One question

W

wolfen

Active member
Why does it take 24 hours for the govt to send a military unit over seas fully depolyed, and a week to send a bottle of water to New Orleans?
 
i feel the same way.

this is just my personal opinion, and i dont want to get any backlash for this, but me and my family thinks that the reason the government took so long to get to new orleans is that most of the people that were left behind were the unmentionables of the city(homeless, carless, jobless people) that is why i think they took so long. I know that would be a very very very wrong reason for them to take so long, but it does make some sense.


:rambo:
 
Well the military is prepared to send a force anywhere in 24-72 hours. Because it has happened before many times. But the gov't was not prepared for this size of a disaster. Why? No one can prepare for everything. It's not like they can pull out a manual for everything that can happen. "Katrina has hit. Lets pull out the Hurricane Katrina Manual to see what we need to do." No, doesn't work that way.
 
I think most people were expecting it to be like Florida; the hurricane hits, everyone moves on with their lives. I dont think that anyone was expecting it to actually do something. Ignorantly underestimating its power. (Im not just talking about residents, but also local, state, and federal authorities as well.)
 
A little first hand info here:


Several Marines in the unit I am in got word to move out at 1100 on Thursday. I know of at least a dozen people that spent until 0300 on Friday preparing themselves and various operational resources to be ready to go. As of 0900 on Friday they were to be mobilized and on their way.

It is a higher echelon of the government that makes these decisions. Not the military itself. You have to consider that to do any kind of civilian action in regards to using military personnel, it literally takes an act of congress and it takes time for congress to go through all the BS redtape they make and have.

Also take into consideration that they just were not prepared for the size and scope of the devastation. Many of the residents (those that left and those that stayed) were well aware of the possible damage and were warned well in advance. My parents live in northern Louisiana and they still got their butts out of dodge just in case.

This is as much a matter of people trying to place blame on someone else for their own actions, as it is those higher up not having a good "what if" scenario.

To all of you that have not yet done so, I would like to suggest a little reading. It is called "A Message To Garcia" by Elbert Hubbard It was written in 1899 and I feel the general message of it still applies to this day.

Read it and start a discussion thread.
 
wolfen said:
Why does it take 24 hours for the govt to send a military unit over seas fully depolyed, and a week to send a bottle of water to New Orleans?
Click to expand...

I am assuming you have no idea the work involved to send a battalion overseas. The act of doing so only takes getting your personal bags on the planes and get there.

Little do people realize that soldiers work their butts off to get ready for a deployment. Do you know how many times you repeat such things as SRP's, packing lists, timelines, loading equipment, railheading the trucks, and other BS associated with a deployment.

Since I have been on 2 deployments and prepared for a 3rd, I believe it is quite ignorant to compare the New Orleans disaster to any deployment.
 
also some 1st hand knowledge from a Marine Winger, my MAW had 6 CH-53's and 2 C-130's ready to go at the drop of a hat. my buddy on the east coast went wednesday or thursday, i cant remember. like Marinerhordes said, its not the military b/c believe me, were ready to go get some at a moments notice, its what we live for, but we need the higher echelon to give us the go ahead.
 
does this mean they will launch a war on weather? or just stop stripping money from projects (like levee upkeep) for the WoT?

[url=http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/us-relationship-in-question/2005/09/05/1125772458051.html said:
The Age Online[/url]]US relationship in question
Canberra


George Bush can bring his own gun-toting guards when he visits peaceful, law-abiding Canberra.

But it takes a week for US authorities to allow a single Australian diplomat into hurricane-ravaged New Orleans to search for stranded Australians whose lives could be in serious peril.

It's hardly the special relationship between the two countries that Australians are used to hearing about.

For Australian diplomats in the US, the refusal of local officials to allow them into the disaster zone to do their job was frustrating.

But for the 70 Australians stranded in New Orleans, menaced by armed gangs and surrounded by the dead and dying, it was incomprehensible that their government was not coming to their rescue.

And for their families, seeing the horrible pictures coming out of New Orleans while waiting for news of their loved ones, the distress is unimaginable.

The Louisiana officials don't want outsiders getting in their way as they struggle to restore order in a city with little food, water or power for those already there.
AdvertisementAdvertisement

With a death toll feared to be in the tens of thousands, they have enough to worry about.

Australian officials rang the Americans every four hours, pressuring to be allowed in, but US authorities would not budge, Foreign Minister Alexander Downer says.

Finally, today, an Australian consular official and a British diplomat were allowed into the city - but only until dusk.

By then, more than half the Australians feared to be in the area had already made it to safety without any help from the government.

Prime Minister John Howard denies that the delay in getting officials into New Orleans means the Australian government has failed its people.

He also denies that it means Australia's relationship with the US is not as close as he has claimed.

"If the leader of the opposition is saying that we have failed, then he is saying that (British Prime Minister) Tony Blair has failed and he is saying that the Canadian prime minister has failed," Mr Howard told parliament.

But Opposition Leader Kim Beazley says the government should have ignored the ban and sent in a rescue mission.

Mr Beazley says Australian troops on postings in the US could have talked their way into the disaster zone, as television news crews did.

"Australian servicemen are terrific at this... These blokes can talk themselves onto anything under any circumstances," he says.

But Neil James of the Australia Defence Association says it's an unworkable plan as all exchange postings are regulated by written agreements controlling how foreigners can be used.

"Because of the law and order situation, I think most of the American commanders would have been a bit reluctant to let their Australian go in case the Australian had to apply force, and then they're not covered legally," Mr James says.

"If something did go wrong, the chances are everyone would cover him, but there would always be that nagging fear."

But those stranded still believe Mr Howard should have done more.

"I'm a good Australian," Brisbane woman Fiona Seidel says.

"I pay my taxes. I work. I own a home. I do the right thing. I don't commit crimes. And he pretty much wasn't there for me when I needed him."
Click to expand...
 
My 2cents here:

It takes 24 hrs to deploy troops to a foreign land becuz FEDERAL govt is in charge.

In a State and local level, Feds have no responsiblity.
 
phoenix_aim54 said:
My 2cents here:

It takes 24 hrs to deploy troops to a foreign land becuz FEDERAL govt is in charge.

In a State and local level, Feds have no responsiblity.
Click to expand...

I am from Louisiana and let me say that the government there is not always the best prepared. There is alot of church and state intermingled, this sometimes makes it hard for those in charge to make a good decision. If any of you live in the "bible belt" you will know exactly what I am talking about.
 
Marinerhodes said:
phoenix_aim54 said:
My 2cents here:

It takes 24 hrs to deploy troops to a foreign land becuz FEDERAL govt is in charge.

In a State and local level, Feds have no responsiblity.
Click to expand...

I am from Louisiana and let me say that the government there is not always the best prepared. There is alot of church and state intermingled, this sometimes makes it hard for those in charge to make a good decision. If any of you live in the "bible belt" you will know exactly what I am talking about.
Click to expand...

What are you exactly talking about? ( :D ) - I mean, really, I'm interested.
 
Let me give you an example of small town politics then you can apply it to a statewide mindset.

My Dad owns a construction company. He wants to go and put up a building. Well if he is not a known donater to the various religious organizations involved in and around the city then his permits and whatnot can be delayed or even denied, yes I have seen this happen 1st hand. I have seen where he would one month get a permit to put up a building in a very short amount of time. Then turn around and 2 months later have it take an extraordinary amount of time to get the same type of permit from the same office in the same parish (county) in the same city etc etc to put up the exact same type of building. Just in a different church's "territory".

The reason I say this is that many members of the church hold state and city positions. They, regardless of their religion, walk and work hand in hand to ensure the "well being" of their churches and congregations.

Now tell me why a minister and his wife each, in a city of approximately 100,000 people, drives a $45,000 dollar vehicle and they live in a 5 bedroom 2 bath house on 20 acres of land? Does his Church and State salary pay him that well?

No, that is not the house set aside for his use by the church, that is the house that he owns and it is his vehicle. This person has been in ministry (so I have been told) for almost 25 years and has been in the state department for about as long.

There is one example of church and state intermingling.

Sorry I know it does not really belong here...but you asked.
 
Sure I did. Thank you very much this has been totally interesting. So what Christian confessions would you apply that to? Baptists, Methodists... ? Curious.
 
Ahh now see, that is why I kept it vague. I do not want to point fingers or get anyone into trouble or cause trouble for anyone. Let's just leave it as is and call it a wrap ;)
 
Marinerhodes said:
Ahh now see, that is why I kept it vague. I do not want to point fingers or get anyone into trouble or cause trouble for anyone. Let's just leave it as is and call it a wrap ;)
Click to expand...

Or PM me and give me your opinion, if you will. No pressure though.
 
Cadet Chief Robot said:
Well the military is prepared to send a force anywhere in 24-72 hours. Because it has happened before many times. But the gov't was not prepared for this size of a disaster. Why? No one can prepare for everything. It's not like they can pull out a manual for everything that can happen. "Katrina has hit. Lets pull out the Hurricane Katrina Manual to see what we need to do." No, doesn't work that way.
Click to expand...

My Squadron wa snever prepared for anything but we always got there in 24 or less no matterwhat happened.
I guess the navy improvises on a lot of stuff that the rest of the military need manuals for LOL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top