers arrived on the ground on 02 september 2005. they reported to a location approximately 6 miles north of downtown NO, to a makeshift TOC (tactical operations center). they SAT THERE with their thumbs in their asses for 4 DAYS because at the time, the STATE GOV'T AND LOCAL GOV'T were still calling the shots and had no sense of coordination when it came to deploying relief efforts within the city. 4 DAYS...

our state's EOCP (emergency operations command post) for the entire state's mobilization was a mere 14 feet from the desk i sit behind everyday. suffice to say i possess a little insight behind the cluster**** that went on during the early stages of our relief effort. only once our soldiers were allowed to do their jobs, did things start happening. our soldiers were on SED (state emergency duty) orders for the first 4 days of their mission, which means they were being paid by the state, with no family separation pay and no additional entitlements. they were then federalized and placed on ADSW (active-duty for special work) with full active duty compensation. is it a coincidence that this coincided with the same day they actually put boots in the water and got to commence with their mission...? you decide. the first rotation of troops returned to missouri yesterday with their replacements deploying just two days prior.

to say that the federal gov't jacked this up the in the beginning stages in a fallacy that is being fed to you by the media. i don't give a damn where you heard it or who said, it's wrong.

seeing that the operations order for Operation Show-Me Katrina Relief is currently unclassified material, i will see to it you receive a copy of it if you have any doubts as to timeframes, mission, etc.

this, of course, just being one example of the mis-appropriation of assets by the hands of the local gov't. is it possible that more existed in the same manner...?

 

[sgtmac_46]

Spoken like a partisan who has been completely disconnected from the reality on the ground for three weeks.

It's not that the boats weren't 'fast enough', it's that rescue boats, not to mention others offering assistance, were turned away.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20050910&articleId=915

A fine example of being a partisan. You failed to mention why people were being turned away. You see, I work in emergency services, and our fire department sent people to New Orleans. They were being turned away, at first, until the city could be secured.

That's why they were begin for police officers, and departments all over the country were sending people. Fire fighters were being turned away because A) They had enough at the time and B) They needed to restore order before large scale rescue operations could begin.

Fire Fighters are good at rescue, bad at restoring order. So why have a bunch of people you have no need for right now, sitting around outside your evacuation areas.

You have no idea how many fire fighters were down there quickly, so save this silly little websites pretending to know the reality on the ground. They are skewed and only report distorted facts without any context.

As for civilian volunteers, what would be the purpose of having even MORE people to rescue when they run in to trouble...as they invariably will. :shrug:

 

[heretic888]

And would you then then blame someone else for not being fast enough with the rescue boats???

Depends.

If'n I'm the guy that's trying to stay with his doggy, then I would kindly inform them to go somewhere else. Besides, I'm a young, able-bodied fellah with years of experience in both the martial arts and Boy Scouts. I'm certainly not on the top of the Need To Be Rescused ASAP list.

If'n, however, I was one of the physically disabled grannies stuck in the slowly flooding retirement home --- then, yeah, I'd say they should get their asses there as so as possible.

So, yeah. It depends.

Laterz.

 

[ginshun]

Just to clarify where I stand on this, I don't be any means think that the whole of NO's population should have started walking out of town when they saw a hurrican coming.

I do however feel that a whole lot of people who stayed there waiting to be rescued or hugging there big screen or whatever, could have and should have done exactly what this guy did and got the F out of dodge.

To not achknowledge that this wasn't an option for a lot of people would be stupid. However, to not acknowledge that this was a perfectly viable option for a whole lot of people who didn't take it would be just as stupid.

Of course, this is all just my opinion, so take it for what its worth.