nfb: What the hell? Are people this idiotic?

[95TransAm]

Personally, I think this is BS. Having lived through Andrew, not to mention last year's hurricanes, it's all about the class of people. Down here in Florida, people pulled together. I remember Andrew when it wiped south Florida off the map..... you never saw people shooting at rescue workers. That is insanity.

I hate to think that this is true...but I'm gonna have to 100% agree with you on this one

[95TransAm]

I think I just heard one of the most disgusting and horrible things yet.

On the radio right now, they just talked about how apparently a guy shot (don't know if she died) his sister over a bag of ice.

How???? Why???? No unity whatsoever. How could you bring yourself to shooting a family member?!?!

I'm disgusted......

[Mark B]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe 1320

Personally, I think this is BS. Having lived through Andrew, not to mention last year's hurricanes, it's all about the class of people. Down here in Florida, people pulled together. I remember Andrew when it wiped south Florida off the map..... you never saw people shooting at rescue workers. That is insanity.

My thoughts exactly!

[2Fbodcru]

I voted for Bush, so I am not Bush bashing here, but this is another instance of something that could have been avoided. I saw on the news this morning, that the levees that failed and caused all of the flooding, were only rated for a category 3 hurricane. They said that a plan was put to the Bush administration last year, to shore up the levees to the point that they could withstand a category 5 hurricane. The proposal was denied. The bottom line is, that the “Powers that Be”, have had since the 1700‘s, when the work on the levees first began, to make them stronger. Everyone knew that this was going to happen eventually, but it was allowed to happen anyway. Is this just failure as usual, or is there some other reason. Who knows. If you look at the cost in dollars and human lives that this disaster is going to cause, it would have been a lot cheaper, to go ahead and begin preparing the levees to withstand this degree of flooding, and it should have been done a long time ago.

[2Fbodcru]

I would also like to note, that billions of dollars of tax payers hard earned money, are going to be spent to bring order to this situation and ultimately to rebuild New Orleans. This includes rebuilding the levees, but also even more billions, will be spent to make the levees strong enough to withstand the category 5’s (hopefully), like they should have done in the first place. So, basically with one stroke of the pen, the request to improve the strength of the levees was refused, and has resulted in an incomprehensible catastrophe. This could have been a story of success instead of a story of failure.
BTW, it sounds like we are actually seeing a part of our country being turned into a war zone-literally, if it doesn‘t improve.

[xxRillixx]

Personally, I think this is BS. Having lived through Andrew, not to mention last year's hurricanes, it's all about the class of people. Down here in Florida, people pulled together. I remember Andrew when it wiped south Florida off the map..... you never saw people shooting at rescue workers. That is insanity.

I totally agree. This is nothing new (hurricanes). It really sickens me that people can do something like that. SAD.

[Jeff_in_Atl]

I voted for Bush, so I am not Bush bashing here, but this is another instance of something that could have been avoided. I saw on the news this morning, that the levies that failed and caused all of the flooding, were only rated for a category 3 hurricane. They said that a plan was put to the Bush administration last year, to shore up the levies to the point that they could withstand a category 5 hurricane. The proposal was denied. The bottom line is, that the “Powers that Be”, have had since the 1700‘s, when the work on the levies first began, to make them stronger. Everyone knew that this was going to happen eventually, but it was allowed to happen anyway. Is this just failure as usual, or is there some other reason. Who knows. If you look at the cost in dollars and human lives that this disaster is going to cause, it would have been a lot cheaper, to go ahead and begin preparing the levies to withstand this degree of flooding, and it should have been done a long time ago.

Hind site is 20-20.

The US pulled some 500 tons of yellow cake uranium out of Iraq in 2004. (Some of the WMDs we did not find there.) If we had not have gone into Iraq and taken Saddam out, that might have been made into a nuclear bomb. Now if that bomb had been set off in New York the death toll would have been hundreds of thousands. We all know how the Muslim terrorist would just love to do that. If Bush had wanted to re-enforce the levees in Louisiana instead of taking Saddam out could you just imagine the out the people in the US would be having now if a nuclear bomb was set off as a result of not taking Saddam out?

Remember the governments only source of income is by taxing and the economy of the US can only stand for so much of that. You have to pick and choose what you can and can't do by analyzing the risk in taking no action at all verses trying to prevent something from happening. It's only a matter of time before the terrorist strike again here in the US. It seams clear that we should address that first.

Personally I think it's pretty dumb of someone to build a structure (much less a life) below sea level so close to the ocean the only thing keeping you from being destroyed is a man made levee. That's a ticking time bomb but you don't know when it's going to go off. Maybe the government should not have allowed the town to even be there. But how far should the government go to keep someone from doing something stupid.

[Bug Lover]

I voted for Bush, so I am not Bush bashing here, but this is another instance of something that could have been avoided. I saw on the news this morning, that the levies that failed and caused all of the flooding, were only rated for a category 3 hurricane. They said that a plan was put to the Bush administration last year, to shore up the levies to the point that they could withstand a category 5 hurricane. The proposal was denied. The bottom line is, that the “Powers that Be”, have had since the 1700‘s, when the work on the levies first began, to make them stronger. Everyone knew that this was going to happen eventually, but it was allowed to happen anyway. Is this just failure as usual, or is there some other reason. Who knows. If you look at the cost in dollars and human lives that this disaster is going to cause, it would have been a lot cheaper, to go ahead and begin preparing the levies to withstand this degree of flooding, and it should have been done a long time ago.

Our government can only do so much without taxing its citizens to death. There are a lot of unanswered questions to this too, so don't go blaming anyone in particular. Isn't it possible that this proposal was made to previous administrations too? Why couldn't the state of Louisiana have improved the levees themselves? New Orleans is a huge tourist town - couldn't the tourism have helped pay for the improvements?

Just a little food for thought.

[Steel2686]

I would also like to note, that billions of dollars of tax payers hard earned money, are going to be spent to bring order to this situation and ultimately to rebuild New Orleans. This includes rebuilding the levies, but also even more billions, will be spent to make the levies strong enough to withstand the category 5’s (hopefully), like they should have done in the first place. So, basically with one stroke of the pen, the request to improve the strength of the levies was refused, and has resulted is an incomprehensible catastrophe. This could have been a story of success instead of a story of failure.
BTW, it sounds like we are actually seeing a part of our country being turned into a war zone-literally, if it doesn‘t improve.

That is IF the insurance companies allow anyone to build there again. Right now, it doesn't sound like they will. Why would they allow a risk like that again?

[95TransAm]

Hind site is 20-20.

The US pulled some 500 tons of yellow cake uranium out of Iraq in 2004. (Some of the WMDs we did not find there.) If we had not have gone into Iraq and taken Saddam out, that might have been made into a nuclear bomb. Now if that bomb had been set off in New York the death toll would have been hundreds of thousands. We all know how the Muslim terrorist would just love to do that. If Bush had wanted to re-enforce the levees in Louisiana instead of taking Saddam out could you just imagine the out the people in the US would be having now if a nuclear bomb was set off as a result of not taking Saddam out?

Remember the governments only source of income is by taxing and the economy of the US can only stand for so much of that. You have to pick and choose what you can and can't do by analyzing the risk in taking no action at all verses trying to prevent something from happening. It's only a matter of time before the terrorist strike again here in the US. It seams clear that we should address that first.

Personally I think it's pretty dumb of someone to build a structure (much less a life) below sea level so close to the ocean the only thing keeping you from being destroyed is a man made levee. That's a ticking time bomb but you don't know when it's going to go off. Maybe the government should not have allowed the town to even be there. But how far should the government go to keep someone from doing something stupid.

I agree. I read an article saying how Bush was told that the possibility of a category 5 hurricane hitting New Orleans would cause total devastation (as we now know), but the chances of it were very remote. When you have to make the decision of spending money on a clear and present danger, or something that's remote...I think I don't have to explain the logical answer.

I do also agree with you as well 2Fbodcru, I wish actions were implemented earlier to avoid all of this. In the end, it would have been a cheaper way and would have prevented the many deaths that occured.

The way I look at it, is we only have so much money to spend. To say that a category 5 hurricane hitting NO and putting the city under water was on top of the list would seem ridiculous. If you were to hear on the news a couple years ago how many millions were being spent to prevent NO from being submerged due to the remote chance of a huge hurricane hitting it head on...I think we all would have laughed at that statement, and been p*ssed off on what our tax dollars were going towards.

[Red20170]

Lack of class yes… But try to look at it from another view. People are stuck in a city that has to be 100% evacuated. The city is 80% under water. Several week before anybody can return They have nothing but the clothes on your back. They are stuck with 30,000 to 60,000 other refugees trying to get out. Their home, job, way of life is gone. They have no place to go. No money, Food water are scarce. Thousands dead around Them. Zero infrastructure to rely on. Little police, No 911. People who are desperate like this, Lose all sense of rationale and judgment. It turns into every man for himself. I still say let this be a lesson learned because you are seeing what happens with a total break down. I lived in Homestead/Cutler Ridge when Andrew hit. The national guard was moved in fast and their was access to these areas to keep order. This storm was a totally different animal. The wide spread devastation with this storm doesn't even come close to Andrew. With Andrew you could still drive 30 minutes to power, water, food, home depot etc..

[Jeff_in_Atl]

That is IF the insurance companies allow anyone to build there again. Right now, it doesn't sound like they will. Why would they allow a risk like that again?

The insurance company can't stop them from building there. They can refuse to insure them again if they do. They can raise the rates for flood insurance for them. They have done that for people in Florida. Then the people in Florida complain about their rates being so high.

[Red20170]

I have a question for the engineer folks. How are they gonna stop that water from coming out the levy?

[Steel2686]

The insurance company can't stop them from building there. They can refuse to insure them again if they do. They can raise the rates for flood insurance for them. They have done that for people in Florida. Then the people in Florida complain about their rates being so high.

That's more or less what I meant, but who's going to want to build where an insurance company won't cover you? Especially after a disaster of this nature has already proven possible, and we're just entering a ten to twelve year cycle of hurricane activity according to meteorologists.

[Bug Lover]

Lack of class yes… But try to look at it from another view. People are stuck in a city that has to be 100% evacuated. The city is 80% under water. Several week before anybody can return They have nothing but the clothes on your back. They are stuck with 30,000 to 60,000 other refugees trying to get out. Their home, job, way of life is gone. They have no place to go. No money, Food water are scarce. Thousands dead around Them. Zero infrastructure to rely on. Little police, No 911. People who are desperate like this, Lose all sense of rationale and judgment. It turns into every man for himself. I still say let this be a lesson learned because you are seeing what happens with a total break down. I lived in Homestead/Cutler Ridge when Andrew hit. The national guard was moved in fast and their was access to these areas to keep order. This storm was a totally different animal. The wide spread devastation with this storm doesn't even come close to Andrew. With Andrew you could still drive 30 minutes to power, water, food, home depot etc..

There's a BIG difference between stealing television sets and stealing food. They can't use the TVs, so what's the point?