Quake3World

Foo wrote:I can't beleive you have so much anger against me when all I've done is discuss the matter here.

What have I done that upsets you so much?

You're confused, yet again. It's not anger, child. It's pitty for your ignorance.

Grow up.

Well I'm asking you civilised questions and you're still coming on with insults.

Thanks for taking the time to post anyway.

NP

Now run along. It must be past your bed time.

Hehe, it's 5:30AM here and I've been up for about 48 hours. I pulled nearly 72 hours from last saturday watching WWLTV and listening in on the emergency scanners.

Am getting too old for all-nighters and red bull breakfasts.

losCHUNK wrote:only cat 3 levies ? when building a city under water i think the strongest cat 5 repellent levies would be one of the most important things

apparently the money/technology wasn't there when they built them...if that is true, why they weren't updated is beyond me.

as for nobody being at fault...

for katrina - obviously not.

for the power of katrina - maybe, maybe global warming had something to do with the above average temp in the gulf waters, but again, no way to really deem it conclusive that this couldn't have been a natural fluctuation in the water temp...

but conditions that exacerbated other aspects of the storm can be blamed on folks -
the levees, the ignoring of the warnings (even a few years ago when a flood of N.O. was brought to the administrations attention).
the turning over of protected wetlands to developers

and obviously the shitball response to the whole thing.

Foo wrote:

R00k wrote:So you also don't think it helps the communities to donate money to them?

To what would I be donating money in this case? The US government has billions at its disposal to rectify this if it so chooses. We're not taking about a 3rd world backwater that simply does not have the necessary funds, and depends on charities for relief efforts. The US has the means and the agencies necessary to react to this crisis.

Money just isn't an issue here.

billions at our disposal? money doesn't come from the money tree here, it just appears that way because our president likes to throw so much of it around in wars for oil. that money that is 'at our disposal' is taxpayer money...and will ultimately pull from other social needs...donated money goes right to the problem (in some cases).

not quite that easy...

You're right, it's not as simple as I stated.

However, I believe the necessary funding for all rescue and recovery operations are adequately covered by your governments resources.

I think if this is not true, we will see an appeal from your government for international donations.

tnf wrote:

losCHUNK wrote:only cat 3 levies ? when building a city under water i think the strongest cat 5 repellent levies would be one of the most important things

apparently the money/technology wasn't there when they built them...if that is true, why they weren't updated is beyond me.

as for nobody being at fault...

for katrina - obviously not.

for the power of katrina - maybe, maybe global warming had something to do with the above average temp in the gulf waters, but again, no way to really deem it conclusive that this couldn't have been a natural fluctuation in the water temp...

but conditions that exacerbated other aspects of the storm can be blamed on folks -
the levees, the ignoring of the warnings (even a few years ago when a flood of N.O. was brought to the administrations attention).
the turning over of protected wetlands to developers

and obviously the shitball response to the whole thing.

Would like to state that I agree with this post 100%.

Here's an engineer's take on the system of levees... "Bush administration funding cuts for the system of levees, floodgates and pumping stations that failed to protect the city had not contributed to the disaster"
...
"Strock said money was a factor in why the levees were not designed to protect against the strongest hurricanes" ..."It's a combination of doing the engineering, looking at the likelihood of a given storm event, looking at the amount of effort that will be needed to protect the city in an ironclad way, and then making a decision which is based on engineering judgment and the economics of whether it's worth the cost to the benefit and then striking the right level of protection."

http://today.reuters.com/investing/fina ... 02564147:1

but our governments resources are completely stretched due to bush's war.

national guard is spread thin, the budget for the army corps of engineers in NO was slashed. the resources for operations were probably there, but the person at the head of it all is a fucking jackass, so it really didn't matter. you won't see Bush do any asking for donations - it would betray his cowboy demeanor and hurt his stake in the Christian right who think America is God's fucking chosen land or something.
but the rest of the world is starting to help -
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9179059/

the problem is that all the help showing up now, the national guard troops, teh amphibious vehicles, etc. needed to be there RIGHT AWAY. It is insulting to hear them talking about launching more and more rescue missions, etc...that shit shoudl have been taking place en masse the day after this whole fucking thing, and i don't care how difficult it was...again, get on fucking waverunners, jet skis, whatever, and swarm that place with fucking help...but it didn't happen...and in some areas, it is still just individual citizens with small boats picking people up here and there...

our government thinks it is dead right about global warming and everyone else is dead wrong. our fucking president doesn't believe in evolution. he doesn't seem to mind being the sole voice of foolishness. i just don't see him 'asking' for help directly...

Neither do I sadly.

I think a big part of me would derive satisfaction from seeing America ask for something, and that might be where some of my stance on it is coming from.

But that's wrong and I'm not proud of thinking that way.

mjrpes wrote: http://today.reuters.com/investing/fina ... 02564147:1

Thanks.

This part really confused me:
"We figured we had a 200- or 300-year level of protection. That means that an event that we were protecting from might be exceeded every 200 or 300 years," Strock told reporters. "So we had an assurance that 99.5 percent, this would be OK. We, unfortunately, have had that 0.5 percent activity here."

Surely hurricane activity does not happen at regular intervals, and if they think it'll happen once every 200 years on average, then that must mean that the chance of it happening within a 10 year period is 5%.

Isn't 5% a big risk?

Foo wrote:Neither do I sadly.

I think a big part of me would derive satisfaction from seeing America ask for something, and that might be where some of my stance on it is coming from.

But that's wrong and I'm not proud of thinking that way.

oh i hate to say that i've taken some solace in knowing that this is helping to skewer Bush politically, but i have.

i am almost looking forward to the months of bashing Bush and his administration are in for, but I am sure that they'll spin their way out of it enough for the majority of folks here to forget about it...

mjrpes wrote:Here's an engineer's take on the system of levees... "Bush administration funding cuts for the system of levees, floodgates and pumping stations that failed to protect the city had not contributed to the disaster"
...
"Strock said money was a factor in why the levees were not designed to protect against the strongest hurricanes" ..."It's a combination of doing the engineering, looking at the likelihood of a given storm event, looking at the amount of effort that will be needed to protect the city in an ironclad way, and then making a decision which is based on engineering judgment and the economics of whether it's worth the cost to the benefit and then striking the right level of protection."

http://today.reuters.com/investing/fina ... 02564147:1

HAHAHAHAHA, alright so Bush isnt to blame for cutting the budgets to the levees but yet money is the factor to why they didnt protect the city.
Nice double think there.

Heres an article from 2003 saying how the Big One was going to come for New Orleans.

http://www.nola.com/hurricane/index.ssf ... part1.html

And now, from the other side,

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp ... 1001051313

It's pretty sad that it takes a cat 5 hurricane to demonstrate that Gramps is a fucking tool.

P.S. rescue attempts apparently being made more difficult by snipers..... WTF?

man, I have no words...

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/09/04.html#a4783

God that guy crying makes me want to punch a republican.

Also I have more respect for Walmart now.

Mr.Magnetichead wrote: Also I have more respect for Walmart now.

lols yeah thats what I thought too; I've also decided that the keys to civilisation are primarily around waste disposal - sewerage, republicans, etc

mjrpes wrote:Here's an engineer's take on the system of levees... "Bush administration funding cuts for the system of levees, floodgates and pumping stations that failed to protect the city had not contributed to the disaster"
...
"Strock said money was a factor in why the levees were not designed to protect against the strongest hurricanes" ..."It's a combination of doing the engineering, looking at the likelihood of a given storm event, looking at the amount of effort that will be needed to protect the city in an ironclad way, and then making a decision which is based on engineering judgment and the economics of whether it's worth the cost to the benefit and then striking the right level of protection."

http://today.reuters.com/investing/fina ... 02564147:1

Strock is a close friend of Bush's. He fired a Corps of Engineers contract supervisor when she blew the whistle on Halliburton's unfair bidding and price-gouging. Her job was to review contracts and look for improprieties.

Barbara Bush thinks the hurricane was a good thing for NO's poor people. America

Yea I saw that. What a ridiculous bitch.

I saw Bush senior on the telly this morning saying something along the lines of 'And if any of you (reporters) want to tell Barbara about his (juniors) shortcomings, i advise you to wear a flak jacket" followed by a lot of cowardly laughter from the assembled press corps.

Jesus. The president's own dad is making fun of him on public television.