Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8905 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-25-2019 2:20 PM
33 online now:
dwise1, edge, Faith, JonF, kjsimons, ooh-child, PaulK, PurpleYouko, Stile, xongsmith (10 members, 23 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 850,206 Year: 5,243/19,786 Month: 1,365/873 Week: 261/460 Day: 13/64 Hour: 4/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
23456
...
14NextFF
Author Topic:   Help Lizard Breath Save Bush from Hurricane Katrina
Silent H
Member (Idle past 3930 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 1 of 205 (240763)
09-06-2005 5:08 AM


In the Hurricane Katrina thread some people began criticizing fed inaction to the developing crisis. It was perhaps premature, and any way not the right time, to start pointing fingers. And there is no question that blame will certainly hit local figures regardless of political affilitiation, so the feds are not totally to blame here. But amazingly there were attempts to defend federal inaction in general and protect Bush in specific.

Monk tried to defend the inaction by playing off federal involvement as restricted in nature. Thus Bush's hands were tied until the state or city asks for help. Lizard Breath tried to play it off as if Bush had been on the ball all along and was doing his very best (as best as anyone else could do).

It seems to me that what is happening is that true believers are yet again rushing to the defense of a lame president.

Back on 911 where we had video footage of a man freezing up like a deer caught in the headlights at the most crucial moments in our recent history, the true believers spun that as a heroic act of courage sacrificing precious time in order to keep a class of children calm. Then in the resulting pursuit of AQ and "terrorists", he diverted valuable resources to Iraq on pretexts that are very well published, yet the true believers have spun it that he was really doing this as a way to spread democracy. Now we have days of inaction, and pretty well admitted ignorance of the crisis, yet true believers see this guy as doing his heroic best against red tape and logistics.

Thus Bush has become to me, the origami president. He folds easily under pressure, but in skilled hands changes from a crumpled mass into some new and pretty thing to behold. But whatever the shape he is still a paper sham, at best a paper tiger.

We can leave all the previous misteps aside, and focus on Katrina. I want to see clear evidence of Bush's genius and heroic acts, and of what actually hindered his herculean efforts. No spinning. Just facts. Times, regulations, etc...

I will end by addressing LB's final statements to me in the other thread so as to drive what I am looking for.

the resources to do everything are limited. You have done a good job in assessing the logistics of moving these mobile centers. This requires assets. Now think of the same situation with the amphibious craft. They need to be moved in quickly but the required assets to move them are pre disposed in the event of a terrorist attack.

So you have to do some quick thinking on your feet as to how to pull away enough airlift support to go move them without jeopardizing the response of a nuclear terrorist attack. The levels or coordination to pull this off is staggering.

Was the US under threat of a nuclear attack? And even if so, where would the most pressing need be for amphibious craft be if the detonations occured at the same time as the hurricane was sweeping, or had just swept through?

I want to see evidence that Bush had a credible reason not to have craft ready to be sent to that region as needed, in the face of an oncoming hurricane in a flood prone region.

So what appeared as a slow response by Bush was acctually him stepping backand letting his logistics generals make the calls and he gave them the space they needed to do their jobs.

I want to see evidence that he ordered his general to draw up plans and that it their fault for having wasted time, or that the task was so onerous, they could not have resources in place within 2-3 days of the hurricane hitting.

He had to keep the rest of the country safe while handling the hurricane. He didn't leave the back door wide open while trying to stop the rain coming in the front door.

It wasn't just rain. An entire city has been wiped out. If he does not understand that a natural disaster can be as bad as anything a human can produce, then he is in sad shape. In any case, please show what threats required him to not prepare emergancy measures.

I think that they were betting that it would not breech and lost. The breech complicated things but the violence was a total suprise. Some looting is always planned for but what happened here was not expected.

So his generals were gambling that levees would not breech under conditions the scientific community had been warning about for years, and which in other parts of the US had been breached by human activity? What were those odds?

An entire major US city was being evacuated (a historical event) and they did not expect large scale looting? They figured it would be business as usual? Who were these generals, and why did the president not realize that their estimates were way off?

This is where these guys had champaign dreams on an "Old Millwalkee Light" budget. It sounded good but there's not enough money to do it per script

How is that not the President's fault?

Again, well thought out but requiring huge amounts of money. Most of these units are reserve units, they would have to be activated, paid, billeted, fed and supported by other units, most likely also activated reserves.

I'm sorry, but how much is the war in Iraq costing us every day? The idea that preparation to protect an entire city from actual destruction would cost a few million a day, suddenly doesn't seem so extreme. Please give me figures of how much it would have cost and compare that to Iraq debts.

Anyone else that would like to defend the president in his hours of need, please jump in with evidence to explain his lack of action on the ground.


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by nwr, posted 09-06-2005 8:00 AM Silent H has responded
 Message 6 by Lizard Breath, posted 09-06-2005 1:19 PM Silent H has responded

    
nwr
Member
Posts: 5585
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 2 of 205 (240779)
09-06-2005 8:00 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Silent H
09-06-2005 5:08 AM


Thus Bush has become to me, the origami president. He folds easily under pressure, but in skilled hands changes from a crumpled mass into some new and pretty thing to behold. But whatever the shape he is still a paper sham, at best a paper tiger.

I think it is a mistake to single out Bush for criticism. This is a massive failure of the conservative experiment in cutting the size of government. It started with Reagan.

Their method of cutting government was to cut taxes, and force the nation into debt to such an extent that we could not afford government programs. And they set a tone which had the effect of putting local and state government under similar financial pressures.

The result has been a failure to adequately invest in infrastructure, education, etc.

We need to get back to the old fashioned idea of planning for our future.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Silent H, posted 09-06-2005 5:08 AM Silent H has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Silent H, posted 09-06-2005 8:24 AM nwr has not yet responded
 Message 22 by nator, posted 09-07-2005 9:52 AM nwr has not yet responded

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 3930 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 3 of 205 (240783)
09-06-2005 8:24 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by nwr
09-06-2005 8:00 AM


I think it is a mistake to single out Bush for criticism.

I absolutely agree. I am critical of more than just conservatives as well. My point was that Bush is now being singled out for protection. It seems as if blame can fall on everyone except for him, which is patently absurd.

It is clear that he, among others, needs to be held accountable for his part in creating this tragedy. It is unfortunate that true believers of Bush have already begun their spin to talk away what is quite apparent... he screwed up.

We need to get back to the old fashioned idea of planning for our future.

This is true and I agree. Much of the planning and longterm prevention issues do not fall on Bush's head. Well to be honest if he was busy reinventing national security agencies to prepare for calamities, then there is a good portion that can come his way, but the main onus that is connected to him, is response.

Whether everything or nothing had been put in place over the years to deal with flooding/subsidence problems along coasts and rivers, there was still the capability or managing rescue resources should problems arise. That the resources are there now points out that we do in fact have resources to respond.

Timeliness from federal agencies (and this involves more than just FEMA) rests with the president.

I don't mean this thread to suggest that I think Bush is the ultimate bad guy in this. I am only trying to point out that people are already preparing his escape from any blame and that is wrong.


holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)
This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by nwr, posted 09-06-2005 8:00 AM nwr has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by berberry, posted 09-06-2005 8:53 AM Silent H has responded

    
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 205 (240792)
09-06-2005 8:53 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Silent H
09-06-2005 8:24 AM


Bush isn't totally to blame, but he is the main man.
I agree with your overall point, holmes; you can't pin this all on Bush. But I've always agreed with the Truman philosophy that the buck stops at the president's desk. When federal agencies fuck things up, the ultimate responsibility lies with the president. How he handles that responsibility is how we take the measure of the man.

In this case, will heads roll or will medals be awarded? I think I know the answer, but we'll see.


"I think younger workers first of all, younger workers have been promised benefits the government promises that have been promised, benefits that we can't keep. That's just the way it is." George W. Bush, May 4, 2005
This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Silent H, posted 09-06-2005 8:24 AM Silent H has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Silent H, posted 09-06-2005 10:07 AM berberry has not yet responded

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 3930 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 5 of 205 (240805)
09-06-2005 10:07 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by berberry
09-06-2005 8:53 AM


Re: Bush isn't totally to blame, but he is the main man.
Since I am a state over federal power type of guy, I am one to hold local heads to more account than nonlocal heads. However this was not just a local issue and had to involve or would potentially involve feds. As it was that from the outset, I do count him as one of the main people to be held accountable.

But I've always agreed with the Truman philosophy that the buck stops at the president's desk. When federal agencies fuck things up, the ultimate responsibility lies with the president. How he handles that responsibility is how we take the measure of the man.

Same for me. I think that is a sign of true leadership, which of course suggests why I have been repeatedly disappointed by this president. He has pointed to anyone but himself, which makes me ask what I think is the next obvious question... why do we need him?


holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)
This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by berberry, posted 09-06-2005 8:53 AM berberry has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Lizard Breath, posted 09-06-2005 5:49 PM Silent H has responded

    
Lizard Breath
Member (Idle past 4806 days)
Posts: 376
Joined: 10-19-2003


Message 6 of 205 (240830)
09-06-2005 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Silent H
09-06-2005 5:08 AM


First Stirrings
I want to see evidence that he ordered his general to draw up plans and that it their fault for having wasted time, or that the task was so onerous, they could not have resources in place within 2-3 days of the hurricane hitting.

From my sphere of influence, we began preping and sealing A/C dedicated to FEMA as early as 30 August. On the 29th, we groomed what we had in advance on our own. On Tuesday the 30th, we sealed 3 aircraft for the missions. The call came in late Wed night on the 31st to be on spot at New Orleans International by 1100 Zulu on Thursday the 1st. This was the earliest that the National Guard could have the runway cleared. They were scrambling to finish as we entered the pattern that Thursday morning.

The National Guard had been on site as early as Monday but the heavy equipment was lagging by at least 36 hours due to logistics in getting in to the SZ. I'm not for sure but it seemed their was confusion at the state level as to where to stage and clear. I'm not sure what heavy equipment was needed because I did not observe much debris at the site, but the runway and ramp did need to be swept for FOD hazards. Maybe that's what they were waiting for. I don't know. There were some busted light poles and such from what I seen. Quite possible that the heavy equipment was used to make a path to the airport so the evacuees could get there.

The first flights in were caious. Several planes were bum rushed and order basically broke down. By Thursday afternoon, order was firmly established and the airport was buzzing with efficiencey. From the time the Feds took over, to order and progress in the EZ was less than 8 hours. Pretty good for Bush once he was allowed to take the field. Tangible progress as guaged by Rivera at the Superdome took several days longer to be reported, but once we had a foothold, the evacuation and rescue escalated rapidly.

By Thursday afternoon, we had enough support moved in to keep 325 helicopters fueled and serviced to remain operating 16 hours a day over the city. That is monumental even in a non disaster zone. Plus ATC up to handle evac fixed wings.

This message has been edited by Lizard Breath, 09-06-2005 02:31 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Silent H, posted 09-06-2005 5:08 AM Silent H has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Silent H, posted 09-07-2005 4:55 AM Lizard Breath has not yet responded

  
Lizard Breath
Member (Idle past 4806 days)
Posts: 376
Joined: 10-19-2003


Message 7 of 205 (240878)
09-06-2005 5:49 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Silent H
09-06-2005 10:07 AM


Re: Bush isn't totally to blame, but he is the main man.
Same for me. I think that is a sign of true leadership, which of course suggests why I have been repeatedly disappointed by this president. He has pointed to anyone but himself, which makes me ask what I think is the next obvious question... why do we need him?

Bush said today that he is going to establish a review of what happened and find out what went right and what went wrong. He will probably find the answers and make 2nd half adjustments.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Silent H, posted 09-06-2005 10:07 AM Silent H has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by berberry, posted 09-06-2005 6:10 PM Lizard Breath has not yet responded
 Message 9 by crashfrog, posted 09-06-2005 7:02 PM Lizard Breath has not yet responded
 Message 15 by Silent H, posted 09-07-2005 5:02 AM Lizard Breath has not yet responded

  
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 205 (240882)
09-06-2005 6:10 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Lizard Breath
09-06-2005 5:49 PM


Re: Bush isn't totally to blame, but he is the main man.
But I don't buy it, LB. From reports I've heard and read, he's talking about running the investigation himself. How is that supposed to work? Has any politician ever investigated him or her self and been found to have come up lacking?

This points up another problem with one-party rule as we have in Washington now. I have more faith in a congressional investigation, but even then it'll be republicans investigating republicans. I can't see how anyone's faith is going to be restored when the same party that fucked up is the one investigating the fuck up.

I have a feeling this is going to be like a typical local sherrif's investigation into a lynching in the Old South. But we'll see.


"I think younger workers first of all, younger workers have been promised benefits the government promises that have been promised, benefits that we can't keep. That's just the way it is." George W. Bush, May 4, 2005
This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Lizard Breath, posted 09-06-2005 5:49 PM Lizard Breath has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 205 (240897)
09-06-2005 7:02 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Lizard Breath
09-06-2005 5:49 PM


Re: Bush isn't totally to blame, but he is the main man.
He will probably find the answers and make 2nd half adjustments.

He was supposed to do that after 9/11. That's what prompted the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and later, the National Response Plan.

The question is not "why did this sort of response happen", but "why did this sort of response happen again?"


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Lizard Breath, posted 09-06-2005 5:49 PM Lizard Breath has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Chiroptera, posted 09-06-2005 7:08 PM crashfrog has responded

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6532
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003


Message 10 of 205 (240901)
09-06-2005 7:08 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by crashfrog
09-06-2005 7:02 PM


Re: Bush isn't totally to blame, but he is the main man.
I bet that if there were someone to bomb, then the administration would have been right on that.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by crashfrog, posted 09-06-2005 7:02 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by crashfrog, posted 09-06-2005 7:10 PM Chiroptera has not yet responded
 Message 12 by docpotato, posted 09-06-2005 7:10 PM Chiroptera has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 205 (240906)
09-06-2005 7:10 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Chiroptera
09-06-2005 7:08 PM


Re: Bush isn't totally to blame, but he is the main man.
I bet that if there were someone to bomb, then the administration would have been right on that.

How dare you belittle our War on Weather! Why on Earth do you hate our troops so much?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Chiroptera, posted 09-06-2005 7:08 PM Chiroptera has not yet responded

  
docpotato
Member (Idle past 3158 days)
Posts: 334
From: Portland, OR
Joined: 07-18-2003


Message 12 of 205 (240907)
09-06-2005 7:10 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Chiroptera
09-06-2005 7:08 PM


Re: Bush isn't totally to blame, but he is the main man.
I bet that if there were someone to bomb, then the administration would have been right on that.

I can see the headline now: US TO BOMB OCEAN "We'll fight the water out at sea so we don't have to fight it at home," says President Bush.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Chiroptera, posted 09-06-2005 7:08 PM Chiroptera has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Silent H, posted 09-07-2005 3:57 AM docpotato has responded

    
Silent H
Member (Idle past 3930 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 13 of 205 (240957)
09-07-2005 3:57 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by docpotato
09-06-2005 7:10 PM


Re: Bush isn't totally to blame, but he is the main man.
Well to be more correct with your analogy, shouldn't we then divert our military to bomb some obscure creek somewhere, designated by Bush and Co as a major "fountain" of water related emergencies?


holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)
This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by docpotato, posted 09-06-2005 7:10 PM docpotato has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by nator, posted 09-07-2005 9:58 AM Silent H has not yet responded
 Message 29 by docpotato, posted 09-07-2005 10:22 AM Silent H has not yet responded

    
Silent H
Member (Idle past 3930 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 14 of 205 (240963)
09-07-2005 4:55 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Lizard Breath
09-06-2005 1:19 PM


Re: First Stirrings
From my sphere of influence, we began preping and sealing A/C dedicated to FEMA as early as 30 August. On the 29th, we groomed what we had in advance on our own. On Tuesday the 30th, we sealed 3 aircraft for the missions. The call came in late Wed night on the 31st to be on spot at New Orleans International by 1100 Zulu on Thursday the 1st. This was the earliest that the National Guard could have the runway cleared. They were scrambling to finish as we entered the pattern that Thursday morning.

I'm sorry but this does not work as an explanation of macroscale issues. You are giving a very select view, which itself does not mean much.

Here is a link to CNN's report on Katrina. You can visit the Timeline there titled "Katrina's days of devastation". In that Timeline you will find this order of events:

Aug 25- Katrina becomes Cat 1 and causes damage in Fla.

Aug 26- Kat goes to Cat 2, prediction that it will reach Cat 4 before reaching landfall in MS or LA. Both governors declare a state of emergency.

Aug 27- Kat goes to Cat 3, LA begins evacuation. Pres Bush declares a state of emergency in LA. Here is where you should begin. Besides "declaring" that, what efforts are made to "prepare" for potential crises?

Aug 28- Kat reaches 4 and 5. NO ordered to evacuate. Bush declares emergency in MS, and orders federal assistance. Great, what preparations were being made for assistance?

Aug 29- Kat reduces to 4 storm, and hits MS and LA, before reducing to tropical storm. You claim that at this time you began "grooming" on your own. What preps are being ordered?

Aug 30- NO begins to bear brunt of damage as levees break, including power/food shortages. US military begins to move planes and ships into the region at request of FEMA. This fits in with your description where you began prepping according to FEMA request.

Aug 31- Pres Bush does a fly by... then announces a major mobilization to help victims. Sorry, this is the timeline.

Sep 1- Violence and devastation continue. DHS makes support announcement below request from Gov. I get the idea that your units may very well have been delayed based on winds and clearing debris from runways. This is when you become involved, correct?

Sep 2- Pres makes more press flights, signs relief bill, and convoys arrive at convention center.

Sep 3- ACOE brings in generators and pumps.

Pretty good for Bush once he was allowed to take the field.

Horse hockey. Once he was allowed to take the field? First of all, who was holding him back? What on earth could possibly hold back a man that invaded a nation preemptively, from getting this disaster prepped preemptively? Second, this is a reverse of your earlier statements which suggested that everything was running according to a schedule and that it was logistics that were the holdup.

Now take a look at that timeline up above. It was back on the 25th that Bush should have had concern that things might not go well, and by the 26th there was no question. For a man that invades nations on pretexts that dangers might form 5-10 years down the line, why would a declaration of a state of emergency within the nation not come with concrete orders for prep?

And this does not mean just giant airlifts. Given that it was a large hurricane it is obvious that landing fields would be compromised. This means that ships, amphibious vehicles, and helicoptors (from both land and sea positions) would be more useful for beginning operations.

And this does not mean just food and water. Generators and pumps would be crucial, and not afterthoughts as it appears to be the case here. Same for the creation of federal command and control facilities so that the pres can get info in real time, as well as working as a backup for possible failure of local control facilities. Same for the preparation of armed security forces for deployment as needed given the potential for not just civil, but terrorist action.

On that last point I am still awaiting any response. Given that as historical fact, levees have been sabotaged in the US to create vast problems, how was that not seen as a very real possibility? The administration continues to claim that they could not have suspected both a hurricane and a levee break, when one could naturally lead tp the other anyway, and more importantly if we are all so concerned about terrorism and possible terrorist actions that is an obvious one.

And of course one could also expect terrorist attacks on responders or those caught in the hurricane's effects. So I don't buy your argument they couldn't expect average US citizens to act as they did, shooting at rescuers and looting. Regardless of what we think US citizens are capable DHS and FEMA are supposed to be taking into consideration what our enemies might do to us during an emergency. Right?


holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)
This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Lizard Breath, posted 09-06-2005 1:19 PM Lizard Breath has not yet responded

    
Silent H
Member (Idle past 3930 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 15 of 205 (240964)
09-07-2005 5:02 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Lizard Breath
09-06-2005 5:49 PM


Re: Bush isn't totally to blame, but he is the main man.
Bush said today that he is going to establish a review of what happened and find out what went right and what went wrong. He will probably find the answers and make 2nd half adjustments.

Yeah, elder Bush and Clinton called for the same thing. You think that this is actually going to focus on mistakes made at all levels, including this administration?

Why will this not follow the standard he has set for all previous investigations, which is that he and his office cannot come under scrutiny and a scapegoat must be found elsewhere?

The fact that you say he will find the answers and make "2nd half" adjustments speaks volumes. It of course means that it will not be an independent inquiry of which he might be found blameworthy. But I'm sure he'll make some half-assed adjustments, just like he did post 911 and Iraq intel fiascos.

Why you continue supporting this man when the facts are in your face, I have no clue. I did not start out against him. I started out vaguely for him. But his actions (or rather inactions and failures) are consistent and obvious at this point in time.

Why is this one single man so important to be seen as a flawless demigod?


holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)
This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Lizard Breath, posted 09-06-2005 5:49 PM Lizard Breath has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Mammuthus, posted 09-07-2005 6:11 AM Silent H has not yet responded

    
1
23456
...
14NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019