National pride and Katrina?

Question

I was shocked, Shocked to hear how much international aid that the Bush administration TURNED DOWN FLAT, like doctors from Pakistan, electrical generators and oil, shelter aid, medical supplies etc. after Katrina.
My question is how do you feel? The US has never accepted aid, wanting to appear proud and strong, but then, they did not adequately help their own. Was this move justified for the sake of national pride, or should they have swallowed their pride? Is the gov't representing the will of the people, there?

And now, aid didn't go to Kansas due to lack of proper hoop-jumping in the request? Aargh!

P.S - I'm Canadian; outside looking in.

Answer 1

I DON'T KNOW BUT I'M STILL KIND OF PISSED THAT THE MEDIA MAKES NEW ORLEANS LOOK AS IF IT GOT THE WORST DAMAGE DUE TO KATRINA THEN THE GULF COAST ....... I WENT TO VISIT DOWN ON THE COAST LAST SUMMER AND BILOXI AND ALL OF HWY 90 LOOKED LIKE A GHOST TOWN AND ITS PRETTY SAD THAT NEW ORLEANS GETS ALL THE PUBLICITY BECAUSE OMG !! THEY GOT FLOODED WHILE THE COAST GOT ALOT OF WIND DAMAGE ...... IF IT WASNT FOR THE CELEBS PARTING IN NEW ORLEANS THEN THE GULF COAST WOULD OF GOT THE SAME MEDIA COVERAGE

Answer 2

Billions of dollars in taxpayer funded aid went to the victims of Katrina. Tens of millions of that money was simply lost to unscrupulous American thieves.
In Kansas, the people are receiving the aid they need. I watched an interview with several senators and congressmen a few days after the disaster, and they all seemed pleased with the federal response. During that press conference, the governor had nothing negative to say, but now it seems that she has some problems.
The difference between Kansas and New Orleans, is the people. Some will help themselves, and some want the government to do everything for them. You figure out which is which.

Answer 3

You have to understand that the Governor of the State of Louisiana had the ball on this one and needed to request and accept aid. To say that the Bush administration turned down anything is not only inaccurate but lacks an understanding of the system. The President would have to issue an Executive Order in order to step in and tell the state that he's letting the Pakistani doctors in whether they want them or not. I understand that there were troops from the Mexican army (this is not a joke) who came in to help. And what about letting all these foreigners in to help? What would they have done if they had of been allowed to go in? There were few facilities to accommodate medical help and how many generators and other supplies did they need? It's always so easy to sit back and condemn from the comfort of your arm chair.

Answer 4

While the offers were appreciated much of it had to do with logistics. The Mexican military was helping so were the Canadians. We had plenty of doctors over here volunteering, I know that to be true because my brother in law was one of them. This was a major disaster made worse by the ignorant media. Living conditions were horrible and letting people just go in without proper escorts would have just led to more disaster. What we have here are two democrat states that whine when something happens. But hurricanes are not new to New Orleans, nor are tornadoes new to Kansas. Florida, Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi(who took the direct hit by the way) did not have the problems because they took the bull by the horns and followed the process. Florida had seen 6 major hurricanes in the 15 months prior to Katrina and you didn't hear this kind of whining.
A wise old saying, never believe anything you read and only half of what you see.

Answer 5

Canadian, eh?

I really think that the US should swallow its pride in times of disaster. If we are so willing to help other nations, why shut them out when we ourselves need help? After two days without water, food, or ice, anyone here can tell you that the Federal Emergency Management Agency is more like Failure to Effectively Manage Anything. Appearing "proud and strong" is doing nothing but hurting us.

Answer 6

I am from Louisiana... and I can tell you that New Orleans did get help...they may not have gotten as soon as wanted, BUT that was the mayor and governors issues...They are rebuilding New Orleans as we speak. They received more help than you know. Citizens of Louisiana went out there to help, government officials helped even celebrities helped. Im sure Kansas will receive the same help also... OH and by the way if you live in Louisiana you know that your insurance agency has recently added an additional fee to your bill...that is to help victims of Katrina and rebuild New Orleans...So as you can see...They are STILL receiving help from everyone!

Answer 7

Hmmmmmmmmmm. If we were offered aid and turned it down, then how do you explain this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_response_to_Hurricane_Katrina

You hear this stuff from our uh, liberal, uh friends, and not one scintilla of it is true except for we did not, and will not accept help from non allied countries. If that is national pride run amuck, sorry, but we do have our standards.

Answer 8

Your being Canadian says how much you don't actually know then. Katrina victims received aid, even those that didn't need it and the people of Kansas are getting the help they need, they just have a weak governor who wants to point blame.

Answer 9

I agree with you that it looks strange, to say the least. A normal government should always accept help for its citizens after such disasters (after all, every country can help others in different things). But most important, A normal government of a wealthy country provides help for its own citizens, instead of calling on private citizens to contribute. Penis Clinton and Bullshit senior collected money from others for the victims of the hurricane-how much did they contribute FROM THEIR OWN ACCOUNT?

Answer 10

I have this to suggest to you, stick with Canadian Politics because you are obviously ignorant about the Katrina situation. They did recieve Aid, and are (for both) so get over it.