09-01-2005, 11:41 PM
|
#1 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,464
| What happened to Emergency Preparedness?
Four days, going on five, down in New Orleans there are Americans dying on the streets because still there has been no deliveries of food or water to the tens of thousands that escaped the floods only to be left to die on dry land.
The Federal Administration and the State resources have responded so slowly, as they "assessed" the situation, that they have failed these people by not even providing the very basics of food, water, and protection.
Emergency preparedness means being able to mobilize resources to reach the victims before the survivors die. Bureaucratic snafu's? Come on, let's get it moving along there people! | 
|  | | And now for this message... |
| |
09-02-2005, 12:21 AM
|
#2 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 367
| Well, mobilize means being able to move...current, not much can get in to NO... | |
| | |
09-02-2005, 05:22 AM
|
#3 | | Curmudgeon-in-Chief
Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Somewhere in your nightmares!
Posts: 23,475
| What, are ALL of the military's helicopters in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Even worse than the slow response is the fact that we knew the disaster was coming days before it struck. Resources could have been moved and staged around the peripheries of the expected storm path well before they were needed. Didn't the governors and mayors request help in advance? Why not? Didn't the Feds foresee the need for quick response, even as every authority was predicting a major debacle? Why not?
Apropos of boots, reports are that 90% of Gulf oil production is offline due to Katrina. I looked at a map of the expected storm track no more than 8 hours before she made landfall, a map overlaid with one showing all the drilling platforms. And the vast majority of the little black dots, over 2/3 of them, were waaaay to the west of the swath. So why shut them all down when the hurricane wasn't going to come within 100 miles of the bulk of them?
Mari has a point. Something is not right. We are supposed to be more competent than this. | |
| | |
09-02-2005, 09:47 AM
|
#4 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 367
| Well, some of the military choppers have been shot at. (seems counterproductive to me, but who knows?). An oil rig within 100 miles of a storm like Katrina would have suffered notable damage.
In regards to emergancy prepardeness: I agree, they probably could have done more. Geographers and urban planners have used New Orleans as a case study for years-knowing that a major disaster like what happened was likely. Louisana and federal officials had even just started wargaming a scenario called Hurricane Pam which has this situation...a little too late.
Army Corps of Engineers has been saying that the levees were only good for a Category 3 hurricane, and the White House has attempted to slash the budget for the Corps for the last two years. And it was federal flood control methods (damming the Mississippi and channeling it) which helped aggravate the disaster by causing erosion of the wetlands and barrier islands that used to form a buffer zone between the coast and the city proper. | |
| | |
09-02-2005, 10:18 AM
|
#5 | | Din Älskling
Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Somewhere inside your head. Or am I?
Posts: 4,196
| The region is plentiful in oil. Why don't they just pretend it is a foreign nation and practice invading?
All jokes aside, this is a serious issue. The reports I have heard all indicate horrendous conditions with the potential for a large amount of people to die from disease, hunger and the lack of potable water. The federal reaction has not just been slow, it has been appallingly slow.
__________________
"Since when does being a patriot in America mean shutting your mouth?"
---
zz,zz,zz,zz,zz,zz! | |
| | |
09-02-2005, 11:04 AM
|
#6 | | Curmudgeon-in-Chief
Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Somewhere in your nightmares!
Posts: 23,475
| Yes, apparently it's our own domestic Baghdad, in a way. Amazing how fast people revert to the primitive under dire conditions.
As for the oilfields: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/s...O&SECTION=HOME
Latest reports have only 58 drilling rigs out of physically out of commission. So the 90% figure seems overblown...perhaps by speculators in the futures markets? | |
| | |
09-02-2005, 11:23 AM
|
#7 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: London
Posts: 1,216
| There are emergencies, and then there's a situation such as that in New Orleans -- nine cities destroyed, well over a million people dead or displaced, as well as any local means to deal with the problem.
You want to transport food and water? You can't use road or rail. Helicopters? How many helicopters does it take to provide food for 500,000-1,000,000 people.
New Orleans, population 1.2 million
Slidell, pop. 26,000
Bay St. Louis/Waveland pop. 12,000
Long Beach, pop. 17,000
Gulfport, pop. 71,000
Biloxi, pop. 50,000
Ocean Springs, pop. 17,000
Psacagoula/Moss Point/Gautier, pop. 42,000
Mobile, pop. 198,000.
Total population: over 1.6 million. How many got out beforehand? A million? That's still over 600,000 left behind.
Who's going to help?
Those in the area -- be they police, ambulence, army, firemen, whatever -- they're victims too. They aren't just there to help, with a home to go home to. Their homes are destroyed. They need food and shelter. They've lost friends and family.
How soon can people come in from outside? How fast can they assess the damage, and figure out what to do? How fast can people get there?
How many people do you have?
How many of those do you send to transport people, to hand out food and water as it arrives, to stop looters, to save people?
How do you decide where you can set up command centres for these things safely?
It's easy to sit here and criticise the amount of preparedness, or how "slow" the response has been. It's easy to underestimate the size of the problem. It's easy to say "people are dying on the streets because we're slow." The reality is that people are dying, and more are going to die: Looters will shoot people, people are still waiting to be rescued, people have insufficient food, there are no hospitals, and most of those who would normally due the saving are victims themselves.
Decisions have to be made, and with each decision that saves the lives of one group of people, it will cost the lives of another group.
You're underestimating the scale of this disaster -- so am I, I think it's impossible not to, unless you're there. Images on a TV screen just aren't the same. And I somewhat doubt that any of the Emergency Plans put in place after 9-11 answered the question "What should we do if we suddenly find one of our major cities is now under water?" | |
| | |
09-02-2005, 11:34 AM
|
#8 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: 40D 34' 7.046" N by 74D 26' 23.503" W
Posts: 765
| Agreed. The logistics are just not there at this point. With the number of people trying to get out of NO, highways and streets are not viable options to get relief supplies in. Railways are washed out. Aircraft (helecopters) are getting shot at.
Even the tsunami in south east asia had problems with logistics and getting relief supplies in. Supplies were arriving, but had no means of being dispatched to those that needed them. At least Malaysia wasn't armed and shooting at the helicopters as they were delivering supplies.
__________________
Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.
| |
| | |
09-02-2005, 12:34 PM
|
#9 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,464
| Here's the thing about Emergency Preparedness... you have to be PREPARED for Emergencies. And that does not mean wondering what to do after five days.
Imagine this... what if instead of water, this was a chemical explosion/flood. Do we not have any plans in place at the Federal level for how to move people out of a dangerous area rapidly? Are we expected to believe that after all these years the Federal Agencies haven't run through a number of disaster scenarios - numbers of "What If's..." on how to step up to action in an emergency. What a disgrace that our Federal Emergency agencies can't mobilize rapidly to meet the needs of the nation.
It's not a matter of the nature of this specific disaster, there should have been plans in place that cover getting basic supplies and security to major metropolitan areas in a timely manner!
And yes.. there are roads available to get down to Lousiana. There are NO trucks, after five days, on those highways working their way down there. After FIVE DAYS the trucks are not on their way with food and water. Emergency Preparedness means that they get those supplies on the way and stage them as closely as they can and stage them for distribution out to the stranded people.
There are 30,000 people at the Superdome. Buses can get in there (if sent) and get those people out of there. There is no excuse for leaving 30,000 people starving and dehydrating in that facility while search and rescue is performed around the flooded zones. New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin said he "talked to everybody under the sun," including President George W. Bush, but had little success accelerating the dispatch of troops and buses to his flooded city terrorized by armed gangs.
"They think small. This is a major, major, major deal," he told CNN television. He earlier told a local radio station, "every day we delay, people are dying and they're dying in the hundreds, I'm willing to bet you."
Nagin said he told Bush, who was to visit the disaster zone on Friday, that "his flying over in Air Force One does not do it justice." | |
| | |
09-02-2005, 12:40 PM
|
#10 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 367
| Sad how quickly civilization can break down...
Astrodome is filled with refugees. Reunion Arena in Dallas is taking in some, as well as warehouses on military bases in San Antonio...(my new neck of the woods) | |
| | |
09-02-2005, 12:43 PM
|
#12 | | Din Älskling
Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Somewhere inside your head. Or am I?
Posts: 4,196
| The hurricane didn't just suddenly appear. It's path was projected days before it hit. We are now into the 5th day. That's not enough time to sort things out so that some semblance of organization is beginning to surface? Does it now take us weeks to respond adquately to a natural catastrophe?
__________________
"Since when does being a patriot in America mean shutting your mouth?"
---
zz,zz,zz,zz,zz,zz! | |
| | |
09-02-2005, 12:53 PM
|
#13 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,464
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by daeceg Sad how quickly civilization can break down...
Astrodome is filled with refugees. Reunion Arena in Dallas is taking in some, as well as warehouses on military bases in San Antonio...(my new neck of the woods) |
You have five days and tens of thousands of displaced Americans. There is no electricity, no television reports, no news, no police or security forces. They don't know if anyone knows they are there. They were advised to evacuate and seek shelter, and they did. Now they are wondering what happened. Where are the authorities to tell them what has happened. Who is telling them that aid is on its way?
Of course it has broken down. Five days with no water, no food, no word from anyone about what has happened.
I've seen "civilized" queues at concert ticket counters and crowded grocery stores cash registers break down faster for less than the dire urgency of New Orleans. | |
| | |
09-02-2005, 02:33 PM
|
#14 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: London
Posts: 1,216
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by Maeve_Mari Here's the thing about Emergency Preparedness... you have to be PREPARED for Emergencies. And that does not mean wondering what to do after five days. | OK ... what should you do? Quote: |
Imagine this... what if instead of water, this was a chemical explosion/flood. Do we not have any plans in place at the Federal level for how to move people out of a dangerous area rapidly?
| How many people are we talking about? How many people can you evacuate in under a week? We're talking about over a million people here, it's not as simple as just saying that they should "have a plan."
Are things being handled ideally? I truly doubt it. But having a plan specific to evacuating a flooded city as large as New Orleans? Who would have such a plan? Maybe the people who've been flooded in New Orleans. Oh, wait -- they're the victims. Quote:
Are we expected to believe that after all these years the Federal Agencies haven't run through a number of disaster scenarios - numbers of "What If's..." on how to step up to action in an emergency. What a disgrace that our Federal Emergency agencies can't mobilize rapidly to meet the needs of the nation.
It's not a matter of the nature of this specific disaster, there should have been plans in place that cover getting basic supplies and security to major metropolitan areas in a timely manner!
| No, it's not a matter of the nature of this disaster: It's the scale. Federal Emergency preparedness is based almost entirely upon terrorist attacks, which really *cannot* occur on this large a scale. There's no comparison -- the damage is similar to that which would be caused by the detonation of multiple nuclear warheads.
Not the size of a chemical weapon attack, or crashing a plane into the city -- much, much bigger. And yes, size does matter. Quote: |
And yes.. there are roads available to get down to Lousiana. There are NO trucks, after five days, on those highways working their way down there. After FIVE DAYS the trucks are not on their way with food and water. Emergency Preparedness means that they get those supplies on the way and stage them as closely as they can and stage them for distribution out to the stranded people.
| Well, as of today there are National Guardsmen arriving with food and water. Does Emergency Preparedness count on the people that you're trying to help shooting at you? Helicopters dropping things from a height, because the pilots are afraid to land? Quote: |
There are 30,000 people at the Superdome. Buses can get in there (if sent) and get those people out of there. There is no excuse for leaving 30,000 people starving and dehydrating in that facility while search and rescue is performed around the flooded zones.
| Yes, and there are 20,000 at the Convention Centre.
Another 12,000 that they stopped from entering the Superdome, due to crowding.
Do you evacuate the Superdome first, or take care of those who don't even have shelter? What of the tens of thousands still in the city who aren't in any of those three groups?
Also: Are you suggesting that they should have let people drown in their attics, and evacuated the Superdome instead of saving them? How many more dead would that leave? Are you certani that it was so wrong a decision as to be "inexcusable"? Or are you under the impression that they have unlimited resources?
Are you aware that they've *attempted* to evacuate the Superdome, but stopped because people were shooting at them? Quote: New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin said he "talked to everybody under the sun," including President George W. Bush, but had little success accelerating the dispatch of troops and buses to his flooded city terrorized by armed gangs.
"They think small. This is a major, major, major deal," he told CNN television. He earlier told a local radio station, "every day we delay, people are dying and they're dying in the hundreds, I'm willing to bet you."
Nagin said he told Bush, who was to visit the disaster zone on Friday, that "his flying over in Air Force One does not do it justice." | Nagin is the mayor of New Orleans. His responsibility is to get help -- he can't do anything himself, all he can do is try to get as much help as possible, as quickly as possible, for the city.
To that end, he puts pressure on everybody and anybody via the media. Good for him. Quote: |
Originally Posted by esskreemr It's path was projected days before it hit. | And they evacuated approximately 800,000 people, and many of those who stayed behind did so of their own (idiotic) accord. They clearly weren't prepared for an emergency on this scale. Were you? Did you expect to see any of the images that have been on your TV a week ago? Quote: |
Originally Posted by esskreemr That's not enough time to sort things out so that some semblance of organization is beginning to surface? Does it now take us weeks to respond adquately to a natural catastrophe? | What do you mean by "respond adequately"? Are you aware of how long it took for help to get to most of those who needed it following the tsunami? How do you respond adequately during the first 24 hours of a crisis like that in New Orleans when the situation continues to worsen? Every time things might be under control, it took a turn for the worse.
And where is "weeks" coming from? Quote: |
Originally Posted by Maeve_Mari You have five days and tens of thousands of displaced Americans. | Tens of thousands? Think bigger. Look back at your quote from the mayor above. You're thinking small. | |
| | |
09-02-2005, 02:58 PM
|
#15 | | Din Älskling
Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Somewhere inside your head. Or am I?
Posts: 4,196
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by kalivor OK ... what should you do? | Everything and anything possible. Quote: |
How many people are we talking about? How many people can you evacuate in under a week? We're talking about over a million people here, it's not as simple as just saying that they should "have a plan."
| Personally? I could probably fit 4-5 in my car. Quote: |
Are things being handled ideally? I truly doubt it. But having a plan specific to evacuating a flooded city as large as New Orleans? Who would have such a plan? Maybe the people who've been flooded in New Orleans. Oh, wait -- they're the victims.
| Ideally, there should be plans at the local level, the state level, the regional level, and the national level. Doesn't sound like any were implemented adequately. Quote: |
No, it's not a matter of the nature of this disaster: It's the scale. Federal Emergency preparedness is based almost entirely upon terrorist attacks, which really *cannot* occur on this large a scale.
| So a biochemical attack in New York wouldn't have a similar effect? Haven't they been planning such 'wide-spread' destructive scenarios for over 4 years now? Where's the infrastructure to handle this type of issue? Why were they turning away Canadian offers of aid? Quote: |
There's no comparison -- the damage is similar to that which would be caused by the detonation of multiple nuclear warheads.
| No, it's not. There are identifiable shelters, high ground, structures secure enough to withstand flooding. This would not be the case in the detonation of multiple warheads. Quote: |
Not the size of a chemical weapon attack, or crashing a plane into the city -- much, much bigger. And yes, size does matter.
| Yes it does. The logistics are similar though. Quote: |
Well, as of today there are National Guardsmen arriving with food and water. Does Emergency Preparedness count on the people that you're trying to help shooting at you? Helicopters dropping things from a height, because the pilots are afraid to land?
| I find it hard to believe that the entire releaf effort was held up for 5 days because of a few pot-shots taken. Aren't these pilots military trained? Quote:
Yes, and there are 20,000 at the Convention Centre.
Another 12,000 that they stopped from entering the Superdome, due to crowding.
Do you evacuate the Superdome first, or take care of those who don't even have shelter? What of the tens of thousands still in the city who aren't in any of those three groups?
| As long as they are dry, why not drop potable water and food supplies, medication, instructions on what to do... Quote: |
Are you aware that they've *attempted* to evacuate the Superdome, but stopped because people were shooting at them?
| Sporadic arms fire is going to stop military pilots from landing or seeking more secure landing? Quote: |
And they evacuated approximately 800,000 people, and many of those who stayed behind did so of their own (idiotic) accord. They clearly weren't prepared for an emergency on this scale. Were you? Did you expect to see any of the images that have been on your TV a week ago?
| I'm not on the Federal Disaster Planning Commission or HEMA (under the Dept of Homeland Security now), or whatever they are calling it now. Quote: |
What do you mean by "respond adequately"? Are you aware of how long it took for help to get to most of those who needed it following the tsunami?
| No. Is this really comparable? Quote: |
How do you respond adequately during the first 24 hours of a crisis like that in New Orleans when the situation continues to worsen? Every time things might be under control, it took a turn for the worse.
| Why was the situation worsening? Were there multiple hurricanes? At what point did the control break? At what point was it reestablished? Quote:
That's perhaps excusable behavior for about a day or so. 5 days?
And where is "weeks" coming from?
| Ok, 'week'.
__________________
"Since when does being a patriot in America mean shutting your mouth?"
---
zz,zz,zz,zz,zz,zz! | |
| | |
09-02-2005, 03:24 PM
|
#16 | | Din Älskling
Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Somewhere inside your head. Or am I?
Posts: 4,196
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by kalivor OK ... what should you do?
How many people are we talking about? How many people can you evacuate in under a week? We're talking about over a million people here, it's not as simple as just saying that they should "have a plan."
Are things being handled ideally? I truly doubt it. But having a plan specific to evacuating a flooded city as large as New Orleans? Who would have such a plan? Maybe the people who've been flooded in New Orleans. Oh, wait -- they're the victims.
No, it's not a matter of the nature of this disaster: It's the scale. Federal Emergency preparedness is based almost entirely upon terrorist attacks, which really *cannot* occur on this large a scale. There's no comparison -- the damage is similar to that which would be caused by the detonation of multiple nuclear warheads.
Not the size of a chemical weapon attack, or crashing a plane into the city -- much, much bigger. And yes, size does matter.
Well, as of today there are National Guardsmen arriving with food and water. Does Emergency Preparedness count on the people that you're trying to help shooting at you? Helicopters dropping things from a height, because the pilots are afraid to land?
And they evacuated approximately 800,000 people, and many of those who stayed behind did so of their own (idiotic) accord. They clearly weren't prepared for an emergency on this scale. Were you? Did you expect to see any of the images that have been on your TV a week ago?
What do you mean by "respond adequately"? Are you aware of how long it took for help to get to most of those who needed it following the tsunami? How do you respond adequately during the first 24 hours of a crisis like that in New Orleans when the situation continues to worsen? Every time things might be under control, it took a turn for the worse.
Tens of thousands? Think bigger. Look back at your quote from the mayor above. You're thinking small. | This wasn't the big 'surprise' as you play it out to be. There were several reports (FEMA) that emphasized the precarious situation of New Orleans, particular with the scope and severity of hurricanes in the Gulf region. Not only was additional funds to increase the efficacy of the levee system requested numerous times, its funding was cut by as much as 80% since 2004. The scale is shocking, but not beyond imagination or precedence.
Why was FEMA placed under the USDHS if not to allow it to be gathered into the wings of an agency with the authority and power to implement plans that consider scenarios with such wide-spread destruction and chaos that we are witnessing? What happened to a Nation-wide response infrastructure that would take attacks on whole cities into account? What happened to the numerous warnings about the precipice upon which New Orleans was teetering? The FEMA report stating in 2001 that a hurricane striking New Orleans would have just the devastating effect that we are now witnessing. Why did funding trickle to next to nothing since 2003?
__________________
"Since when does being a patriot in America mean shutting your mouth?"
---
zz,zz,zz,zz,zz,zz! | |
| | |
09-02-2005, 03:27 PM
|
#17 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,464
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by kalivor OK ... what should you do?
How many people are we talking about? How many people can you evacuate in under a week? We're talking about over a million people here, it's not as simple as just saying that they should "have a plan."
Are things being handled ideally? I truly doubt it. But having a plan specific to evacuating a flooded city as large as New Orleans? Who would have such a plan? Maybe the people who've been flooded in New Orleans. Oh, wait -- they're the victims. | I think it is as simple as having our Federal Emergency Agencies having plans... that's what they are supposed to have been doing as part of their day to day operations. Making plans to be prepared to reach out efficiently and effectively for emergencies.
I know at my company we have emergency plans. We prepare them, we test them, we have little circle groups to discuss these plans and ask for input and innovative ideas for how we can better these plans. We do mock drills, we hire experts to come in and look at our plans, we update our plans... and in the case of an emergency, we mobilize and execute on those plans. We did so for our 30,000 employees down in the Gulf Coast region just this very week. In a few weeks we will look at those plans and see where they worked well and where they need improvement. Then we will update our plans, consider some new scenarios and emergencies, and we'll | |
