T Nation

New Orleans, Worth Your Help?

No one should have to endure what the unfortunate people who were stranded in New Orleans had to the past week. However what the media is failing to comment on its coverage is personal responsibility.

This morning’s New York Times has some shocking information in its main story on New Orleans. The USA Today also reports that police escorts had to kill five residents of New Orleans as they were shooting at Army engineers who were trying to repair the breeched levee.

The conditions were so bad in New Orleans that 200 of its 1500 police officers handed in their badges and another two committed suicide. If that wasn’t bad enough the police superintendent offered to send not only all members of the police and fire departments but their families on vacations to Las Vegas. I don’t remember New York sending its firemen to Vegas after 9/11, do you??

Just seems morally reprehensible to even consider doing something this outrageous, but at least that would be consistent with the moral caliber of this city.

Let’s get back to personal responsibility. It is no mystery that the city was built below sea level Many expert panels had predicted that this would happen and it was surprising it hadn’t occured earlier. It wasn’t a matter of New Orleans would be flooded it was when it would have a disaster. These levees were NEVER DESIGNED to withstand this type of storm. Unlike the unpredictable tsunami and 9/11 disasters this one could have been prevented.

As NewMax said this am “Common sense suggests that local and state governments are best able to prepare and plan for local disasters. But if we believe the major TV networks, George Bush, FEMA and the Republicans in Congress are all to blame for the current nightmare.”

Chicago Did It ? Why Couldn’t New Orleans?

I live in Chicago and it was also below sea level before 1850. However the city spent 20 years to repair that and rebuild itself 14 feet higher. Chicago is FAR larger than New Orleans. If they were able to fix their city over 150 years ago why couldn’t New Orleans?

Instead New Orleans chose to do nothing, absolutely nothing to correct its plight and now that the predicted disaster has occurred significant portions of its entitlement mentality population believe the federal government “owes it to them” to repair their city. Now, you and I will have to pay TENS OF BILLIONS of our tax dollars to correct their careless irresponsible behavior.

Morally Unacceptable Behavior

Hundreds of its citizens chose to pillage and rape its own residents and aim deadly fire on those that were sent to help them by bringing supplies and repair assistance.

Then, to add insult to injury, the city decides to send its municipal workers and their families to Las Vegas. Is it because their isn’t enough work to do or because they just could not figure out what to do with all their surplus city funds?

The city is BILLIONS of dollars in debt due to this disaster and wants to spend money it doesn’t have to send these families to Las Vegas.

It is most unfortunate that so many helpless people had to suffer and die because those in responsible positions chose to do nothing. The media has not said one word about bringing the appropriate city officials to trial for this disaster.

Rather the mayor of New Orleans goes on the media and issues multiple profanities rather than accepting responsibility for not taking preventive action that could have avoided this disaster.

Source: mercola.com/blog/2005/sep/5/reflections_on_new_orleans_disaster

I found this to be a bit shocking, I thought I would share. I guess you do learn something everyday.

[quote]ZARA22 wrote:
The USA Today also reports that police escorts had to kill five residents of New Orleans as they were shooting at Army engineers who were trying to repair the breeched levee.

[/quote]
That is terrible. Those guys are supposed to be trained professionals. I can’t believe they missed a couple.
Too bad all of the good shooters are busy in the middle east.

[quote]ZARA22 wrote:
No one should have to endure what the unfortunate people who were stranded in New Orleans had to the past week. However what the media is failing to comment on its coverage is personal responsibility.

This morning’s New York Times has some shocking information in its main story on New Orleans. The USA Today also reports that police escorts had to kill five residents of New Orleans as they were shooting at Army engineers who were trying to repair the breeched levee.

The conditions were so bad in New Orleans that 200 of its 1500 police officers handed in their badges and another two committed suicide. If that wasn’t bad enough the police superintendent offered to send not only all members of the police and fire departments but their families on vacations to Las Vegas. I don’t remember New York sending its firemen to Vegas after 9/11, do you??

Just seems morally reprehensible to even consider doing something this outrageous, but at least that would be consistent with the moral caliber of this city.

Let’s get back to personal responsibility. It is no mystery that the city was built below sea level Many expert panels had predicted that this would happen and it was surprising it hadn’t occured earlier. It wasn’t a matter of New Orleans would be flooded it was when it would have a disaster. These levees were NEVER DESIGNED to withstand this type of storm. Unlike the unpredictable tsunami and 9/11 disasters this one could have been prevented.

As NewMax said this am “Common sense suggests that local and state governments are best able to prepare and plan for local disasters. But if we believe the major TV networks, George Bush, FEMA and the Republicans in Congress are all to blame for the current nightmare.”

Chicago Did It ? Why Couldn’t New Orleans?

I live in Chicago and it was also below sea level before 1850. However the city spent 20 years to repair that and rebuild itself 14 feet higher. Chicago is FAR larger than New Orleans. If they were able to fix their city over 150 years ago why couldn’t New Orleans?

Instead New Orleans chose to do nothing, absolutely nothing to correct its plight and now that the predicted disaster has occurred significant portions of its entitlement mentality population believe the federal government “owes it to them” to repair their city. Now, you and I will have to pay TENS OF BILLIONS of our tax dollars to correct their careless irresponsible behavior.

Morally Unacceptable Behavior

Hundreds of its citizens chose to pillage and rape its own residents and aim deadly fire on those that were sent to help them by bringing supplies and repair assistance.

Then, to add insult to injury, the city decides to send its municipal workers and their families to Las Vegas. Is it because their isn’t enough work to do or because they just could not figure out what to do with all their surplus city funds?

The city is BILLIONS of dollars in debt due to this disaster and wants to spend money it doesn’t have to send these families to Las Vegas.

It is most unfortunate that so many helpless people had to suffer and die because those in responsible positions chose to do nothing. The media has not said one word about bringing the appropriate city officials to trial for this disaster.

Rather the mayor of New Orleans goes on the media and issues multiple profanities rather than accepting responsibility for not taking preventive action that could have avoided this disaster.

Source: mercola.com/blog/2005/sep/5/reflections_on_new_orleans_disaster

I found this to be a bit shocking, I thought I would share. I guess you do learn something everyday.[/quote]

Excellent post. As I stated before, the city was aware of this problem for a long, long time. And as the article states, it chose to do nothing. But it’s the federal governments fault for not throwing enough cash at the problem?

This is certainly a disaster of biblical proportions. However the entire situation could have been handled alot better if the city of New Orleans and the state would have had appropriate disaster plans in place to better coordinate with the feds. That’s how that shit works folks. City and county level, then the state level, then the federal level.

If the possibility of severe flooding of this extent was mede aware of as long ago as it was, then there’s NO EXCUSE for not having a plan in place for the forced evacuation of the city in advance. The leadership in NO droped the ball a long time ago, and haven’t picked it up since. New Orleans should have had a plan in place with the state, the state should have had a plan in place with the feds. Period.

This article makes some good points in that this disaster was absolutely a man made disaster.

I believe this story goes hand in hand with the story of the woman who was on tv bitching about how her food was cold and wasn’t very good when she was given something to eat at a shelter. She was given an MRE! the very same chow that our fighting men and women eat! WTF!!!

I particularly like the reference to the fact that city leadership (although I really don’t believe that term applies here) had no plan to evacuate the prisoners.

The city had no plan to evacuate the elderly

The city had no plan to evacuate the handicaped

The city had no plan to evacuate the poor with no transportation of their own.

The city “leadership” had no plan whatsoever for anything. NO was a corrupt city with a corrupt government and the good citizens deserved better than what they gave them. which was nothing.

September 5, 2005
Unnatural Disaster: A Hurricane Exposes the Man-Made Disaster of the Welfare State
By Robert Tracinski

It took four long days for state and federal officials to figure out how to deal with the disaster in New Orleans. I can’t blame them, because it also took me four long days to figure out what was going on there. The reason is that the events there make no sense if you think that we are confronting a natural disaster.

If this is just a natural disaster, the response for public officials is obvious: you bring in food, water, and doctors; you send transportation to evacuate refugees to temporary shelters; you send engineers to stop the flooding and rebuild the city’s infrastructure. For journalists, natural disasters also have a familiar pattern: the heroism of ordinary people pulling together to survive; the hard work and dedication of doctors, nurses, and rescue workers; the steps being taken to clean up and rebuild.

Public officials did not expect that the first thing they would have to do is to send thousands of armed troops in armored vehicle, as if they are suppressing an enemy insurgency. And journalists?myself included?did not expect that the story would not be about rain, wind, and flooding, but about rape, murder, and looting.

But this is not a natural disaster. It is a man-made disaster.

The man-made disaster is not an inadequate or incompetent response by federal relief agencies, and it was not directly caused by Hurricane Katrina. This is where just about every newspaper and television channel has gotten the story wrong.

The man-made disaster we are now witnessing in New Orleans did not happen over four days last week. It happened over the past four decades. Hurricane Katrina merely exposed it to public view.

The man-made disaster is the welfare state.

For the past few days, I have found the news from New Orleans to be confusing. People were not behaving as you would expect them to behave in an emergency?indeed, they were not behaving as they have behaved in other emergencies. That is what has shocked so many people: they have been saying that this is not what we expect from America. In fact, it is not even what we expect from a Third World country.

When confronted with a disaster, people usually rise to the occasion. They work together to rescue people in danger, and they spontaneously organize to keep order and solve problems. This is especially true in America. We are an enterprising people, used to relying on our own initiative rather than waiting around for the government to take care of us. I have seen this a hundred times, in small examples (a small town whose main traffic light had gone out, causing ordinary citizens to get out of their cars and serve as impromptu traffic cops, directing cars through the intersection) and large ones (the spontaneous response of New Yorkers to September 11).

So what explains the chaos in New Orleans?

To give you an idea of the magnitude of what is going on, here is a description from a Washington Times story:

"Storm victims are raped and beaten; fights erupt with flying fists, knives and guns; fires are breaking out; corpses litter the streets; and police and rescue helicopters are repeatedly fired on.

"The plea from Mayor C. Ray Nagin came even as National Guardsmen poured in to restore order and stop the looting, carjackings and gunfire…

"Last night, Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco said 300 Iraq-hardened Arkansas National Guard members were inside New Orleans with shoot-to-kill orders.

“‘These troops are…under my orders to restore order in the streets,’ she said. ‘They have M-16s, and they are locked and loaded. These troops know how to shoot and kill and they are more than willing to do so if necessary and I expect they will.’”

The reference to Iraq is eerie. The photo that accompanies this article shows a SWAT team with rifles and armored vests riding on an armored vehicle through trash-strewn streets lined by a rabble of squalid, listless people, one of whom appears to be yelling at them. It looks exactly like a scene from Sadr City in Baghdad.

What explains bands of thugs using a natural disaster as an excuse for an orgy of looting, armed robbery, and rape? What causes unruly mobs to storm the very buses that have arrived to evacuate them, causing the drivers to speed away, frightened for their lives? What causes people to attack the doctors trying to treat patients at the Superdome?

Why are people responding to natural destruction by causing further destruction? Why are they attacking the people who are trying to help them?

My wife, Sherri, figured it out first, and she figured it out on a sense-of-life level. While watching the coverage one night on Fox News Channel, she told me that she was getting a familiar feeling. She studied architecture at the Illinois Institute of Chicago, which is located in the South Side of Chicago just blocks away from the Robert Taylor Homes, one of the largest high-rise public housing projects in America. “The projects,” as they were known, were infamous for uncontrollable crime and irremediable squalor. (They have since, mercifully, been demolished.)

What Sherri was getting from last night’s television coverage was a whiff of the sense of life of “the projects.” Then the “crawl”?the informational phrases flashed at the bottom of the screen on most news channels?gave some vital statistics to confirm this sense: 75% of the residents of New Orleans had already evacuated before the hurricane, and of those who remained, a large number were from the city’s public housing projects. Jack Wakeland then told me that early reports from CNN and Fox indicated that the city had no plan for evacuating all of the prisoners in the city’s jails?so they just let many of them loose. [Update: I have been searching for news reports on this last story, but I have not been able to confirm it. Instead, I have found numerous reports about the collapse of the corrupt and incompetent New Orleans Police Department; see here and here.]

There is no doubt a significant overlap between these two populations–that is, a large number of people in the jails used to live in the housing projects, and vice versa.

There were many decent, innocent people trapped in New Orleans when the deluge hit?but they were trapped alongside large numbers of people from two groups: criminals?and wards of the welfare state, people selected, over decades, for their lack of initiative and self-induced helplessness. The welfare wards were a mass of sheep?on whom the incompetent administration of New Orleans unleashed a pack of wolves.

All of this is related, incidentally, to the incompetence of the city government, which failed to plan for a total evacuation of the city, despite the knowledge that this might be necessary. In a city corrupted by the welfare state, the job of city officials is to ensure the flow of handouts to welfare recipients and patronage to political supporters?not to ensure a lawful, orderly evacuation in case of emergency.

No one has really reported this story, as far as I can tell. In fact, some are already actively distorting it, blaming President Bush, for example, for failing to personally ensure that the Mayor of New Orleans had drafted an adequate evacuation plan. The worst example is an execrable piece from the Toronto Globe and Mail, by a supercilious Canadian who blames the chaos on American “individualism.” But the truth is precisely the opposite: the chaos was caused by a system that was the exact opposite of individualism.

What Hurricane Katrina exposed was the psychological consequences of the welfare state. What we consider “normal” behavior in an emergency is behavior that is normal for people who have values and take the responsibility to pursue and protect them. People with values respond to a disaster by fighting against it and doing whatever it takes to overcome the difficulties they face. They don’t sit around and complain that the government hasn’t taken care of them. And they don’t use the chaos of a disaster as an opportunity to prey on their fellow men.

But what about criminals and welfare parasites? Do they worry about saving their houses and property? They don’t, because they don’t own anything. Do they worry about what is going to happen to their businesses or how they are going to make a living? They never worried about those things before. Do they worry about crime and looting? But living off of stolen wealth is a way of life for them.

People living in piles of their own trash, while petulantly complaining that other people aren’t doing enough to take care of them and then shooting at those who come to rescue them?this is not just a description of the chaos at the Superdome. It is a perfect summary of the 40-year history of the welfare state and its public housing projects.

The welfare state?and the brutish, uncivilized mentality it sustains and encourages?is the man-made disaster that explains the moral ugliness that has swamped New Orleans. And that is the story that no one is reporting.

Robert Tracinski is Editor and Publisher of The Intellectual Activist

It’s worth saving there are more good then bad people in the city.

For every gangbanger looter, raping and killing there were stories of bravery by ordinary people. For every cop who couldn’t deal with it another took his place. Lot’s of kids you would call gangbangers gave what they had (water) to others. Some robbed and stole. Focus on the positive. They need it.

I hated to hear the cops didn’t do their jobs. Don’t judge them to harshly. They had it very rough. A strong leader would have helped but in the end each man makes the call himself. The ones that are left are better knowing that they can count on those that remained.

You use Chicago as an example and state that it is a bigger city–well isn’t what would make something more viable–a larger tax base from which to work? What is the rate of people who pay taxes in Chicago v. those who live in New Orleans (percentage)? The only way this disaster could have been avoided is if every single person had been evacuated somewhere safe. Do you think this is a possibility with 500,000 people? If even 80% were evacuated–which is a liberal estimate–there still would have been 100,000 people unaccounted for.

Next I ask you to look at who the majority of those not evacuated and who were still stranded on top of buildings 6 days after the fact and ask yourself how is race/class/social standing not an issue?

We are citizens who place a large responsibility on the Gov’t (federal, state, local) for our safety and when the bottom two are not able to meet its citizens’ needs the Federal Gov’t will undoubtedly come under fire. What do you think is an appropriate response for the victims of this tragedy?

Lastly I ask you–how is it the journalist covering the story were more capable than FEMA to go in and rescue these people? How is it we can drop food, water, and first-aid in Afghanistan but not New Orleans? How is it that George Bush allowed the governor of LA to wait 24 hrs to respond to the emergency when the president asked her what she wanted to do?

Is fixing New Orleans worth it? Yes, you bet it is. This is a city of culture–a one of a kind in the U.S. This city is “Mecca” for jazz musicians around the world which helped build it to what it is most known for. It is a sad commentary on this country that the citizens who made this city what it is were the ones being left behind to fend for themselves.

In spite of all the BS being spouted NO is worth saving.

NO certainly had a plan in place to evacuate. They just didn’t use it.

Earlier in the summer the city washed their hands of responsibility and told people they were on their own if a hurricane hit. They basically threw away the plan without providing an adequate substitute. Shameful.

We should seriously consider whether NO should be rebuilt on the same ground. This article from today’s WaPo provides some very important points for consideration, irrespective of the final decision:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/05/AR2005090501034.html

Time for a Tough Question: Why Rebuild?

By Klaus Jacob

Tuesday, September 6, 2005; Page A25

It is time to swim against the tide. The direction of public discourse in the wake of Katrina goes like this: First we save lives and provide some basic assistance to the victims. Then we clean up New Orleans. And then we rebuild the city. Most will rightly agree on the first two. But should we rebuild New Orleans, 10 feet below sea level, just so it can be wiped out again?

Some say we can raise and strengthen the levees to fully protect the city. Here is some unpleasant truth: The higher the defenses, the deeper the floods that will inevitably follow. The current political climate is not conducive to having scientific arguments heard before political decisions are made. But not doing so leads to the kind of chaos we are seeing now.

This is not a natural disaster. It is a social, political, human and – to a lesser degree – engineering disaster. To many experts, it is a disaster that was waiting to happen. In fact, Katrina is not even the worst-case scenario. Had the eye of the storm made landfall just west of the city (instead of to the east, as it did) the wind speeds and its associated coastal storm surge would have been higher in New Orleans (and lower in Gulfport, Miss.). The city would have flooded faster, and the loss of life would have been greater.

What scientific facts do we need before making fateful political, social and economic decisions about New Orleans’s future? Here are just two:

First, all river deltas tend to subside as fresh sediment (supplied during floods) compacts and is transformed into rock. The Mississippi River delta is no exception. In the early to mid-20th century, the Army Corps of Engineers was charged with protecting New Orleans from recurring natural floods. At the same time, the Corps kept the river (and some related canals) along defined pathways. These well-intended defensive measures prevented the natural transport of fresh sediments into the geologically subsiding areas. The protected land and the growing city sank, some of it to the point that it is now 10 feet below sea level. Over time, some of the defenses were raised and strengthened to keep up with land subsidence and to protect against river floods and storm surges. But the defenses were never designed to safeguard the city against a direct hit by a Category 5 hurricane (on the Saffir-Simpson scale) or a Category 4 hurricane making landfall just west of the city.

Second, global sea levels have risen less than a foot in the past century, and will rise one to three feet by the end of this century. Yes, there is uncertainty. But there is no doubt in the scientific community that the rise in global sea levels will accelerate.

What does this mean for New Orleans’s future? Government officials and academic experts have said for years that in about 100 years, New Orleans may no longer exist. Period.

It is time to face up to some geological realities and start a carefully planned deconstruction of New Orleans, assessing what can or needs to be preserved, or vertically raised and, if affordable, by how much. Some of New Orleans could be transformed into a “floating city” using platforms not unlike the oil platforms offshore, or, over the short term, into a city of boathouses, to allow floods to fill in the ‘bowl’ with fresh sediment.

If realized, this “American Venice” would still need protection from the worst of storms. Restoration of mangroves and wetlands between the coast and the city would need to be carefully planned and executed. Much engineering talent would have to go into anchoring the floating assets to prevent chaos during storms. As for oil production, refining and transshipment facilities, buffer zones would have to be established to protect them from the direct onslaught of coastal storm surges.

Many ancient coastal cities of great fame have disappeared or are now shells of their former grandeur. Parts of ancient Alexandria suffered from the subsidence of the Nile delta, and earthquakes and tsunamis toppled the city’s famed lighthouse, one of the “Seven Wonders of the Ancient World.”

It is time that quantitative, science-based risk assessment became a cornerstone of urban and coastal land-use planning to prevent such disasters from happening again. Politicians and others must not make hollow promises for a future, safe New Orleans. Ten feet below sea level and sinking is not safe. It is time to constructively deconstruct, not destructively reconstruct.


The writer, a geophysicist, is an adjunct professor at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs. He teaches and does research on disaster risk management.

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
We should seriously consider whether NO should be rebuilt on the same ground. This article from today’s WaPo provides some very important points for consideration, irrespective of the final decision:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/05/AR2005090501034.html[/quote]

Here is another article in slate saying the same thing. NO will flood again and if it is a worse case scenario, then many more people will die. Pumping the thing dry isn’t going to fix the corruption or epidemic of poverty so it might be worthwhile to not rebuild it.

No question we should not rebuild same as before.

There need to be some substantial changes.

"Last night, Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco said 300 Iraq-hardened Arkansas National Guard members were inside New Orleans with shoot-to-kill orders.

I was under the impression that the National Guard didn’t fight over seas…

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
No question we should not rebuild same as before.

There need to be some substantial changes.[/quote]

I agree. To rebuild it we should locate it in a different area, disperse the original population, and not bother fixing those levies.

Given what BB posted and what else I have read, New Orleans really is in an untenable situation. I’m glad I at least got to visit the french quarter a coupld of years ago.

[quote]andy bumphren wrote:
"Last night, Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco said 300 Iraq-hardened Arkansas National Guard members were inside New Orleans with shoot-to-kill orders.

I was under the impression that the National Guard didn’t fight over seas…[/quote]

You are mistaken. Our Gaurdsman do in fact fight abroad when needed.

As for the main post, I kind of feel the same way about people who live in trailer parks in Wichita and build on the flood plain of the Mississippi River. Have some damn common sense.

[quote]conorh wrote:
As for the main post, I kind of feel the same way about people who live in trailer parks in Wichita and build on the flood plain of the Mississippi River. Have some damn common sense.
[/quote]

As long as they can get insurance Co.'s to pay for their loss, they will continue to build in disaster prone areas.

[quote]Soco wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
No question we should not rebuild same as before.

There need to be some substantial changes.

I agree. To rebuild it we should locate it in a different area, disperse the original population, and not bother fixing those levies.

Given what BB posted and what else I have read, New Orleans really is in an untenable situation. I’m glad I at least got to visit the french quarter a coupld of years ago.[/quote]

That is pretty funny. There is some truth in what you say.

Some parts such as the French Quarter are much more salvagable than others.

[quote]ZARA22 wrote:

Chicago Did It ? Why Couldn’t New Orleans?
[/quote]

Money (or lack thereof in New Orleans). This is one of the poorest major cities in the country, meaning very few tax dollars to fund a large project like this.

In situations like this i sometimes see the advantages in living under a more authortarian or communist govmnt, i know that the chinese if given this situation would see if it was even feasible to resettle new orleans and protect it given a category 5 hurricane. Can they build the levees strongly enough for that? Can they do all the engineering stuff to keep water out in such a circumstance?

People will always live there but the LA state gov needs to look at future vulnerability issues before repopulating

Nice, another “blame the victims” thread.

Maybe everybody living in tornado alley should be left to the wolves. Then, all the people on the west coast in earthquake zones should be thrown to the abyss as well. Then, everybody living anywhere along the Mississipi should be left to rot when it floods.

Who else can we disown? I’m sure there are risks and dangers everwhere. Oh, how could I forget, anyone living near a forest should be left for ashes when there are forest fires. Then, when we have dry seasons, farmers should be left in financial ruin.

Cool, we might be able to wash our hands of maybe 1/4 of the populace. Good plan!

[quote]thabigdon24 wrote:
In situations like this i sometimes see the advantages in living under a more authortarian or communist govmnt, i know that the chinese if given this situation would see if it was even feasible to resettle new orleans and protect it given a category 5 hurricane. Can they build the levees strongly enough for that? Can they do all the engineering stuff to keep water out in such a circumstance?

People will always live there but the LA state gov needs to look at future vulnerability issues before repopulating[/quote]

Anytime I see anyone saying they see the benefit of living under communism, I know they have been fooled.

You do remember Chernobyl do you not? The Russians were told by other countries their design was flawed. We knew in America before the Russian people knew.

In regimes like this, you are the governments property. Be careful of what you wish for.

Now as far as New Orleans, it will be rebuilt. They will reinforce the levees, or rebuild them bigger and stronger.

There is no problem living below sea level if you take the proper actions to keep yourself safe. You can build levees big enough and strong enough.

And considering Alaska got millions to build a bridge nobody will use, I don’t think it would have been so hard for NO to get money to rebuild their levees. Didn’t they hear of something called pork? Billions and billions going to crap, and nobody gets the idea of using some of that for a real situation? Could have brought a little work to NO too.

[quote]thabigdon24 wrote:
In situations like this i sometimes see the advantages in living under a more authortarian or communist govmnt, i know that the chinese if given this situation would see if it was even feasible to resettle new orleans and protect it given a category 5 hurricane. Can they build the levees strongly enough for that? Can they do all the engineering stuff to keep water out in such a circumstance?

People will always live there but the LA state gov needs to look at future vulnerability issues before repopulating[/quote]

Stalin would have just kept the media out and let everyone starve to death.

In his eyes there would be no problem.

I hope your post was a joke, but I fear it was not.

Never even consider trading away freedom!