Hurricane

Aug 31, 2005 10:03

What's the deal with having absolutely no coverage of the hurricane? I keep hearing that this is the worst hurricane in known history and the damage being caused is worse that 9/11 and the tsumani. This has been going on for a few days now and it seems like no one is doing anything to help. remeber how "horrible" our gov/t was when we waited 3 ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 5

allanc August 31 2005, 08:29:09 UTC
Because most of the coverage would just be "Welp. Things are still wet, toxic, and disgusting. And they show no signs of clearing up any time soon." Followed by current estimated body counts.

How will cancelling normal programming to say that over and over again help anything?

Reply

allanc September 1 2005, 05:41:34 UTC
Also, anyone who says that Katrina was worse than the tsunami is just flat out wrong. Pessimistic news reports are measuring Katrina-related deaths in the hundreds. Tsunami deaths ended up being measured in the hundreds of thousands. There might be more property damage from Katrina, simply because the US is a wealthier nation than those hit by the tsunami, and it's built up a lot more, but even if that's the case it certainly can't compare with three orders of magnitude more fatalities.

Reply


divinus August 31 2005, 17:20:28 UTC
Sorry about your brother, whos situation is downright frightening. All those chemical plants and things down there are going to be turning the entire area into a toxic wasteland. Not a good situation.

I wish we'd had the Louisiana National Guard there to help out, but during times of 'war' the NG comes under the Navy, and we know where they are right now. =(

Reply

allanc September 1 2005, 05:53:05 UTC
Actually, I've heard that the US military is staffed to deal with two full-scale wars and a natural disaster simultaneously. Last I heard, about a third of the national guard was, in fact, being mobilized (the other two thirds being used in Iraq and kept in reserve, respectively).

Of course, I have no really authoritative information on this (i.e., read it in a slashdot post), so if you have real information, I'll bow to your greater knowledge.

Reply

divinus September 3 2005, 01:20:35 UTC
I don't have much in the way of authoritative information either, but that information seems a bit suspect. We might have the raw personnel, but I'm not sure about the logistical support for that sort of thing. I think the best evidence is the sluggish response we're having to the current situation. Afterall, if two-thirds of the National Guard are undeployed, why are they bringing back aircraft and national guardsmen from Iraq to deal with Louisiana?

Reply


Leave a comment

Up