Farrakhan says that Bush purposefully destroyed New Orleans...

[EGarrett]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bw001Jqz7HY

A 25-foot crater under the barge? Burn marks?

[Redtail]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bw001Jqz7HY

A 25-foot crater under the barge? Burn marks?

Yes. We Black folks have some crazy people too.

[Dave1001]

Why do we care what Farakhan says? Shouldn't we care more about credible people with actual influence like Barack Obama and Bill Richardson? I thought Farakhan already gave his last speech and retired. So shouldn't we be ignoring him?

[Dave1001]

Yes. We Black folks have some crazy people too.

Well to be fair, by a preponderance of the evidence Farakhan would be white.

[EGarrett]

Why do we care what Farakhan says? Shouldn't we care more about credible people with actual influence like Barack Obama and Bill Richardson? I thought Farakhan already gave his last speech and retired. So shouldn't we be ignoring him?I thought the Conspiracy Theory board was specifically for humoring insane people with baseless claims?

[LashL]

Hoo boy. Farrakhan refers to himself in the third person repeatedly ~ something that always causes my "nutcase detector" to go to red line and/or explode, particularly when it is coupled with unfounded accusations of heinous crimes committed for no apparent reason.

[David Wong]

And... what did Bush gain from doing this?

A boost in the polls?

A guarantee for his party to win the midterm elections?

What?

[Zep]

And... what did Bush gain from doing this?

A boost in the polls?

A guarantee for his party to win the midterm elections?

What?He blew up a barge! What more does any right-thinking Texan want than to blow something up every now and then?

[Unfit4Command]

And... what did Bush gain from doing this?

A boost in the polls?

A guarantee for his party to win the midterm elections?

What?

My thoughts exactly. The Katrina disaster was the point in Bush's second term where his polls dipped into the 30s and have yet to fully recover, and probably never will.

[Redtail]

Well to be fair, by a preponderance of the evidence Farakhan would be white.

Many would say that about me in theory, but in practice? Not so much.

[skepticalcriticalguy]

And... what did Bush gain from doing this?

A boost in the polls?

A guarantee for his party to win the midterm elections?

What?

It could be argued (and is argued in that region) that it was by design, as a land grab. People are losing their land to the banks big time down there.

Another theory is that it was a "dry run" (ugggh) for a martial law situation. Remember when they announced they would be confiscating all guns? And the battle between Bush and Blanco over federalizing law enforcememnt was huge.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/050912/12leadall.b.htm

Also, the oil companies sure used it to jack their prices. But that doesn't have anything to do with the levees, so never mind that. It just irritated me that I went broke buying gas while helping with the recovery.

[skepticalcriticalguy]

Also, keep in mind that in 1927, the Corp of Engineers DID blow up a levee to route the water, destroying the southern (poor) parishes to save the richer areas.

Sorry if that sounds like I'm editorializing. I guess I could word it differently; they sacrificed the less populated parishes to save the city. There, that sounds more noble.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/050912/12leadall.b.htm

[Brainache]

Please pardon my ignorance of US geography, but wasn't New Orleans built on a swamp at or below sea level in a hurricane zone?

If anyone is to blame it is the people who founded it. I blame the French.

[fuelair]

He blew up a barge! What more does any right-thinking Texan want than to blow something up every now and then?

Well, gosh all heck - I'm not a Texan and I want to blow up stuff every now and then too!!:D :D

[gumboot]

Please pardon my ignorance of US geography, but wasn't New Orleans built on a swamp at or below sea level in a hurricane zone?

If anyone is to blame it is the people who founded it. I blame the French.



I equate those that blame Bush for New Orleans' fate with someone blaming Helen Clarke if a volcano errupted in downtown Auckland or an earthquake levelled Wellington.

The city required enormous walls of earth to prevent flooding. It is located in the planet's most prolific cyclic storm generating zone. You do the math.

-Gumboot

[skepticalcriticalguy]

Please pardon my ignorance of US geography, but wasn't New Orleans built on a swamp at or below sea level in a hurricane zone?

If anyone is to blame it is the people who founded it. I blame the French.

You're basically correct. But its economic geography is that it is in a very important shipping point; where the Mississippi river meets the Gulf of Mexico. So, regardless of its being below sea level, in a hurricane zone (like a good chunk of the country is), etc, it evolved.

When you have a major port, and oil industry, you need people to work. They have to live somewhere. And those people need mini malls and Mickey D's and Wal-Mart. And those places need workers too. And those workers have to live somewhere. And all these people, rich and poor alike, need tasty music. And musicians have to live somewhere too. So, voila! A city evolved.

Now, if only the US of A cared about its infrastructure enough to keep that city safe.

Other cities in other countries are below sea level, and their levee/gate systems actually work. Amsterdam? (I think). Maybe cities in Norway and/or Sweden? And Venice.

[skepticalcriticalguy]

I equate those that blame Bush for New Orleans' fate with someone blaming Helen Clarke if a volcano errupted in downtown Auckland or an earthquake levelled Wellington.

The city required enormous walls of earth to prevent flooding. It is located in the planet's most prolific cyclic storm generating zone. You do the math.

-Gumboot

Yeah, it was pretty much doomed. Now add into the math the lack of upkeep to the levees. Bad formula, all around.

Miami, Tampa, and New York are sitting ducks too. And Houston/Galveston (they dodged a big bullet when Rita veered off).

[Pardalis]

I blame the French.

http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&q=sophie+marceau&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2

I can't stress this enough.

[skepticalcriticalguy]

Hoo boy. Farrakhan refers to himself in the third person repeatedly ~ something that always causes my "nutcase detector" to go to red line and/or explode, particularly when it is coupled with unfounded accusations of heinous crimes committed for no apparent reason.

Farrakhan took over as leader of The Nation of Islam when Malcolm X was killed. Malcolm X was getting less radical, and denouncing violence; moving more toward the MLK way. Blammo! He's killed, and Farrakhan drags the movement back toward violence.

[skepticalcriticalguy]

Please pardon my ignorance of US geography, but wasn't New Orleans built on a swamp at or below sea level in a hurricane zone?

If anyone is to blame it is the people who founded it. I blame the French.

Wasn't it the French Canadians?

[Brainache]

Well that wasn't the French I was thinking of. I meant this guy:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/Louis_XIV_of_France.jpg/300px-

Hmm nice legs.

[gumboot]

Other cities in other countries are below sea level, and their levee/gate systems actually work. Amsterdam? (I think). Maybe cities in Norway and/or Sweden? And Venice.



Yes but they're not located in an area that generates more cyclic storms than any place on earth.

Venice is actually in a long-standing State of Alert because it's sinking, and hugely vunerable to flooding. Many Venitians live only in the upper floors of their houses, the lower floors having been claimed by the water.


The reality is the city was at threat from a major natural disaster. It was only a matter of time. You cannot completely protect something as a large as a city from any sort of major natural disaster. You can design it as well as you want. Mother Nature will always do one better.

-Gumboot

[Unfit4Command]

Well that wasn't the French I was thinking of. I meant this guy:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/Louis_XIV_of_France.jpg/300px-

Hmm nice legs.

I've always thought that pictures of old Frenchmen were creepy...

[skepticalcriticalguy]

Yes but they're not located in an area that generates more cyclic storms than any place on earth.

Venice is actually in a long-standing State of Alert because it's sinking, and hugely vunerable to flooding. Many Venitians live only in the upper floors of their houses, the lower floors having been claimed by the water.


The reality is the city was at threat from a major natural disaster. It was only a matter of time. You cannot completely protect something as a large as a city from any sort of major natural disaster. You can design it as well as you want. Mother Nature will always do one better.

-Gumboot

That's what I was trying to say. Cities evolve because of the economics of their location. And some are doomed. Like LA and San Francisco. And Miami and Tampa.

Just an aside; everybody talks about New Orleans; the whole coast of Mississippi got whiped out. (Biloxi, Bay Saint Louis, Gulfport, etc). Goners. And that was from the storm surge alone; no levee issues. People forget that.

[Zep]

Well, gosh all heck - I'm not a Texan and I want to blow up stuff every now and then too!!:D :DWelcome to Houston, pardner! ;)

[boloboffin]

I equate those that blame Bush for New Orleans' fate with someone blaming Helen Clarke if a volcano errupted in downtown Auckland or an earthquake levelled Wellington.

The city required enormous walls of earth to prevent flooding. It is located in the planet's most prolific cyclic storm generating zone. You do the math.

-Gumboot

What do you think about people who blame Bush for his administration's craptacular response to New Orleans' fate? I mean, come on - nobody in FEMA could watch CNN and find out about the people in the community center?

Ah, forget it. Politics, here we come, right? They didn't blow the levee on purpose to grab the land.

[gumboot]

What do you think about people who blame Bush for his administration's craptacular response to New Orleans' fate? I mean, come on - nobody in FEMA could watch CNN and find out about the people in the community center?



As I understand it there were issues between the state and federal governments?

It is standard for the media to start lathering blame on governments after disasters. Generally the "shock and awe" stories last 2 or 3 days before the heart-wrenching "inspiring stories of human triumph and heart wrenching stories of personal tragedy" kick in. They usually only last a few more days. Within a week the finger pointing stories generally kick in. The tried and true angle for natural disasters is to first criticise the slow lack lustre response and later start questioning why people weren't warned in advance.

Auckland recently did some extensive Civil Defence exercises, because the city holds 1/4 of the country's population and is pretty vunerable to natural disasters. Imagine New York City, but with 75 million people, build on a volcanic field, in the cyclic storm zone, partially built on reclaimed land, low lying with oceans on both sides, and right within the tsunami path of a highly active explosive volcano.

You get the idea...

It would take authorities 10 days to completely evacuate Auckland in the event of a disaster. That's 10 days if it happens BEFORE the disaster occurs, and the infrastructure is undamaged.

Now think, how often do you get 10 days warning that a natural disaster is serious enough you HAVE to evacuate a million people?

New Orleans' metropolitan population is about the same as Auckland's, so let's apply the 10 day warning figure.

Katrina hit New Orleans on 29th August. Ten days before that the storm didn't even exist.

Katrina formed on August 23rd, which means there was only 6 days warning. Further more, it was not immediately a high-category storm. It was also predicted the storm would pass east of the city.

An advisory evacuation order was given on the evening of August 27th. Later that evening the National Hurricane Centre advised authorities of the seriousness of the situation, and the following morning a mandatory evacuation order was delivered.

They had less than 24 hours to evacuate a million people (let's just look at New Orleans for now, not the other areas). Astoundingly, they almost managed this. 80% of the population did evacuate safely. Of the 20% that remained, they did so of their own choice, and were breaking the law by doing so.

So I feel the efforts of authorities were exemplary in terms of working to try avoid the human disaster (nothing could be done about the level of material damage).

Certainly of the 20% that remained, they may indeed have been some that were incapable of evacuating themselves, and the authorities were lacking in terms of providing transport for these people. However I would ask, realistically, how much resources we can expect governments to provide within a 2 day timeframe.

-Gumboot

[skepticalcriticalguy]

An advisory evacuation order was given on the evening of August 27th. Later that evening the National Hurricane Centre advised authorities of the seriousness of the situation, and the following morning a mandatory evacuation order was delivered.

They had less than 24 hours to evacuate a million people (let's just look at New Orleans for now, not the other areas). Astoundingly, they almost managed this. 80% of the population did evacuate safely. Of the 20% that remained, they did so of their own choice, and were breaking the law by doing so.

So I feel the efforts of authorities were exemplary in terms of working to try avoid the human disaster (nothing could be done about the level of material damage).


-Gumboot

Good analysis. The mayor of New Orleans gets slammed still for not evacuating the city. He claims 90%. You say 80%. Either is unprecedented, and an incredible feet.

Sure, they should have had a better plan, with buses/trains/whatever available. Maybe next time. (But I doubt it).

But Houston didn't even come close to that percentage when they evacuated for Rita. More like 50% (or less), and it was a traffic-jam from hell. And of course, after watching what happened to New Orleans, they called for the evacuation immediately, so they could avoid political criticism.

[Dave1001]

Here's a conspiracy theory: did Farakhan collaborate with the CIA or some sort of other U.S. govt. entity to assassinate a Malcolm X that was moving away from cartoonish racialism?

If people like Farakhan are such threats to the system, why do they have lifespans of a japanese grandmother?

[skepticalcriticalguy]

Here's a conspiracy theory: did Farakhan collaborate with the CIA or some sort of other U.S. govt. entity to assassinate a Malcolm X that was moving away from cartoonish racialism?

If people like Farakhan are such threats to the system, why do they have lifespans of a japanese grandmother?

Good point! (I think).

I recently read something about just that; that Farrakhan is CIA. I've also read that Jessie Jackson is too. Each chosen as the successor to the assassinated.

Want the links? It's interesting.

[njslim]

Wasn't it the French Canadians?

Hey - I'm French Canadian! My grandparents defected from Canada, braving
the ice choked St Lawrence River to arrive in the land of warmth and freedom!

Guess I'm guilty!

[skepticalcriticalguy]

Of the 20% that remained, they did so of their own choice, and were breaking the law by doing so.

-Gumboot

As I understand it, this is not actually true. The "mandatory evacuation" isn't a legal thing. More like a "we strongly recommend you get the hell out of the city" kind of thing. I don't think it was/is legally binding in any way.

If I'm wrong, somebody please correct me.

[gumboot]

As I understand it, this is not actually true. The "mandatory evacuation" isn't a legal thing. More like a "we strongly recommend you get the hell out of the city" kind of thing. I don't think it was/is legally binding in any way.

If I'm wrong, somebody please correct me.



I think it must be, because after people started resisting (even shooting at rescuers!) the National Guard were using force to evict people.

It wouldn't surprise me. Under New Zealand law, if you fail to comply with a Civil Defence Emergency Directive you could be charged.

-Gumboot

[skepticalcriticalguy]

I think it must be, because after people started resisting (even shooting at rescuers!) the National Guard were using force to evict people.

It wouldn't surprise me. Under New Zealand law, if you fail to comply with a Civil Defence Emergency Directive you could be charged.

-Gumboot

There is no actual proof that rescuers were shot at. If you have any, please let me know. It was reported, but then later, it was reported that it might have been misreported. I think that was a CYA deal. (No, not CIA, CYA. "Cover yer arse.")

And the National Guard TRIED to evict people, but when it came down to it, if they refused to leave, they were not forced.

Tomorrow I'll dig into this. But if you have any info, please post it. I think the "mandatory evacuation" was just a semantic thing. You can't force people to leave their homes. Or give up their weapons. (Not yet, anyway).

[gumboot]

Good analysis. The mayor of New Orleans gets slammed still for not evacuating the city. He claims 90%. You say 80%. Either is unprecedented, and an incredible feet.

Sure, they should have had a better plan, with buses/trains/whatever available. Maybe next time. (But I doubt it).

But Houston didn't even come close to that percentage when they evacuated for Rita. More like 50% (or less), and it was a traffic-jam from hell. And of course, after watching what happened to New Orleans, they called for the evacuation immediately, so they could avoid political criticism.



Done some more reading into the specific criticism. to be honest until the question was asked of me, I didn't know much about Katrina. I have been frantically researching. :)

I'm actually stunned at the speed of the response. From the criticisms, I was expecting it to have taken weeks. It took days and hours.

Incredible.

I honestly don't understand what people expected? Should the USS Enterprise have just used its transporter to beam down tonnes of supplies (created in that nifty food maker machine) from orbit?

Seriously...

One thing that seemed to leap out was FEMA preventing people from assisting until it had been approved - allegedly resulting in rescue efforts and supplies being delayed.

I find this interesting, especially when you look at 9/11.

No one can dispute the courage and kindness of any person or group who selflessly dives headlong into assisting with a disaster.

But often good intentions can cause chaos.

If rescue efforts aren't managed, you get a horrific mess, especially when the situation is this sort of scale, and especially if the "victims" are actively involved in attacking their rescuers (which was happening in New Orleans).

Now let's take a look at 9/11. A primary cited reason for the number of FDNY deaths is not actually due to the unexpected collapse. The collapse was expected, and indeed FDNY ordered an evacuation of the buildings.

Interestingly, not a single fireman was lost from the first fire house that responded.

The problem was firemen flocked in from all over the city. Firemen that hadn't been dispatched. firemen that weren't on comms and didn't report in to command centres. Firemen that were off duty and just saw it on TV.

It was an utter shambles. And that shambles probably cost lives.

Now multiply it to the scale of the Katrina Disaster. If FEMA just let anyone come charging in willy nilly to "help" you'd only make matters worse. People were trying to fly in to rescue others. People just wanted to bumble along whatever route they felt like.

You do that, in a region that has just suffered a severe disaster, and people are going to get killed.

-Gumboot

[skepticalcriticalguy]

Done some more reading into the specific criticism. to be honest until the question was asked of me, I didn't know much about Katrina. I have been frantically researching. :)

I'm actually stunned at the speed of the response. From the criticisms, I was expecting it to have taken weeks. It took days and hours.

Incredible.

I honestly don't understand what people expected? Should the USS Enterprise have just used its transporter to beam down tonnes of supplies (created in that nifty food maker machine) from orbit?

Seriously...

One thing that seemed to leap out was FEMA preventing people from assisting until it had been approved - allegedly resulting in rescue efforts and supplies being delayed.

I find this interesting, especially when you look at 9/11.

No one can dispute the courage and kindness of any person or group who selflessly dives headlong into assisting with a disaster.

But often good intentions can cause chaos.

If rescue efforts aren't managed, you get a horrific mess, especially when the situation is this sort of scale, and especially if the "victims" are actively involved in attacking their rescuers (which was happening in New Orleans).

Now let's take a look at 9/11. A primary cited reason for the number of FDNY deaths is not actually due to the unexpected collapse. The collapse was expected, and indeed FDNY ordered an evacuation of the buildings.

Interestingly, not a single fireman was lost from the first fire house that responded.

The problem was firemen flocked in from all over the city. Firemen that hadn't been dispatched. firemen that weren't on comms and didn't report in to command centres. Firemen that were off duty and just saw it on TV.

It was an utter shambles. And that shambles probably cost lives.

Now multiply it to the scale of the Katrina Disaster. If FEMA just let anyone come charging in willy nilly to "help" you'd only make matters worse. People were trying to fly in to rescue others. People just wanted to bumble along whatever route they felt like.

You do that, in a region that has just suffered a severe disaster, and people are going to get killed.

-Gumboot

I really wish you guys could discuss a topic without twisting it into a 9/11 thing. It might help your credibility.

I also wonder where you're getting your info about Katrina. Of course, there is a TON of stuff out there. And you'll get all the political angles.

But, bottom line. If CNN could get in easily, so could bottled water. And it was days, not hours.

[westprog]

Good analysis. The mayor of New Orleans gets slammed still for not evacuating the city. He claims 90%. You say 80%. Either is unprecedented, and an incredible feet.

Sure, they should have had a better plan, with buses/trains/whatever available. Maybe next time. (But I doubt it).

But Houston didn't even come close to that percentage when they evacuated for Rita. More like 50% (or less), and it was a traffic-jam from hell. And of course, after watching what happened to New Orleans, they called for the evacuation immediately, so they could avoid political criticism.

I think that the problem with evacuating New Orleans was that the people who had their own transport evacuated, and that the ones who were left were split between those who couldn't and wouldn't go.

A more meaningful percentage would show what proportion of those unable to leave were assisted to do so.

The really interesting thing is that Popular Mechanics appear in this conspiracy as well.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/research/1282151.html

[skepticalcriticalguy]

Now multiply it to the scale of the Katrina Disaster. If FEMA just let anyone come charging in willy nilly to "help" you'd only make matters worse. People were trying to fly in to rescue others. People just wanted to bumble along whatever route they felt like.

You do that, in a region that has just suffered a severe disaster, and people are going to get killed.

-Gumboot

The thing is, many of the people who did show up to help "willy-nilly" just plain did it. Without FEMA approval. And got the damn job done.

I work for FEMA, I do know, and have to follow, the beurocratic paper-work stuff. But at the same time, I was rooting for those mavericks who were taking it upon themselves to go in and damn well do something, right now!

[skepticalcriticalguy]

I think that the problem with evacuating New Orleans was that the people who had their own transport evacuated, and that the ones who were left were split between those who couldn't and wouldn't go.

A more meaningful percentage would show what proportion of those unable to leave were assisted to do so.

The really interesting thing is that Popular Mechanics appear in this conspiracy as well.

Nice of Pop Mech to chime in! We need their comforting and knowledgable take on every important event!

But you're right; I talked to many people who wanted to leave, and would have left, but just plain ol' didn't have a car. Or gas money. Or a place to go. So they relied on the hope that their tax money was spent properly so the infrastructure was solid. Whoopsie!

[gumboot]

There is no actual proof that rescuers were shot at. If you have any, please let me know. It was reported, but then later, it was reported that it might have been misreported. I think that was a CYA deal. (No, not CIA, CYA. "Cover yer arse.")

And the National Guard TRIED to evict people, but when it came down to it, if they refused to leave, they were not forced.

Tomorrow I'll dig into this. But if you have any info, please post it. I think the "mandatory evacuation" was just a semantic thing. You can't force people to leave their homes. Or give up their weapons. (Not yet, anyway).



You're right that some of the stories of chaos were exaggerated - especially what was going on at the Superdome and Convention Centre. But also reports of snipers, etc...

However there are also examples of officially reported attacks such as the incident on Danziger Bridge in which police shot a number of people after they attacked contractors to the Army Corps of Engineers.

The mayor did issue a forcible evacuation order, and reports indicate people WERE forced out of their homes:

...Outside Kajun's Pub, between the relatively dry French Quarter and the heavily flooded Ninth Ward, bar owner JoAnn Guidos loaded up her 1991 Ford Econoline van with clothing, liquor and other necessities Thursday morning. After holding out for 10 days, Guidos and her friends were finally leaving New Orleans and heading to high ground.

...

But on Wednesday night, Guidos said, armed federal agents identifying themselves as U.S. marshals confiscated her weapons and ordered her and six friends to leave by noon Thursday.

"When you get 15 M-16s pointed at you and they line you up against the wall, it's kind of scary," said Guidos, 55.

...

P. Edwin Compass, the superintendent of police, said there are thousands of people remaining in the city but that authorities are determined to get everyone out. He said as little force as necessary would be used but that staying is not an option. Anyone with a weapon, even one legally registered, will have it confiscated, he said.

"No one will be able to be armed," Compass said. "Guns will be taken. Only law enforcement will be allowed to have guns."

from the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/08/AR2005090802089.html)


-Gumboot

[skepticalcriticalguy]

You're right that some of the stories of chaos were exaggerated - especially what was going on at the Superdome and Convention Centre. But also reports of snipers, etc...

However there are also examples of officially reported attacks such as the incident on Danziger Bridge in which police shot a number of people after they attacked contractors to the Army Corps of Engineers.

The mayor did issue a forcible evacuation order, and reports indicate people WERE forced out of their homes:



-Gumboot

Before you post about the Danziger Bridge incident, you should do some extensive research on it. This is a hell of a lot more complex than "police shot a number of people after they attacked contractors to the Army Corps of Engineers."

And yes, they did start to force people from their homes, and tried to confiscate their weapons. Until the people resisted, and the govt backed down. (Surprisingly).

[skepticalcriticalguy]

A more meaningful percentage would show what proportion of those unable to leave were assisted to do so.



Perhaps you're right. But be sure to include Mississippi and Alabama into this, too. After all, they took the hit. New Orleans would have been fine if the infrastructure had held up. After all, Katrina was only a Cat 3 hurricane! And that was in Mississippi, meaning that New Orleans only got hit by Cat 2-ish winds.

(rolling on the floor laughing my ass off. Except it ain't funny).

This is according to Max Mayfield (formerly) of the National Hurricane Center. (They slid that story in a couple days before Christmas 2005, while nobody was paying attention to the news).

[skepticalcriticalguy]

I think it must be, because after people started resisting (even shooting at rescuers!) the National Guard were using force to evict people.

It wouldn't surprise me. Under New Zealand law, if you fail to comply with a Civil Defence Emergency Directive you could be charged.

-Gumboot

Question, Gumboot;

If the Civil Defense Emergency Directive says you must leave your home, and/or give us your weapons (while mobs are terrorizing the streets), would you do it?

[skepticalcriticalguy]

A more meaningful percentage would show what proportion of those unable to leave were assisted to do so.



What's interesting is that I get the argument from conservative Republicans that the liberal Democrats in Louisiana failed the people by not getting them all out. Yet, the same people argue that the people shouldn't rely on the government; they're on their own! So, which is it?

Of course, the conservative Republican governments of Mississippi and Alabama don't get called to task for the same thing.

[gumboot]

But, bottom line. If CNN could get in easily, so could bottled water. And it was days, not hours.



This is exactly the sort of ridiculous statement that people always make about these sorts of things. If you work for FEMA, I'm really disappointed that you think this way.

A journalist, with their own resources, getting themself and their camera man into a difficult site is not even remotely comparable to providing aid and evacuation to tens of thousands of people.

To suggest otherwise shows a gross lack of understanding of even the most basic fundamentals of logistics.

-Gumboot

[gumboot]

Question, Gumboot;

If the Civil Defense Emergency Directive says you must leave your home, and/or give us your weapons (while mobs are terrorizing the streets), would you do it?



Very few people in New Zealand have firearms.

To answer your question... I wouldn't be there. I like to think my life is worth more than the sum of my posessions.

-Gumboot

[Gravy]

What do you think about people who blame Bush for his administration's craptacular response to New Orleans' fate? I mean, come on - nobody in FEMA could watch CNN and find out about the people in the community center?"Brownie, you're doin' a heck of a job!" (For the head of an Arabian horse club who was somehow given the job of running the Federal Emergency Management Agency.)

Cronyism. That's one of the ugly political facts exposed by the Katrina disaster. But the people of the Gulf coast, and Louisiana in particular, know more about that than anyone in the U.S. Cronyism, patronage, and corruption are cultural institutions there. While the local and federal response to Katrina was appalling, inexcusable, and surprising, the flood was a virtual certainty. Everyone (local and federal) knew that the levees needed to be upgraded to withstand a major storm, and everyone knew that a major storm would come. They took their chances with not upgrading the levees, and lost. I almost moved to New Orleans a while ago. Glad I didn't.

Ah, forget it. Politics, here we come, right? They didn't blow the levee on purpose to grab the land.The federal government owns plenty of land. Why would they need a few million acres of swamp?

Here are some facts that most people don't know about the lower Mississippi.

1) Its banks are home to a mainstay of the of the U.S. economy: the petrochemical industry.

2) It is being diverted by the Army Corps of Engineers to follow its current path, past the chemical plants and New Orleans.

3) It doesn't want to flow that way, and will, perhaps soon, follow its natural inclination, which is to join with the Atchafalaya River. The Atchafalaya follows a much shorter and steeper route southwest to the coast (about 60% shorter, IIRC). When the Mississippi changes course, water will still flow along its current channel, but probably not enough to keep the salty ocean water from pouring upstream with the tide. Remember, New Orleans is not only below the level of the Mississippi, it's below sea level. This would drastically affect river navigation between the ocean and...the United States. It would cause the price of oil, gasoline, and natural gas to skyrocket. And saline water would present enormous problems to all the communities (such as N.O.) that now use the Mississippi for drinking water and for the industries that use it as coolant.

In 1973, after heavy snowfalls in the north, the Mississippi came very close to making the switch. The Corps of Engineers has stopgaps in place to prod the Mississippi in the desired direction, but the works of man are puny compared to the drainage flow of two-thirds of the United States (and a good deal of Canada) during a heavy flood season (Google "Old River Control Structure" and "Bonnet Carré"). When the lower Mississippi leaves its artificial banks – and it will – the economic blow will make Katrina look like child's play. We have no national plan for that contingency. Good thing we're a rich nation.

Laissez les bon temps roulez!

[Gravy]

Very few people in New Zealand have firearms.

To answer your question... I wouldn't be there. I like to think my life is worth more than the sum of my posessions.

-GumbootIn fairness, tens of thousands of people wanted to flee Katrina but didn't have the resources to do so.

[skepticalcriticalguy]

This is exactly the sort of ridiculous statement that people always make about these sorts of things. If you work for FEMA, I'm really disappointed that you think this way.

A journalist, with their own resources, getting themself and their camera man into a difficult site is not even remotely comparable to providing aid and evacuation to tens of thousands of people.

To suggest otherwise shows a gross lack of understanding of even the most basic fundamentals of logistics.

-Gumboot

I was talking about some quick water drops. Maybe some food rations. Not evacuation.

[TheGrunion]

I was talking about some quick water drops. Maybe some food rations. Not evacuation.

What on earth are you talking about? Distributing food and water without a mechanism for controlling the distribution can create more problems than it solves.

Evacuation was clearly necessary. Its also been standard operating procedure for severe coastal weather for years.

Do you really work for FEMA? What do you do for them?

FWIW, I worked as an Operations Officer for FEMA for Tropical Storm Allison in 2001.

[skepticalcriticalguy]

What on earth are you talking about? Distributing food and water without a mechanism for controlling the distribution can create more problems than it solves.



True, but there was already a mechanism in place. Get water and MREs to the Superdome, and continue distributing them.

Private citizens were going in and taking people out. So, the beurocracy could have too. Come on; FEMA failed.

[TheGrunion]

The thing is, many of the people who did show up to help "willy-nilly" just plain did it. Without FEMA approval. And got the damn job done.

I work for FEMA, I do know, and have to follow, the beurocratic paper-work stuff. But at the same time, I was rooting for those mavericks who were taking it upon themselves to go in and damn well do something, right now!

You don't really work for FEMA, do you?

[skepticalcriticalguy]

You don't really work for FEMA, do you?

Yes.

But admittedly, not in logistics.

Of course a logistics expert was going to appear to tell me I'm wrong.

[WildCat]

It could be argued (and is argued in that region) that it was by design, as a land grab. People are losing their land to the banks big time down there.
And no real estate is more desireable than that which is below sea level in a hurricane area. Bush's rich buddies will be moving in any day now, and insurance companies and banks will be bending over backwards writing policies and mortgages for said real estate. :rolleyes:

[skepticalcriticalguy]

And no real estate is more desireable than that which is below sea level in a hurricane area. Bush's rich buddies will be moving in any day now, and insurance companies and banks will be bending over backwards writing policies and mortgages for said real estate. :rolleyes:

Probably condos. With parking garages on the lower floors.

[WildCat]

Other cities in other countries are below sea level, and their levee/gate systems actually work. Amsterdam?
Explain this (http://www.semp.us/biots/biot_317.html).

And that wasn't even a hurricane.

[Babbylonian]

What's interesting is that I get the argument from conservative Republicans that the liberal Democrats in Louisiana failed the people by not getting them all out. Yet, the same people argue that the people shouldn't rely on the government; they're on their own! So, which is it?
I'm not going to justify the sniping between parties that goes on, but I will note that even most "conservative Republicans" believe that the government should be a resource in crises such as this. When they talk about not "[relying] on the government," they're usually talking about not relying on government "handouts" to get through one's normal life.

[skepticalcriticalguy]

Explain this (http://www.semp.us/biots/biot_317.html).

And that wasn't even a hurricane.

1953.

Interesting article though. Thank you.

So I guess there are actually other "stupid people" who develop cities on deltas below sea level.

[negativ]

I thought the Conspiracy Theory board was specifically for humoring insane people with baseless claims?

I hereby propose that the forum's description be officially changed from "A place to discuss alternative interpretations, theories and explanations of historical and current events" to "For humoring insane people with baseless claims."

It's more to the point, and flows a little better, IMHO. Yeah.:cool:

[gumboot]

In fairness, tens of thousands of people wanted to flee Katrina but didn't have the resources to do so.


Absolutely. But is it sensible to expect authorities to be capable of evacuating that many people in less than a day?

Remember, Auckland...10 days...

Unless a government literally has all of the required resources standing by waiting to go, it's not realistic. And the cost of maintaining a force ready for that level of rapid deployment makes it prohibitive.

Look at the US Army. Of their nearly half a million regular force strength, they have only one division capable of rapid deployment. The 82nd Airborne Division. Ironically, one of the 82nd's Brigades, numbering 5000 paratroopers, were deployed to New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.

-Gumboot

[gumboot]

I was talking about some quick water drops. Maybe some food rations. Not evacuation.


The people had to be evacuated. They could not stay there. It was not safe. "Some quick water drops" will not achieve anything. How much? Where do they drop it? Where does the water come from? How is it transported to the aircraft that are going to drop it? Which aircraft will drop it? Who owns those aircraft? Who will pilot them?

It takes ten soldiers in a support/logistics role to maintain a single soldier on the front line. There's a reason for that. Logistics is a VERY resource demanding and complicated system.

Logistics will make or break a rescue operation just as surely as it will make or break a combat operation.

-Gumboot

[skepticalcriticalguy]

The people had to be evacuated. They could not stay there. It was not safe. "Some quick water drops" will not achieve anything. How much? Where do they drop it? Where does the water come from? How is it transported to the aircraft that are going to drop it? Which aircraft will drop it? Who owns those aircraft? Who will pilot them?

It takes ten soldiers in a support/logistics role to maintain a single soldier on the front line. There's a reason for that. Logistics is a VERY resource demanding and complicated system.

Logistics will make or break a rescue operation just as surely as it will make or break a combat operation.

-Gumboot

We're talking about different things. Of course an evacuation is major. Keeping people alive with some water and food shouldn't have been an impossibility.

[skepticalcriticalguy]

But is it sensible to expect authorities to be capable of evacuating that many people in less than a day?



Of course not. Yet, many people turned it into a political attack on the mayor and governor. For not getting 100% of the people out before the storm hit.

[gumboot]

We're talking about different things. Of course an evacuation is major. Keeping people alive with some water and food shouldn't have been an impossibility.


No, we're not. You're not paying attention. Even providing substantial levels of supplies is an enormous logistical undertaking. We're not talking a couple of bottles of water here. We're talking enough food and water to provide for tens of thousands of people.

In addition, the priority was evacuation. Every resource used to drop supplies only delays the evacuation process.

It is a well accepted policy for westerners that you should have enough food and water and survival materials to maintain yourself for 3 days. You should not expect assistance from your government in the first 3 days of a disaster. You should expect assistance after 3 days.

This is basic civil defence. If people in New Orleans were not aware of this, there was a failure of education of the population. If the population WERE aware of this, and failed to provide sufficient resources for themselves, they have only themselves to blame.

If they remained unassisted for 3 days after the Hurricane hit they may have a legitimate complaint against the government.

For what it's worth, the local government HAD stockpiled supplies to provide food and water and medical care to people who were stuck in the path of the Hurricane. These supplies were provided by FEMA. The problem was they underestimated the number of people that would still be in the city.

To claim they did nothing, or failed utterly, is unfair.

-Gumboot

[gumboot]

Of course not. Yet, many people turned it into a political attack on the mayor and governor. For not getting 100% of the people out before the storm hit.



That's because people like to blame someone... ;) And you Americans can't help but make things political... :p

-Gumboot

[Alareth]

Cronyism. That's one of the ugly political facts exposed by the Katrina disaster. But the people of the Gulf coast, and Louisiana in particular, know more about that than anyone in the U.S. Cronyism, patronage, and corruption are cultural institutions there.


As a former resident of Louisiana I can confirm this statement. Getting indicted on fraud and racketeering charges seem to be a requirement for running for governor.

Maybe it's a, "Let's keep our crooks out in the open so we can keep an eye on them" mentality....

Little known legal trivia, the Louisiana state constitution and legal system are based of the Napoleonic Codes. Under state law you are actually considered guilty until proven innocent. Lawyers have to take a couple extra years of college to account for the differences in order to practice in the state.

[JimBenArm]

That's because people like to blame someone... ;) And you Americans can't help but make things political... :p

-Gumboot
Gee, don't know why you'd think that! :D

[Brainache]

As a former resident of Louisiana I can confirm this statement. Getting indicted on fraud and racketeering charges seem to be a requirement for running for governor.

Maybe it's a, "Let's keep our crooks out in the open so we can keep an eye on them" mentality....

Little known legal trivia, the Louisiana state constitution and legal system are based of the Napoleonic Codes. Under state law you are actually considered guilty until proven innocent. Lawyers have to take a couple extra years of college to account for the differences in order to practice in the state.

See I told you, it's those damn French again!

Apologies to Sophie Marceau.

[ShowMe]

Do you have any idea what kind of an undertaking “a few water drops” consists of? We’re not talking about giving a few thirsty kids on the basketball court a bottle of Aquafina here.

Years ago I was in the military. I was good friends with a “paper pusher”, a gentleman who worked in supply. After I teased him one day he asked how I would move 2 gallons of water to someone who needed it. One gallon, he told me, weighs eight pounds & the average person needs two gallons a day.

I was a young and cocky kid and didn’t think about it at all. I was too busy figuring out where I was going to go out drinking. But those numbers stuck with me, and I did a bit of thinking back when Katrina went through and all this was going down.

Now that Katrina is a few years behind us and we have the wonderful benefit of hindsight let’s pull up a comfy chair and crunch some numbers.

Figure 40,000 people in the stadium would require 80,000 gallons of water. Some quick math shows us we need to move 320 tons of that life-giving liquid.

How are you going to do this? Certainly not by air drop.

By truck is the most obvious solution. Remember, however, that the roads are impassible at this point. Better call in some military units to help clear a way for the trucks.

The five-ton truck, the mule of the military, doesn’t really carry five tons. Needs things like drivers and fuel and spare tires and other things to make it go zoom. But for simplicity we will say they can hold 5 tons of water.

320 tons of water. 5 tons per truck. 64 trucks. Two miles of bumper to bumper trucks that have to traverse an area the size of Great Britain that has just been totaled. Roads are completely blocked, no bridges, no rail. Infrastructure nearly totaled.

Grand, we’ve got our convoy of trucks. We need to include the fuel required for 64 trucks to move 320 tons of water, the spare parts that will be required, the personnel needed to clear the trees & debris, the guards that will need to protect the cargo, the folks who will have to dig the latrines and clean up the trash from all this movement. And oh, by the way, all those soldiers are going to need food and water as well.

I really want to go off on a rant right now, but I will refrain. On a board of many critical thnkers the numbers should speak for themselves.

Move and distribute 320 tons of water, vehicles, and personell.

Oh, and by the way...do it all again tomorrow.

[skepticalcriticalguy]

Do you have any idea what kind of an undertaking “a few water drops” consists of? We’re not talking about giving a few thirsty kids on the basketball court a bottle of Aquafina here.

Years ago I was in the military. I was good friends with a “paper pusher”, a gentleman who worked in supply. After I teased him one day he asked how I would move 2 gallons of water to someone who needed it. One gallon, he told me, weighs eight pounds & the average person needs two gallons a day.

I was a young and cocky kid and didn’t think about it at all. I was too busy figuring out where I was going to go out drinking. But those numbers stuck with me, and I did a bit of thinking back when Katrina went through and all this was going down.

Now that Katrina is a few years behind us and we have the wonderful benefit of hindsight let’s pull up a comfy chair and crunch some numbers.

Figure 40,000 people in the stadium would require 80,000 gallons of water. Some quick math shows us we need to move 320 tons of that life-giving liquid.

How are you going to do this? Certainly not by air drop.

By truck is the most obvious solution. Remember, however, that the roads are impassible at this point. Better call in some military units to help clear a way for the trucks.

The five-ton truck, the mule of the military, doesn’t really carry five tons. Needs things like drivers and fuel and spare tires and other things to make it go zoom. But for simplicity we will say they can hold 5 tons of water.

320 tons of water. 5 tons per truck. 64 trucks. Two miles of bumper to bumper trucks that have to traverse an area the size of Great Britain that has just been totaled. Roads are completely blocked, no bridges, no rail. Infrastructure nearly totaled.

Grand, we’ve got our convoy of trucks. We need to include the fuel required for 64 trucks to move 320 tons of water, the spare parts that will be required, the personnel needed to clear the trees & debris, the guards that will need to protect the cargo, the folks who will have to dig the latrines and clean up the trash from all this movement. And oh, by the way, all those soldiers are going to need food and water as well.

I really want to go off on a rant right now, but I will refrain. On a board of many critical thnkers the numbers should speak for themselves.

Move and distribute 320 tons of water, vehicles, and personell.

Oh, and by the way...do it all again tomorrow.

I'll bet if it were done by private enterprise, with a nice fat payoff for success, it would have been done overnight. (And probably by Halliburton).

[gumboot]

Do you have any idea what kind of an undertaking “a few water drops” consists of? We’re not talking about giving a few thirsty kids on the basketball court a bottle of Aquafina here.


For what it's worth, the New Zealand Army's primary logistics vehicle is the Mercedes-Benz Unimog U1700L, a 4x4 truck with excellent offroad capabilities including the ability to drive while entirely submerged (although the driver tends to have trouble seeing!).

It's empty weight is 12,000kg. In its water tanker configuration it carries a 4910L tank with a full weight of 6250kg. That's 1297 gallons, enough for 649 people based on the 2 gal/day figure.

So, expanding this based on the 40,000 figure, that's 62 Unimogs. Each has a range of 625km or 388 miles from a fuel tank of about 150L.

Now, when they run out of fuel, they'll need refueling from the Unimog U1700L in tanker format, hauling a 4000L fuel tank. That will refill 26 trucks, so we need 2.5 of these tanker trucks for every 388 miles that the convoy has to travel to get to the site AND back. They have a top speed of 55 MPH, however over rough terrain you're realistically looking at between 20 and 40 MPH. So realistically, you can cover about 420 miles a day. Meanwhile you need transport versions of the trucks with supplies and additional support staff for the convoy itself. At this stage you're looking at a minimum of about 70 trucks and their crews. A convoy that size is realistically going to be two logistics companies at a minimum. That's about 250 men.

If we assume the location is only one day from the staging site, that means one day to transport to location, one day to distribute, and one day to return. Therefore you will need three convoys - six companies, or more than an entire Regiment - to maintain a continual supply of just water.

If the location involves TWO days of travel (800 miles) you'll need five convoys - that's TWO entire Transport Regiments, to maintain water supply. If it's THREE days of travel (1200km) you'll need three Regiments to maintain supply.

To give you an idea of the scale we are talking, the entire British Army has only ten Logistics Transport Regiments and over half of them are Territorial Units.

-Gumboot

ETA. Now, at the head of these calculations, we haven't factored in how long it takes to assemble three convoys consisting of over 200 vehicles and 750 men. It's not a case of simply jumping in the trucks and heading off. It would take several days at least just to fill the tankers with water. Actually, that also adds at least a day of turnaround for each convoy to restock, so you've already added another convoy to the totals. Another 70 vehicles, and another 250 men.

[TheGrunion]

I'll bet if it were done by private enterprise, with a nice fat payoff for success, it would have been done overnight. (And probably by Halliburton).

I don't understand how someone that works for FEMA can be unaware that FEMA already outsources a very high percentage of their responsibilities to the private sector.

What is it that you do for FEMA?

[gumboot]

I'll bet if it were done by private enterprise, with a nice fat payoff for success, it would have been done overnight. (And probably by Halliburton).


I doubt it. Halliburton provide servies to the oil industry, so I'm not sure how they would be much use in providing essential supplies to people trapped by a Hurricane. Their subsidary, KBR, who had the LOGCAP contract that got them all the work in Iraq is a construction company, so again not overly useful in assisting in search and rescue or humanitarian relief operations.

-Gumboot

[ShowMe]

ETA. Now, at the head of these calculations, we haven't factored in how long it takes to assemble three convoys consisting of over 200 vehicles and 750 men. It's not a case of simply jumping in the trucks and heading off. It would take several days at least just to fill the tankers with water. Actually, that also adds at least a day of turnaround for each convoy to restock, so you've already added another convoy to the totals. Another 70 vehicles, and another 250 men.

I don't know what the ANG currently uses, but even if we assume that they use these trucks you speak of...and that they were completely filled with water, engines running and ready to go as soon as the storm quit, you're still looking at a 2 day drive to get from the staging area through all of the destruction & distribute the water.

I've done the math and I still have problems trying to comprehend the scale. It certainly makes me appreciate the folks that have the ability to do these things. And do them they did...in an astonishingly small amount of time.

Someone mentioned earlier that "if it were done by a private enterprise it would have been done overnight". The phrase "You can't make a baby in a month by hiring 9 pregnant women" comes quickly to mind.

[EGarrett]

I hereby propose that the forum's description be officially changed from "A place to discuss alternative interpretations, theories and explanations of historical and current events" to "For humoring insane people with baseless claims."

It's more to the point, and flows a little better, IMHO. Yeah.:cool:The moment the claim becomes sane and supported, it stops being a conspiracy theory and becomes science or history. So yes, the second description is fairly appropriate for this board.

I also lobbied for it to be moved to "Entertainment."

[skepticalcriticalguy]

I doubt it. Halliburton provide servies to the oil industry, so I'm not sure how they would be much use in providing essential supplies to people trapped by a Hurricane. Their subsidary, KBR, who had the LOGCAP contract that got them all the work in Iraq is a construction company, so again not overly useful in assisting in search and rescue or humanitarian relief operations.

-Gumboot

They do whatever makes them money. They provided mobile showers after Katrina, even.

[skepticalcriticalguy]

I don't understand how someone that works for FEMA can be unaware that FEMA already outsources a very high percentage of their responsibilities to the private sector.

What is it that you do for FEMA?

I'm well aware of it. I'm one of those that is outsorced too. The point was, they didn't outsource that immediate water/food part. They stopped people from doing it themselves.

What I do doesn't matter. I already acknowledged that my role is not logistics and distribution. Apparently, YOU are the expert there.

[Darth Rotor]

Wasn't it the French Canadians?

Hey - I'm French Canadian! My grandparents defected from Canada, braving
the ice choked St Lawrence River to arrive in the land of warmth and freedom!

Guess I'm guilty!
Pay no attention to the pitchforks and torches the crowd behind me is carrying, everything is fine. :) You forgot "land of the crawdad."
He blew up a barge! What more does any right-thinking Texan want than to blow something up every now and then?
You convinced me. :D

General Comment: Logistics, hard. For you FEMA guys, consider the New Madrid earthquake, if it hits Richter 6.7-7.2 intensity. We did a CPX some years ago on how to provide support to FEMA with a warning order of 12 hours from a mechanized division in Colorado. (At the time 4th ID.)

We then realized who the lead elements would be. Bridging units and fuel depots, water supply points. With all of the bridges dropped in the area, as well as water and fuel pipes, our entire logistics laydown was way out of line for a standard brigade move.

A fascinating exercise, and a real eye opener.

Hope it doesn't come down. New Madrid shaking hard would cut US East West commerce for quite some time, if the quake hits. Check rail lines, and I-20, I-40, and I-70 for starters.

Ouch.

DR

[skepticalcriticalguy]

Remember "the angel in black?" The woman who drove in from Texas in her black Hummer and went into New Orleans and started hauling people out?

Maybe they should hire out a bunch of her! She found the way in, and out.

[Quinn]

Another point to bear in mind: the Katrina evacuation was only as successful as it was because the city had done a disastrous "dry run" the previous summer with Hurricane Ivan. They totally botched the contraflow on the freeways, and the traffic situation was beyond nightmarish. It took me eighteen hours of solid driving to reach Lafayette, normally a three hour drive. But that showed them where the problems were, and they at least worked out the kinks well enough that by the time Katrina hit, the evacuation was a lot smoother, relatively speaking. If not for the lesson of Ivan, I shudder to think how many more people would have been stuck in the city.

[Quinn]

Remember "the angel in black?" The woman who drove in from Texas in her black Hummer and went into New Orleans and started hauling people out?

One story of many. Three cheers for the Redneck Navy.

[skepticalcriticalguy]

Another point to bear in mind: the Katrina evacuation was only as successful as it was because the city had done a disastrous "dry run" the previous summer with Hurricane Ivan. They totally botched the contraflow on the freeways, and the traffic situation was beyond nightmarish. It took me eighteen hours of solid driving to reach Lafayette, normally a three hour drive. But that showed them where the problems were, and they at least worked out the kinks well enough that by the time Katrina hit, the evacuation was a lot smoother, relatively speaking. If not for the lesson of Ivan, I shudder to think how many more people would have been stuck in the city.

Very good point! I know the evacuation wasn't perfect, but it wasn't a disaster, like that Houston debacle. "Everybody out! Now! GO!!!!"

I worry about Florida. Most of us don't even evacuate any more, because there is nowhere to go. You can get stuck on Alligator Alley, and have to ride it out in your car. Or you can haul to Orlando, or somewhere, only to not get a hotel room, have the 'cane hit there anyway. I just board up and ride them out.

Tampa is toast if it gets a direct hit. And the people in Tampa don't take it seriously enough, even after seeing the destruction to other cities recently. It's not below sea level, but right at sea level, and the bay area, of course, has water all around. The bay, the Gulf, the intracoastal.

Sorry, off topic, I know.

[Alareth]

Very good point! I know the evacuation wasn't perfect, but it wasn't a disaster, like that Houston debacle. "Everybody out! Now! GO!!!!"

I worry about Florida. Most of us don't even evacuate any more, because there is nowhere to go. You can get stuck on Alligator Alley, and have to ride it out in your car. Or you can haul to Orlando, or somewhere, only to not get a hotel room, have the 'cane hit there anyway. I just board up and ride them out.

Tampa is toast if it gets a direct hit. And the people in Tampa don't take it seriously enough, even after seeing the destruction to other cities recently. It's not below sea level, but right at sea level, and the bay area, of course, has water all around. The bay, the Gulf, the intracoastal.

Sorry, off topic, I know.

When I lived in Ft Lauderdale years ago nobody took hurricanes seriously. "We haven't had a hurricane in 20 years" was the usual reply.

Then Andrew came through....

[gumboot]

I don't know what the ANG currently uses, but even if we assume that they use these trucks you speak of...and that they were completely filled with water, engines running and ready to go as soon as the storm quit, you're still looking at a 2 day drive to get from the staging area through all of the destruction & distribute the water.



I was having a look on Mercedes-Benz website and apparantly the US Army also uses Unimog U1700Ls for access to remote locations. Whether they have the same watertanker and fuel tanker variants as the NZ Army I don't know.

-Gumboot

[gumboot]

They do whatever makes them money. They provided mobile showers after Katrina, even.


You seem to have missed my point. They're builders. They build things. Be they bridges or oil wells or showers. They don't rescue people. They don't find people. They don't do supply provision.

There are no private companies that regularly do large scale logistical operations of this nature. Only armed forces have this sort of capability.

Also, they don't make money. The profit margin for LOGCAP Task Orders is fixed between 1 and 4%. For example KBR's average profit margin for their Task Orders in Iraq and Afghanistan under LOGCAP III was 1.4%.

-Gumboot

[gumboot]

When I lived in Ft Lauderdale years ago nobody took hurricanes seriously. "We haven't had a hurricane in 20 years" was the usual reply.

Then Andrew came through....



Aucklanders are the same with volcanoes. "We haven't had a volcano in a thousand years!".

But when it happens... ouch.

-Gumboot

[Babbylonian]

Aucklanders are the same with volcanoes. "We haven't had a volcano in a thousand years!".

But when it happens... ouch.
Volcanoes are tricky that way. Around here, people were stunned that Mt. St. Helens exploded in 1980 (the way it exploded, of course, was a surprise even to most of the geologists watching it) despite knowing all their lives that it was simply an "inactive" volcano with the potential for eruption.

[gumboot]

Volcanoes are tricky that way. Around here, people were stunned that Mt. St. Helens exploded in 1980 (the way it exploded, of course, was a surprise even to most of the geologists watching it) despite knowing all their lives that it was simply an "inactive" volcano with the potential for eruption.



Yeah we have White Island. It's an ACTIVE volcano. If it explodes, think Krakatoa only bigger. Krakatoa produced a Tsunami 4x the size of the Boxing Day Tsunami. Much of Auckland is low-lying, built on reclaimed land.

White Island also happens to be in the volcanic chain that includes some of the largest explosive volcanic eruptions ever. She's gonna pop, and when she does, good night nurse.

-Gumboot

[PhantomWolf]

"We haven't had a volcano in a thousand years!"

Not entirely correct either. Rangitoto is only 500 years old.

eta: Of course the one I live next too erupted just 200 years ago....

[gtc]

Yeah we have White Island. It's an ACTIVE volcano. If it explodes, think Krakatoa only bigger. Krakatoa produced a Tsunami 4x the size of the Boxing Day Tsunami. Much of Auckland is low-lying, built on reclaimed land.

White Island also happens to be in the volcanic chain that includes some of the largest explosive volcanic eruptions ever. She's gonna pop, and when she does, good night nurse.

-Gumboot

Is she on the Chile side or the Australian side of New Zealand?

[gumboot]

Is she on the Chile side or the Australian side of New Zealand?



Pacific side. In the Bay of Plenty.

I think Australia would be safe from Tsunami. However, if White Island decides to go big-badda-boom on the scale of the Oruanui Eruption (Taupo - 26,000 BP) you'll be getting a nice helping of ash and nuclear winter... :)

-Gumboot

[PhantomWolf]

Is she on the Chile side or the Australian side of New Zealand?

The Pacfic side, over by Gisborne. Doesn't worry me too much, I'm on the other side. (ignores the big lump of a volcano about 30km away)

[PhantomWolf]

Pacific side. In the Bay of Plenty.

I think Australia would be safe from Tsunami. However, if White Island decides to go big-badda-boom on the scale of the Oruanui Eruption (Taupo - 26,000 BP) you'll be getting a nice helping of ash and nuclear winter... :)

-Gumboot

Stunningly unlikely.

White Island Info (http://www.gns.cri.nz/what/earthact/volcanoes/nzvolcanoes/whiteisprint.htm)

Although there is no record that White Island eruptions have ever significantly damaged the mainland, recent work has suggested the volcano is potentially capable of producing large eruptions. This potential arises from the size of the magma body at depth beneath the island, as indicated by the long term outputs of sulphur dioxide gas (400 tons/day) and heat (400 MW) from the crater. Maintenance of these large outputs over the more than 16,000 year history of White Island activity requires the degassing and cooling of several tens of cubic kilometres of magma. A large proportion of this magma still remains to provide the heat source for the present activity. If a substantial fraction of this magma were to be erupted (e.g. more than 1 cubic kilometre) it would be far larger than any recognised previous eruption from White Island, and large enough to produce a threat to the Bay of Plenty coast. These threats principally arise from fall out of ash and pumice and from tsunami.

[PhantomWolf]

c.f. Taupo

Extract from The Taupo Eruption, New Zealand I. General Aspects (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1985RSPTA.314..199W)

The ca. A.D. 186 Taupo eruption was the latest eruption at the Taupo Volcanic Centre, occurring from a vent, at Horomatangi Reefs, now submerged beneath Lake Taupo in the central North Island of New Zealand. Minor initial phreatomagmatic activity was followed by the dry vent 6 km3 Hatepe plinian outburst. Large amounts of water then entered the vent during the 2.5 km3 Hatepe phreatoplinian ash phase, eventually stopping the eruption, though large amounts of water continued to be ejected from the vent area, causing gullying of the ash deposits. After a break of several hours to weeks, phreatoplinian activity resumed, generating the 1.3 km3 Rotongaio ash, notable for its fine grainsize and for containing significant quantities of non- or poorly-vesicular juvenile material. The vent area then became dry again, and eruption rates and power markedly increased into the 23 km3 Taupo `ultraplinian' phase, which is the most powerful plinian outburst yet documented. Synchronous with this ultraplinian activity, lesser volumes of non- to partially-welded ignimbrite were generated by diversion of ejecta from, or partial collapse of, the eruption column. The rapid rate of magma withdrawal during this phase removed support from the vent area, to trigger local vent collapse and initiate the catastrophic eruption of the ca. 30 km3 Taupo ignimbrite. Finally, after some years, lava was extruded on to the floor of the reformed Lake Taupo, and floating fragments derived from the lava carapace were driven ashore. The known eruption volume is more than 65 km3, while additional volumes are represented by primary material now beneath Lake Taupo and layer 3 to the ignimbrite phases; a total volume of more than 105 km3 is likely, equivalent to more than 35 km3 of magma plus more than 3 km3 of lithic debris. Airfall deposits more than 10 cm thick blanketed 30 000 km2 of land east of the vent, while ignimbrite covers a near-circular area of ca. 20 000 km2. Widespread and locally severe ground shaking occurred during, but mostly after the eruption, associated with subsidence in the Lake Taupo basin. Secondary deposits are abundant above and extending beyond the Taupo ignimbrite, consisting of the products of surface water interacting with the still-hot ignimbrite and subsequent water reworking of the light, pumiceous materials. The complexity and size of this eruption preclude accurate forecasting of the size, nature and return period of the inevitable next eruption from the Taupo Volcanic Centre.

[gumboot]

Stunningly unlikely.


Well considering Oruanui is the largest volcanic eruption in the last 70,000 years, yes I'd say it probably is unlikely... but not impossible. However, look at the volcanic chain White Island belongs to...

Taranaki, Ruapehu, Tongariro, Ngarahoe, Tarawera, Rotorua...

This chain has a tradition of massive explosive eruptions. Therefore the possibility of White Island exploding with a large eruption is much higher than, say, an eruption in the Auckland field (which produces primarily shield volcanoes).

Explosive volcanoes usually remain active until they have a "blow-out" that makes them dormant. White Island hasn't had a blow-out yet. It will. One day. Maybe in a year. Maybe in 100,000 years. But it will happen.

-Gumboot

[PhantomWolf]

Taranaki, Ruapehu, Tongariro, Ngarahoe, Tarawera, Rotorua...

You need to recheck that. Egmont/Taranaki is part of its own hotpsot, unrelated to the central chain.

[PhantomWolf]

Explosive volcanoes usually remain active until they have a "blow-out" that makes them dormant. White Island hasn't had a blow-out yet. It will. One day. Maybe in a year. Maybe in 100,000 years. But it will happen.

It may, if the vent gets blocked, however from the report I posted, those geologists that have studied the volcano and its surroundings disgree with you on how big that eruption would be. Even at it's worse they are putting it at around 1/65th of Taupo.

Add to that, Australia is to our west, the predomient weather direction, so for ash to cause them trouble it'd have to have circled the southern hemisphere.

Quite simply, White Island is extremely unlikely be another Taupo or Karakatoa, and even if it were, it wouldn't drop ash on or cause a nuclear winter in Australia. (eta yeah I know that bit had a smilie)

[gumboot]

Quite simply, White Island is extremely unlikely be another Taupo or Karakatoa, and even if it were, it wouldn't drop ash on or cause a nuclear winter in Australia. (eta yeah I know that bit had a smilie)


I think it's unlikely it will be as big as that. However were it that big, it would affect Australia like that. Oruanui dumped ash on every surface of the planet. It caused a drop in global temperatures. Even the vastly smaller more recent Taupo eruption turned the sky red in Rome and was heard in China.

Even if White Island was 1/65th the size of Oruanui it would still be more than twice the size of Krakatoa.

The fairly recent Civil Defence exercises in Auckland involved computer modelling of the impact of a White Island eruption. Previously it had been accepted that only a truely gargantuan erruption would produce a Tsunami, and that the Coromandel Penninsula would protect Auckland.

They discovered they were wrong on both counts. Their modelling indicated even a minor erruption would produce a devastating erruption, and that the coromandel penninsula, far from protecting Auckland, would refract the wavefront around so that it hit smack into Auckland with full force, accelerating as it did so.

If White Island errupts the North Shore, CBD, and Eastern Bays will be devastated.

These sort of sudden realisations that all of the estimates were wrong is nothing new to volcanology. For a long time it was thought Taupo was extinct. Then it was thought it was dormant. Taupo is actually active.

The CD position, at this point, is that any signs of imminent White Island erruption will result in a mandatory evacuation of Auckland. This requires 10 days, which is ample time. Explosive volcanoes obviously don't just errupt with no warning, they often have erruptions for a very long time before they actually explode - there was intense siesmic activity around Krakatoa for years before its final erruptions in August 1883.

I'm not trying to say White Island is going to blow up tomorrow and kill us all. :) It's unlikely it would happen in our lifetime, and even if it did, we'd almost certainly get years of warning, not hours.

-Gumboot

[PhantomWolf]

Even the vastly smaller more recent Taupo eruption turned the sky red in Rome and was heard in China.

Cite? I have read that the Ash in the upper atmosphere was seen from China, but not that it was heard there. I seriously doubt it would have been heard there.

Even if White Island was 1/65th the size of Oruanui it would still be more than twice the size of Krakatoa.

Note that it was Taupo, not Oruanui. And at that size they were predicting pumice and ash over the Bay of Plenty.

The fairly recent Civil Defence exercises in Auckland involved computer modelling of the impact of a White Island eruption.

Don't suppose there is a link to that, or a ref that can be got at the local library?

[gumboot]

Cite? I have read that the Ash in the upper atmosphere was seen from China, but not that it was heard there. I seriously doubt it would have been heard there.


You could be right there. Actually it seems very unlikely they heard it. :) Records seem to indicate they recorded events in the sky that indicated a volcano, as you suggest. :)





Note that it was Taupo, not Oruanui. And at that size they were predicting pumice and ash over the Bay of Plenty.


Right, sorry about that. But the report you linked to doesn't say that 1km3 is the absolute maximum size. That's the MINIMUM size at which it would be considered a large eruption capable of damaging the mainland.

What the report actually says is:

If a substantial fraction of this magma were to be erupted (e.g. more than 1 cubic kilometre) it would be far larger than any recognised previous eruption from White Island, and large enough to produce a threat to the Bay of Plenty coast.

(my bolding).



Don't suppose there is a link to that, or a ref that can be got at the local library?


I honestly have no idea. One of the Safety Officers I would with regularly was involved in the exercises because he's a water safety specialist. I know the media talked about the exercises when they were on, but I've never seen any publicly released data on the modelling itself.

-Gumboot

[Alareth]

Ok, now Gumboot and PhantomWolf have confused me.

The "bowl" that New Orleans sits in is actually the caldera of a supervolcano that will kill us all and only Farrakhan is willing to speak up about it?


:jaw-dropp :boxedin:

[skepticalcriticalguy]

You seem to have missed my point. They're builders. They build things. Be they bridges or oil wells or showers. They don't rescue people. They don't find people. They don't do supply provision.

There are no private companies that regularly do large scale logistical operations of this nature. Only armed forces have this sort of capability.


-Gumboot

Well, maybe free enterprise, or private citizens with Hummers, should get a crack at it next time. ;)

(Finally they can put those big Hummers to use!)

[gumboot]

Well, maybe free enterprise, or private citizens with Hummers, should get a crack at it next time. ;)

(Finally they can put those big Hummers to use!)


As long as I'm not living there, go for it.

-Gumboot

[skepticalcriticalguy]

As long as I'm not living there, go for it.

-Gumboot

You wouldn't take a rescue, or a bottle of water, from a stranger in a Hummer?

[gumboot]

You wouldn't take a rescue, or a bottle of water, from a stranger in a Hummer?


I wouldn't entrust the rescue and relief of thousands of my fellow Aucklanders to private civilians.

-Gumboot

[skepticalcriticalguy]

I wouldn't entrust the rescue and relief of thousands of my fellow Aucklanders to private civilians.

-Gumboot

What about large corporations that specialize in logistics? Say a trucking firm and/or or retail giant? (Who incidentally would also have the inventory).

[gumboot]

What about large corporations that specialize in logistics? Say a trucking firm and/or or retail giant? (Who incidentally would also have the inventory).


Large corporations don't specialise in logistics. Not like this. These sorts of things don't happen often enough to make it economically viable.

-Gumboot

[skepticalcriticalguy]

Large corporations don't specialise in logistics. Not like this. These sorts of things don't happen often enough to make it economically viable.

-Gumboot

It's fairly common for private enterprise, on a volunteer basis, to beat FEMA to the scene. Lots of stories out there about ice melting in trucks while awaiting approval to distribute it. I remember interviews with truck drivers on the local news after Hurricane Frances.

[gumboot]

It's fairly common for private enterprise, on a volunteer basis, to beat FEMA to the scene. Lots of stories out there about ice melting in trucks while awaiting approval to distribute it. I remember interviews with truck drivers on the local news after Hurricane Frances.


Dozens of trucks sitting in downtown New Orleans full of water, having driven there cross-country?

-Gumboot

[skepticalcriticalguy]

Dozens of trucks sitting in downtown New Orleans full of water, having driven there cross-country?

-Gumboot

Not sure about that one. Was that a headline?

[gumboot]

Not sure about that one. Was that a headline?


My point is there will always be isolated cases of individuals doing something, and there will always be isolated cases of whoever is managing the operation allegedly preventing individuals helping.

That's entirely to be expected. That's also an entirely different ballgame to providing essential supplies and evacuating tens of thousands of people from a place that is totally cut off from the rest of the country and has had its infrastructure destroyed.

Do you seriously think trying to encourage tens of thousands of citizens to independently enter the disaster area and "do what they can" is a responsible and effective way of dealing with a disaster?

I do not. I think it's an incredibly STUPID way of dealing with a disaster. In fact I think it's a good way of making the situation WORSE.

-Gumboot