English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-01-30 12:26:50 · 10 answers · asked by zacharyf13 1 in Politics & Government Government

10 answers

no, why would they be. it was the responsibility of the local state and city officials. if they had called out the state of emergency in advance - LIKE THEY WERE TOLD TO DO - the Feds and national gaurd would then have been on stand by. i live in Florida and often, when it's a large bad storm approaching, the state of emergency is called out in advance and all evac routes and shelters are on stand by to open at a moments notice. i feel truly sorry for all those in LA and Miss who suffered in this horrible hurricane. however the federal government is NOT in charge - the locals have to call them in - if they don't, they don't come until the locals are so far behind they have to take over. it's part oif the whole system here in america.

2007-01-30 12:32:56 · answer #1 · answered by Marysia 7 · 0 0

Yes, we were ready, but then Bush dismantled FEMA and send the Louisiana National Guard to Iraq.

----
How SHOULD a President Respond
In September 1999, Hurricane Floyd -- a category 3 -- was bearing down the Carolinas and Virginia.

President Clinton was in Christchurch, New Zealand - meeting with President Jiang of China (you know, actually working). He made the proclamation that only Presidents can make and declared the areas affected by Floyd "Federal Disaster Areas" so the National Guard and Military can begin to mobilize. Then he cut short his meetings overseas and flew home to coordinate the rescue efforts. This all one day BEFORE a Cat-3 hit the coast. That is how you do it.

How about this dope's own father during Hurricane Andrew? Once again, President Bush (41) -- August, 1992 -- was in the midst of a brutal campaign for re-election. Yet, he cut off his campaigning the day before and went to Washington where he martialed the largest military operation on US soil in history. He sent in 7,000 National Guard and 22,000 regular military personnel, and all the gear to begin the clean up within hours after Andrew passed through Florida. 'Cause, you know, those people and their stuff was actually where it belonged, rather than being used for insurgent target-practice halfway around the world in a vain effort to make Iraq safe for Iranian takeover.

In August of 1969 when Cat-5 Hurricane Camille hit roughly the same area as Katrina, President Nixon had already readied the National Guard and ordered all Gulf rescue vessels and equipment from Tampa and Houston to follow the Hurricane in. There were over 1,000 regular military with two dozen
helicopters to assist the Coast Guard and National Guard within hours after the skies cleared.

Bush 43 - August 2005 - Cat-5 Hurricane Katrina bears down on New Orleans and the Mississippi gulf. Both states are down nearly 8,000 National Guard troops because they are in Iraq -- with most of the rescue gear needed. Bush is on vacation. The day before Katrina makes landfall, Bush rides his bike for two hours. The day she hits, he goes to Johnnie McCain's birthday party; and lies to old people about the multi-billion-dollar pharmaceutical company welfare boondoggle. People are dying, the largest port of entry in the United States (and fifth largest in the World) is under attack. Troops and supplies are desperately needed. The levees are cracking and the emergency 1-1/2 ton sandbags are ready, but there aren't enough helicopters or pilots
to set them before the levees fail. The mayor of New Orleans begs for Federal coordination, but there is none, and the sandbagging never gets done. So Bush -- naturally -- goes to San Diego to play guitar with country singer and lie to the military about how Iraq is just exactly like WWII. The levees give way, filling New Orleans with water, sewage, oil and chemicals.
Ten percent of all US exports, and 50% of all agricultural exports ordinarily go through this port. It is totally destroyed. Bush decides he'll end his vacation a couple of days early -- TOMORROW --BECAUSE HE HAS TICKETS TO A PADRES GAME! He goes back to the Fake Farm in Crawford, with every intention of doing something on WEDNESDAY about this disaster that happened starting last Sunday night.

2007-01-30 20:37:17 · answer #2 · answered by barringtonbreathesagain 2 · 0 0

Yes. BTW we spent 22 Billion on those people much much more than NYC got for 9-11. PS next time the radio says to get out of town- do it.

2007-01-30 20:48:47 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

you can listen to all the morons that say it was Bush's fault. or you can read the constitution, and realize that the feds cannot "takeover" until asked by the state. the state and locals let down the people of La, Al, FL, Ga, and Ms.
Do some research and learn the truth.

2007-01-30 20:51:58 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Of course we had the resources , and even had many stationed outside New Orleans soon after it hit . Unfortunately , Bush , FEMA, and others purposely withheld sending them in , allowing anarchy to reign . I think they treated it more of a training exercise for the New World Order , then to rescue people that needed help . Yea Yea , Call me a wacko conspiracy theorists if you want . People had better wake up .

2007-01-30 20:34:30 · answer #5 · answered by prole1984 5 · 1 1

U.S. governments don't worry about weather. That's for the states to deal with. Always has been. If the states are overwhelmed, they then ask for assistance from the national government.

2007-01-30 20:30:49 · answer #6 · answered by Shaddup Libs 5 · 3 0

i think they were too concerned with spending billions over in iraq to worry about something the state should be dealing with. Of course, they shouldnt have made or weakened laws allowing people to build and live in areas that will flood.

2007-01-30 20:35:47 · answer #7 · answered by tomhale138 6 · 0 1

they were ready, they just did not care.
look at 9/11, that place was cleaned up in no time. and why?, cause big money is in new york, not in Louisiana.

2007-01-30 20:39:46 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Yes, the US gov't (in addition to the local gov't) were more than ready to let the poor die.

2007-01-30 20:32:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

The lack of response loudly answers this question!

2007-01-30 20:30:38 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 4

fedest.com, questions and answers