Hurricane Katrina

That's not exactly accurate. In major disasters, just as in wartime, the federal gov't has the capability of acting independently. For example if Cuba invaded NO, the Feds would not have to call the mayor or governor to see what is needed.I am a big proponent of state and local power over federal power, but national scale crises (and one must remember this is more than just a one state issue) calls for federal level responses, at the very least in the immediate term where local resources will obviously be pushed to the breaking point and further. Why on earth should he say that when he is talking about what to do NOW? As far as I could tell he was discussing reponse problems, not preventative issues.He can certainly be blamed, or take blame, later regarding prevention. In response he seems to have done what he can do and is asking for help.So far Bush has planned photo ops for himself. I remember 9/11, now I can point to this. When can we (as a nation) admit this president is wholly incapable of responding to emergencies?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

As much as I dislike Guiliani, he was fantastic in a crisis. Pataki was okay. Bush was worthless. I don't think its being within HS is necessarily the problem. It is how it is allowed to operate within HS which would be the problem. The irony in this is well noted. Be appointed by a guy that screws up and you can be fired for screwing up. Be a screw up that does the appointing and you are safe.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Notice that you have once again confused planning (prevention) with response. Whether or not the state an city had planned for an invasion, if one occured the feds could move in regardless. That goes double when it appears the local and state gov'ts have been overwhelmed. Same goes for a natural disaster. You are correct that it would be irresponsible not to coordinate efforts. Now lets deal with the reality here. What could they possibly do at the fed level that would hinder operations underway by the state and local gov'ts? Those entities are already despairing (quite publicly) that they have coordination problems in and of themselves due to their isolated and overwhelmed conditions.At this point the feds stepping in could allow for coordination which does not currently exist.I might add that the issue holding up federal response at this time does not appear to be "coordination" issues. That is that they are busy trying to coordinate efforts and so that is the entirety of the holdup. You yourself appeared to be claiming it was priority issues. They are overwhelmed. They said so. The time to act was back when they said so... at the very latest.Let me point out something. This was a natural disaster with at least a little bit of warning. A major terrorist attack (the kind Bush keeps using as a bogeyman), would be the exact same thing, only with no warning. Indeed it could involve the exact same issues, flooding and power outages, leaving immense numbers homeless and starving.Are you saying that if a dirty bomb was used in a city as well as perhaps some reservoirs so as to produce the same results, it would make sense that the feds would wait to see what happens on the ground?Heck at the very least Bush could have been preparing the resources which might be needed in anticipation of any requests.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

A dramatic change would be great. I have not dissed the efforts being made. I haved been critical, based on the comments from people on the ground, and reports of what Bush is doing, from his own mouth. Notice that I am not the only person that has been critical. I hate the fact that political hacks continue to twist any practical criticism into something about political bias. I just got done saying that despite my loathing of Guiliani, I thought his response was fantastic during 911.I respect results and leadership, regardless of its political base. Oh yeah and by the way genius mindreader that you are, I am not a democrat and so have no political bias against G Bush. I actually prefered him over Gore in 2000, and could vote Rep in 2008 depending on who they put up. You would be wrong. Your mischaracterization is noted. Build another strawman. Sure, he didn't. His first belated arrangements appear to be flyovers for press and morale uses. Not if arrangements were being made in a timely and efficient manner I wouldn't. Wow, wtf are you and members of your unit doing reading the posts of some "pony tailed" jerk like me, much less responding to them, when there are all those people to be helping?But if all of them are reading perhaps you can get one to browse through and read the posts which explain that I AM NOT A DEMOCRATIC AND HAVE NO POLITICAL OPPOSITION TO REPUBLICANS, even Bush!My opposition to him has been his repeated failures to act in a constructive way to challenges he is presented with. That's how I went from slightly supporting him (I'd have prefered McCain) to no longer liking him.If you are going to attempt character assassination in the future, at least try and identify your target.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

I didn't say that at all and how could you take it that way when in the very quote you responded to you have: "What could they possibly do at the fed level that would hinder operations underway by the state and local gov'ts?"Please read what I write more carefully. First of all I didn't say anything was simple. Second I didn't say just go down there. Third there is a difference between becoming active independently and not trying to coordinate, becoming active independently with coordination, and holding an assisting role.You are simply trying to shift debate away from the actual topic. You were discussing bureaucratic reasons why the feds had to wait. You refered to the feds' status as "assisting". My response was that they did not have to wait for a call, and did not have to remain in an "assisting" role.They can be proactive and independent, especially in areas that are clearly vacant. Sending in a medical relief ship, or preparing supplies/reinforcements before requests come in, would not require coordination with anyone.And when I talk about hindering, I am wondering what your problem is. If you think it would be irresponsible to go in without coordination, what else are you saying but the independent action of feds without coordination would result in hindrance of rescue efforts?And I also tried to express, but maybe I didn't make myself clear enough, that at some point waiting to coordinate could itself be detrimental, when local resources are taxed beyond their breaking point. At that point you move in and create the coordination center/relief for local resources. If they don't need any more help, then you get out no harm done. If they need help then you are there in time. If you mean "already" as being the point at which he was speaking then you are right. If you mean before the hurricane hit, then I did not hear that portion of his complaints. Perhaps I missed something but the majority of his complaints were about response in the aftermath, including Bush's continued press drive with little results.I think your criticisms of the mayor on preparedness issues are somewhat solid. Indeed I have some of my own, including response, based on his interview. If you think I am trying to shift blame from everyone else and put it on Bush, you are wrong.I actually withheld any discussion of this topic, and specifically anything regarding Bush, until events actually unfolded. If Bush had done a great job he would have had my compliments.However what I did ultimately see is that yet again, Bush has folded under pressure of a crisis. This man isn't a teflon president, he's an origami president. You keep trying to force this into a local only issue. You are right that mistakes were made on Nagin's part, as well as many other gov'tal sections at the lower than fed level. On that we can agree (in general, if not on every specific detail).In fact, do you remember me responding to you at all when you made those earlier comments? Duh...I only stepped in when you went to defend Bush by mischaracterizing the role of the federal agencies. He also shares a bit of the burden. In fact I find it sort of hypocritical to be discussing the knowledge Nagin should have had in the face of a Cat 5 storm (was he even around for all that work on flood control systems), yet give Bush a pass on it.If I were president, and I saw a serious hurricane heading toward a major city, and indeed could hit several states (which by itself becomes a federal issue), I'd have requested the exact same kind of information on their defenses as you just provided, and made sure I was putting in place some contingency plans.Once an entire, and rather important, city was ordered for evacuation, there was no question that (especially in a post 911 environment) someone could take advantage of the security issues presented. I mean who the f knows if terrorists are not at this moment, using the security issues to their advantage? I'd have had troops stationed there in advance, at the very least at federal buildings, in large bumbers, to act as bases of security and coordination in case things got out of hand.This isn't hindsight, its not armchair quarterbacking, its foresight. I have genuinely been amazed at the poor performance on the fed level. Things will eventually be fixed, indeed it appears some relief is finally arriving, but there was obviously some major mistakes made and the blame hits all levels on this one.Personally I will be encouraged if this event gets notice paid to flood control defenses, as well as subsidence issues for states. Coincidentally I had learned and studied coastal/flooding issues with respect to NO, years ago (almost 10 years ago). This stuff is not new, and so some blame could go back as far as Clinton.Now are all of you f'ing political hacks happy?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Actually I didn't, at least not from anything you mentioned, though I admit I am ignorant of exact details of arrangements.However, you appear ignorant of history, and concepts of proper planning. As RAZD has already pointed out, commands should have been coming down before the storm hit. It did not take a genius, based on basic knowledge of hurricanes and flooding, especially around NO, to realize the potential for serious trouble was there.As soon as NO was slated for evacuation, the federal gov't should have been sending in troops on its own to secure vital areas. The potential for additional damage by manmade sources (namely terrorists) escalated exponentially at that moment... and that is besides the looting issues.Maybe you do not remember the floods of last decade further north in the Mississppi. I do as well as all the troops that had to be deployed to fix things and keep order. At that time some people (not even terrorists) sabotaged flood defenses. Bush was not considering that that could be a possibility?Forming federal centers as backup relief/coordination areas for local resources as well as points for federal control in case things got out of hand would not have been impossible nor unwise. Its called planning. That in itself speaks volumes. Why on earth were amphibious craft, or at the very least aquatic vehicles, not moved into theater? Flooding issues were not expected? is that what you are telling? That is only an argument for greater ignorance than I was originally positing. I was jerking your chain. For a jackass to tell me who I am and totally miss the mark, I felt it was tit for tat to do the same. Guess you didn't get it when I placed in the reference to what you called me.I loathe people that use the fact that they are in positions of doing good, to berate others and act as if everything they have to say on all other subjects are correct. Yet you continue to protest your own ignorance to the world. Hey, were you one of the assholes that tried to say I was against the military and wars and stuff like that?Maybe you could actually start providing some counterevidence regarding how it was impossible to expect flooding... FLOODING... in NO when a storm surge develops along a subsiding delta with known flooding issues... such that extra amphibious and aquatic resources should be moved into theater or prepared for deployment.Perhaps you can provide reasons that no one would expect that a situation would develop... when a city is being evacuated... where serious security issues might not develop and require federal oversight.That is instead of supplying forged evidence to create personal attacks. Maybe you should actually read and/or try to understand what I am writing. First of all if you go back in this thread I never said word one, including when people were criticizing people outside the Bush admin (even Dems), until a mischaracterization was made about the nature of federal response to emergencies in order to cut Bush some slack in this mess.I wasn't trying to just Blame Bush, but I am certainly going to point the finger (or raise one) when it is appropriate, and not let others appeal to nonissues to cut him slack.My guess is if Kerry had been in the WH, you and those jumping to defend Bush at this point, would be discussing how this proves his lack of response to times of crisis.I on the other hand am being quite fair. Dems certainly hold responsibility (at the local level), as Monk has adequately pointed out (and berb at this point too). At the federal level there is only one guy in charge, and he does get the blame for mistake made at the federal level. He happens to be george bush.It also just so happens that he froze in the same way on 911. Thankfully another Republican was quite the leader at the local level.This is strike two for Bush, totally whiffing, in the face of national emergencies. It appears some changes have already begun. Fantastic. Great work... and I suppose that even includes you.I will not blame Bush for the problems that are going to come out of this disaster. That is what happens in disasters of this scale. If you see me doing what you just suggested, then call me on it. Otherwise shut the f up. Are you kidding me? I gauge who I criticize, based on their realm of control and the results at that level. It seems to me that everyone on the ground and that can do something is working heroically. On the flipside, it appears to me that most of the leaders who are supposed to be planning before things happen, as well as coordinate them afterward were not (Honore is the first fed who appears to be moving things forward from a top level). I mean really, wtf?Oh by the way, I don't get Chris Matthews where I am. Or at least I have no idea where to get him. And I don't watch any US media. The CNN I do get is international and they have not said anything about Bush or his actions in any derogative way.Where I get my criticisms are from HIS OWN ACTIONS AND STATEMENTS ABOUT HIS ACTIONS... which have amounted to inaction. How hard is that for you to follow?Abandon your stereotypes and maybe you will start addressing who I am or at least what I have been saying.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Exactly. Since Bush/Cheney entered office and began inserting neocon and ultrarightwing agendas (and breaking campaign promises to do so), we have suffered:1) The worst terrorist attack (or any other kind of attack) in US history. The main focus of attack being the centers of rightwing economic and military power.2) Had a fatal shuttle disaster, this one carrying a torah and studded with religious messages from Bush and Sharon, lauding themselves and God. It might as well have been the arrow shot from the tower of Babble, fo the response that their hubris got them.3) A march into a new an terrible war based on amazingly collosal failures of intelligence, almost miraculous in nature.Even more shortly after Bush and Co were reinstalled on a platform of increased hypocrisy and hatred to others in the name of God (taking his name in vain does not mean swearing by the way), we have had:1) One of the worst natural disasters in US history hit a key port, a base for economic and oil (resource) power. This was made worse by (it appears) equally failed intelligence.2) The death of a Supreme Court justice. I decided to throw that in as a massive evangelical prayer vigil was held for God to target bad justices for elimination from the supreme court, buy death if necessary. So far two conservatives were hit, with the most conservative being killed.If there are divine signs in tragedies, why are you so blind that you cannot read them?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Why on earth did you make so many separate replies to me before this one? Especially when they were all the same type and level of response. I will first deal with them all here...THINK LIZARD BREATH... THINK. Go back and look at your posts and read them and THINK. Not one comment you made actually countered anything I said. In fact everything you wrote merely enhanced the degree of poor judgement and lack of foresight of this administration.Remember national security, that is the security of this nation, both natural and manmade disasters, are supposedly the top priority of this administration. They had four years to readdress faults in the federal system which could fail to prevent or hinder response to disasters.And on top of that, they had several hours, if not days, notice that a large hurricane had the potential to hit a swath of southern states. You say they could not predict there'd be flooding, that a breach could occur in a levee, that authorities might not be swamped and so a rise in criminal activity?Maybe YOU could not predict that. And maybe THEY could not predict that. But when we had that very thing happen to us about ten years ago in the upper Mississippi, and we JUST GOT DONE WATCHING THAT VERY THING HAPPEN IN INDONESIA, I am seriously scratching my head as to what level of ignorance of history or recent events one must have not to be able to predict those possible outcomes.To add to this, the idea of HS and the entire "national security" concept was pitched by THIS ADMINISTRATION, as being PREEMPTIVE and PROACTIVE. I didn't say it, they did. So even without historical record to go by, someone should have thought to prepare for those possibilities.I note that you didn't at all deal with the fact that our lack of federal response left that entire area open to very real terrorist attacks. Thankfully they have not occured, but it wouldn't have taken much to send a person or team in to sabotage a levee, or otherwise hinder rescue efforts. It is not just protection against people that become savages in the face of disaster, but those with intent to harm us during a disaster.Duh.Now for your latest post... I can't speak for that. I can tell you though how a rational person with a modicum of education, traditional american values, a respect for the military and civil service professions, likes living in cities, doesn't wear tie-dye, almost always sports a military hair cut, despises many Democrats, supports some Republicans, and doesn't wear flip flops might approach some problem. Cool I like logic puzzles. Wait a second I thought the invasion of Iraq prevented this from happening? And when did Pakistan become a threat? Well I guess if this is the case... If I were Bush:
I'd invade Syria or Iran and capitulate some more to Pakistan and claim to the American public that as long as nothing detonates it proves I solved the problem.Oh wait, you were asking about how to position hospital units in preparation for the potential catastrophes...(that's if I were Bush) If I were a rationale person:
Given that Galaxy aircraft have a very large range, I might load and remove one or two of the hospitals from the US proper. Most likely Canada and Mexico, but perhaps as far out as Europe or South America. That way one has reserve units that will not potentially be blown to smithereens or otherwise contaminated. The return time would be negligible.During the load and move I'd have people plotting all potential landing areas, primary and secondary, and if they can do so, crossreferenced to potential targets. If I hadn't done so beforehand (which is really ridiculous), I'd be activating an stashing with (or close to) those units all those who are trained to operate in them.I would also secretly be requesting aid, preparation of similar equipment, from other friendly nations.I would station crews and at least three backup crews to keep the planes prepared and ready for immediate deployment 24/7. The backups would be so that one crew does not have to shoulder the burden of waiting 24/7 and get exhausted in the process.This of course does not mention readying nonmassive units like the ones you are refering to, including supplies of food and medicine and support for local and scattered level response. I'd also be trying to figure out where the nukes are so as to plan for the possibility of multiple sites and staggered detonations (they'd of course realize that staggered detonations would hurt worse than many all at once). According to your scenario, that is impossible. The best that can reliably be expected, would be 36 hours plus flight time, if one has them preloaded. Unless of course you are not counting loading and uploading at all?My guess then is that one should (as I have noted) not be counting on these massive units for the very first and immediate response.Now tell me what a guy with his head shoved up his ass (or is it Bush's ass) would do?Oh yes, and on top of that that same guy with his head shoved up his ass (or is it Bush's) can explain what this has to do with Katrina? Not only is this BS as it has nothing to do with proper planning for the Hurricane, it is really bizarre as you impres a 24 hour time limit for response. The feds did not respond en masse till how many hours into the crisis? That is in addition to your own admission there wasn't even a call to begin preparations until 12 hours after the hurricane hit, which is many many many hours after knowing the potential for disaster was there.You can try and switch the subject, but it will come back to the real world eventually. Even staunch Republicans are coming out against the slow Fed response. It really is obvious.This message has been edited by holmes, 09-05-2005 05:07 AM

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Watch this... and Yet... So you can speak for God? Well remember all of this came about not after the churches were becoming more liberal, but in the immediate aftermath of rightwing fundies gaining political power, including a man in the presidency. They have been increasingly divisive and intolerant.Isn't God's point clear then as to where most fundies are errant? Wherever you go, make sure to check into reality.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)