Jade Fox
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Sep-03-05 09:32 PM
Original message |
People were not allowed to leave NOLA because under Martial Law.... |
|
Edited on Sat Sep-03-05 09:52 PM by Jade Fox
the priority is "controling the area".
That is my understanding. I believe that is what was behind people not being allowed to leave New Orleans, and at least partially what was behind the delay in rescue efforts. In other words, they were not treating NO as if the priority was helping people, but getting the area under their control.
Anyone else have info/thoughts about this?
|
Kagemusha
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Sep-03-05 09:42 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Yes. We find out who made this decision. |
|
And then we hold his sorry ass accountable.
|
Jade Fox
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Sep-03-05 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. As a decision it was unspeakable... |
|
I'm wondering if anyone will ask the specific question: Was the decision made to get the area under control before commencing rescue efforts?
Many people died because of that decision, if indeed it was made.
|
spuddonna
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Sep-03-05 09:43 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Ok, so which order has higher priority? |
|
Manditory evac or Controlling area? This is a TOTAL fuck up...
|
Jade Fox
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Sep-03-05 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
4. I believe controlling the area was made higher priority.... |
|
and god knows how many people died because of it.
|
Kagemusha
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Sep-03-05 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. Under a sane command structure, you just do both. |
|
Why can't you do both? Usually, people shout, "insufficient resources" like oh, not enough National Guard.
So they "prioritize". Maybe less NG got hurt for it. Maybe a lot more civvies got hurt for it. Whoever made the decision should defend it, not hide behind the Louisiana governor...
|
Jade Fox
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Sep-03-05 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
6. So you're saying they made that decision, and made it because.... |
|
of the low number of National Guardsmen? Who would have been the one to make that decision? thanks
|
The Magistrate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Sep-03-05 10:03 PM
Response to Original message |
7. Nothing In Martial Law, Comrade |
|
Requires such an order, or directs that decision particularly. there are a number of obvious factors that might have been considered sufficient to direct it, including doubts about destination and the possibilities of panics and tramplings and the like. It may well have been a foolish decision, but it is merely one facet of ther colossal cock-up that is the whole situation, produced by lack of competent preparation and planning, and indifference at the highest levels to the success of the endeavour to succor the city's citizens.
"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"
|
Jade Fox
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Sep-03-05 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
8. Thanks for the info..... |
|
I can see how it was only one part of the massively poor response to this situation.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu May 23rd 2024, 09:34 AM
Response to Original message |