Thu, 01 Sep 2005

Katrina and flood control

Emperor Palpatine says I'm silly because I blame dubya for a massive hurricane basically destroying a major US city. Well, no, and don't put words in my mouth, thanks.

My point is not only that if all you can do is sign a few cheques, at least have the respect for the victims and show up on TV having fun a few hours later of reporting the most destructive natural disaster in your country. Appearing to care a bit about what's going on seems like a good idea, when you're POTUS.

Besides the appearances, there's other stuff you can do before the hurricane hits. For example, you can try not to divert flood-control funds to your little adventure in the Middle East. It's sad to learn that most of the money earmarked to the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project (SELA) suddenly got diverted to Iraq when things started to go too wrong around the Persian Gulf.

The ongoing repairs to levees and other flood control measures in the area were not finished when they should have, and now the nice city of New Orleans is a deadly lake. I'm not saying levees and dams are the ultimate solution but they surely would have helped in this case, as the tsunami alert systems in the Pacific help when they need to.

But I guess Jaldhar thinks all the war stuff was really necessary, and the money was worth it. Probably what the American voter really cares about, according to him. I have this utopia in my head, it could have been used for other matters, like fixing some of the social problems in the US that make your urgent rescue operations a problem because with the amount of guns out of control in the US, your helicopters get shot. Or helping getting rid of famine, plagues and epidemies in those spots of the world where the poverty situation only generates what you call "terrorism". Or simply helping your economy to be less polluting, so your country doesn't contribute half of the emissions to the atmosphere that are causing global warming, and, for example, make hurricanes and typhoons like Katrina even more deadly.

"My point is not only that if all you can do is sign a few cheques, at least have the respect for the victims and show up on TV having fun a few hours later of reporting the most destructive natural disaster in your country."

Come on man, Bush is a president not a dictator. He was holding a guitar, not "showing up on TV". He is not responsible for channel programming. And that is a good thing, isn't it? Not to mention, how in the world is anyone supposed to know what all other channels are going to air?

As to the money... next time new september 11 hits, are you going to ask "why were the funds diverted to prevent such unprobable things as floods if we have real terrorist to hunt?"

Oh, and no, poverty does not generates "terrorism". Somehow I doubt that.

Posted by Yury at Thu Sep 1 23:55:08 2005

I don't think you're silly, I think you are plain stupid.  The flood control money you talk about being diverted would have been used for levee repair, not for making the levees Cat. 5 hurricane resistant.  And guess what, the levees broke in areas that weren't slated for repair, so the money wouldn't have done a damn thing to prevent what happened. They've known for decades that the levees were only rated to withstand a Cat. 3 hurricane.  Why they weren't upgraded to Cat. 5 is beyond me, but I can tell you it had nothing to do with President Bush. 

You sir, are a dumbass.

Posted by JQ at Fri Sep 2 00:36:43 2005

"the nice city of New Orleans is a deadly lake. I'm not saying levees and dams are the ultimate solution but they surely would have helped in this case, "

What basis do you have for that statement? Do you know why the levee failed? Do you know what the construction programs were planning on fixing? At the very least, you don't know the reason for the failures, since nobody does. That makes this "surely would have helped in this case, " statement pretty much valueless speculation after the fact.

"I have this utopia in my head, it could have been used for other matters, like fixing some of the social problems in the US"

Most of our social and fiscal problems are caused by overdependance on others and an unwillingness to take personal responsibility. There aren't many government spending programs that can fix either of those things.

"Or helping getting rid of famine, plagues and epidemies in those spots of the world where the poverty situation only generates what you call "terrorism"."

That's part of the point behind Iraq/Afganhistan. Sure, we're having to overthrow a couple dictators to do it, but the entire developed world (aside from the US, which isn't old enough) moved away from absolute monarchies and dictatorships before they really started thriving.

But maybe the alternative really is spending programs and grants to the developing world. Sadly, incredible amounts of aid money get diverted away from charitable work thanks to corrupt regimes in the affected countries. Personally, I'd rather my tax dollars go to support things other than the Ugandan army. (And so would other people: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4657139.stm )

"Or simply helping your economy to be less polluting,"

That's an easy potshot, considering the US economy is currently the largest in the world. Scaled agaisnt GDP, the US is ninth on the list of carbon dioxide polluters. Nuclear waste, we're 14th.

"so your country doesn't contribute half of the emissions to the atmosphere that are causing global warming, and, for example, make hurricanes and typhoons like Katrina even more deadly."

So, it's our fault? :-)

Posted by mschaef at Fri Sep 2 00:51:46 2005

I wanted to comment on the social issue spending. I totally agree that the social issues should be placed higher on the totem pole of America's priorities. With that said, I believe that the reason for these social struggles has more to do with individual responsibility to our fellow man than our government. One thing our government is meant to do is protect the nation's sovereignty. I believe it is each and every person's responsibility to look after our neighbors. My point here is that I think criticizing war is one thing, but when we say the money should have been earmarked to social issues, we mere point out that we don't want to take responsibility for how we don't give lick about those around us.

I hope this is a constructive comment btw. Your post struck a cord with me today, so thank you for sharing your thoughts. I only meant to spark thinking as well.

Posted by Eric at Fri Sep 2 03:41:36 2005

Where are Mississippi's and Louisiana's National Guards? You've guessed it. IRAQ. http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/24861/

Posted by David Fu at Fri Sep 2 07:23:59 2005

mschaef: What basis do you have for that statement?

During maintenance routines, areas where the protection could be seen as weaker than average could have been found, for example.

And based on what a country like USA attacks Iraq? What prove do we have that invading a country will stop Al-Qaeda (or any other armed group) from acting like they did?

Oh, right, Chile. Iraq perhaps needs a dictator that make 20K+ people disappear without trace, hoping that among those 20K+ go many of the "terrorists".

Right.

Posted by Jesus Climent at Fri Sep 2 10:55:15 2005

Jordi, the only thing you can add to your post is that New Orleans needs US Army and US Army is all over the world, not at home.

Everyday more and more people hates american diplomacy (war of course).

Don´t think that "God bless america" is enough.

Forget my english.
-----

Jordi, lo único que te falta por añadir a la entrada es que Nueva Orleans necesita al ejército americano y el ejército está repartido por todo el mundo, no en casa.

Cada día más gente odia la política americana (la guerra, claro).

No piensen que con "Dios bendiga américa" está todo hecho.

Posted by arpia49 at Fri Sep 2 11:31:28 2005

"Scaled agaisnt GDP, the US is ninth on the list of carbon dioxide polluters."

Hey wiseguy, if nine is the actual number, then why the USA still refuses to sign Kyoto protocol?

Posted by stripe4 at Fri Sep 2 15:00:14 2005

"Hey wiseguy, if nine is the actual number, "

You're right, I should've posted my reference:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/env_pol_car_dio_fro_fos_fue_200_gdp

"Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, International Energy Annual, 2002, and International Energy Outlook, 2001"

Posted by mschaef at Fri Sep 2 15:47:28 2005

"During maintenance routines, areas where the protection could be seen as weaker than average could have been found, for example."

That's still speculation, at best, and not very productive. With the information we have now, we can say that the budget decision was a bad one. With the information we have now, we can say that we should've stopped 19 specific people from bording planes on the morning of September 11th, 2001. But nobody can do that ahead of time.

(You'd be right if you said that we knew New Orleans was a risk ahead of time, but we know about other risks too, and don't have the money to fix them all. Nobody does.)

The real tragedies in New Orleans, IMO are these. 1)when the mayor ordered the evacuation, he didn't provide transportation for his poorest citizens without cars, and 2) for some reason, five days after the levee failure, we still haven't put together a decent response. This is a tragic embarrasment for my country.

"And based on what a country like USA attacks Iraq? What prove do we have that invading a country will stop Al-Qaeda (or any other armed group) from acting like they did?"

What proof do we have that tolerance, appeasement, or withdrawal will help, either? They've failed horribly in the past.

Keep in mind, that I can't say I'm happy about this.

Posted by mschaef at Fri Sep 2 16:30:52 2005

Couldn't have put it better my self.  Most of the pictures are no different from 3rd world disasters - this in what is supposed to be the richest country in the world.

Posted by Nermal at Fri Sep 2 17:18:02 2005

Hehe. Got to love Americans talking about democracy.

Hint: choosing between two white, rich, right-wing males does NOT equal democracy.

Oh, and the gun lobby must be happy now, with everyone shooting one another in NO.

America. I'd say learn from history, but you don't even have much of a history. Sigh!

Posted by Watcher at Fri Sep 2 19:50:46 2005

And it's still a hell of a lot better than living in your country.  Go America!

Posted by JQ at Sat Sep 3 00:49:35 2005

This week we went back in time a couple of hundred years. The Katrina disaster reminds me of the Tinanic. People in the water dying and no one helping them. Sad, sad, sad. Bush is too busy invading other countries and wishing he could  "rule the world" than care about our own citizens. This whole situation is a total disgrace. Again after time again our government has let us down.

Posted by Roger at Sat Sep 3 05:46:45 2005

Hi:

That's an easy potshot, considering the US economy is currently the largest in the world. Scaled agaisnt GDP, the US is ninth on the list of carbon dioxide polluters. Nuclear waste, we're 14th.

Well, how about you also tell us where you found this statistic you moron. what are we supposed to search for it ourselves? Or just believe what you say? I don't even doubt that it may be true, however what pisses me off is that you are just talk, talk, talk.

Thanks

Posted by sven at Fri Jan 27 17:21:24 2006

Hi:

That's an easy potshot, considering the US economy is currently the largest in the world. Scaled agaisnt GDP, the US is ninth on the list of carbon dioxide polluters. Nuclear waste, we're 14th.

Well, how about you also tell us where you found this statistic you moron. what are we supposed to search for it ourselves? Or just believe what you say? I don't even doubt that it may be true, however what pisses me off is that you are just talk, talk, talk.

Thanks

Posted by sven at Fri Jan 27 17:21:44 2006