Shirley - No sympathy for Haiti

**VeloClone** · 01-26-2010, 05:12 PM

I think I will refrain from commenting on the bulk of what he wrote as I can see some logic but I think he went way too far on most of it.

However, I do have to admit that he came pretty close to hitting the mark for me on the Katrina issue. I believe we all have a responsibility to care for those who are in peril during a disaster. However, do I believe that we have a responsibility to rebuild a city that is literally built below sea level? Or further, that we have a responsibility to rebuild said city and provide for extreme levees to protect against cat 4 (or worse) hurricanes? I do not believe we do. When I walk through a city and look UP to see ships on the river or canal on the other side of the levee, even simple minded me can see that where I am standing is a disaster waiting to happen.

I have nothing against New Orleans - I would love for it to be there for me to visit. However, there are limits to what we should be doing to rebuild and protect what nature is telling us should not be there. The next big hurricane could quite feasably be larger and more disastrous. (Meteorologists and historians have traced an ebb and flow to the frequency and severity of Atlantic hurricanes. Many believe we are entering another crescendo of activity.) The cry will be "why did you not provide us with a cat 5 hurricane proof levee system" not "why did we all pay to rebuild there after the last disaster?" Nature provided its own buffer for these disasters. Many decades ago a decision was made to continue to destroy this buffer and build a continually growing city instead. At some point we need to understand that man's folly is believing he can master nature. We may win battles but we will invariably lose the war.

I fear for every child born in the delta.

**gogagig** · 01-26-2010, 05:16 PM

[quote=Cydkar;1504568]

Originally Posted by GeronimusClone

Run, cops!

Governments are overflowing!

**VeloClone** · 01-26-2010, 05:18 PM

Originally Posted by CloneIce

Ok some of it is right... but if we can't be sympathetic and help poor people with terrible standards of living, then who can we help?

I do agree with him somewhat on New Orleans. In American we should be smart enough not to build a city below flood level surrounded by 3 flooding sources, with levees that aren't tall enough, and a developed coastline that no longer has nature's defenses against storm surges. Obviously Katrina was going to happen eventually, and it will again.

You beat me too it. Perhaps I need to be more succinct like you. Lesson learned.

**clone52** · 01-26-2010, 05:29 PM

Originally Posted by Stumpy

He makes some valid points. Haiti is essentially rated dead last in the world in any positive ranking -- wealth, economic freedom, quality of life, human rights/human development index, etc. The entire infrastructure of the place is a mess. And while I disagree with Paul and think that donating is a necessity for the people involved in the disaster, I too recognize that it likely won't change a thing when it comes to the root of the issue.

He state's some facts, but makes no valid points.

If LA gets flattened by an earthquake, will we say we shouldn't have built there?

When Parkersburg got destroyed, did we say they were fools for building in a tornado zone?

The entire east coast is at risk for a mega tsunami due to the volcanic islands in the Atlantic. Will it be all their fault when those cities get wiped out due to that?

When Yellowstone erupts, Iowa is toast. Should we all move?

I challenge you to name a single place in the world that couldn't be wiped out by mother nature.

**JUKEBOX** · 01-26-2010, 05:30 PM

Originally Posted by clone52

He state's some facts, but makes no valid points.

If LA gets flattened by an earthquake, will we say we shouldn't have built there?

When Parkersburg got destroyed, did we say they were fools for building in a tornado zone?

The entire east coast is at risk for a mega tsunami due to the volcanic islands in the Atlantic. Will it be all their fault when those cities get wiped out due to that?

When Yellowstone erupts, Iowa is toast. Should we all move?

I challenge you to name a single place in the world that couldn't be wiped out by mother nature.

Hurricanes and earthquakes happen frequently and are very destructive in those locations. People are living there at their own risk.

**aauummm** · 01-26-2010, 05:31 PM

Originally Posted by CloneIce

I do agree with him somewhat on New Orleans. In American we should be smart enough not to build a city below flood level surrounded by 3 flooding sources, with levees that aren't tall enough, and a developed coastline that no longer has nature's defenses against storm surges. Obviously Katrina was going to happen eventually, and it will again.

We Americans didn't start the City of New Orleans, the French did and then we bought it from them when they needed some money.

(However, we did continue the folly by ignoring all common sense and kept on building and building, etc.)

The French also started the colony of Haiti (it was named something else). The French might make nice pastries, but they can't build a colony worth a ****.

**VeloClone** · 01-26-2010, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by aauummm

We Americans didn't start the City of New Orleans, the French did and then we bought it from them when they needed some money.

(However, we did continue the folly by ignoring all common sense and kept on building and building, etc.)

The French also started the colony of Haiti (it was named something else). The French might make nice pastries, but they can't build a colony worth a ****.

Hear, hear! Another thing to blame the French for...

Very nice aauummm!! I like it.