Hurricane Katrina: Political Aftermath

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

That's exactly why they want it wiped out. It looks like the Republicans' wishes are coming true.

Republicans want New Orleans to be destroyed?  That is quite possibly the most ridiculous thing I've heard you say yet.

Ummm....

Yeah, but Mobile was slammed.  Personally, I wouldn't have minded if New Orleans was reclaimed by the sea.  That's what they get for building a city 6 feet below sea level, and bordered from the north and south by bodies of water.

[A18]

Notice MODU is not a Republican.

[MODU]

That's exactly why they want it wiped out. It looks like the Republicans' wishes are coming true.

Republicans want New Orleans to be destroyed?  That is quite possibly the most ridiculous thing I've heard you say yet.

Ummm....

Yeah, but Mobile was slammed.  Personally, I wouldn't have minded if New Orleans was reclaimed by the sea.  That's what they get for building a city 6 feet below sea level, and bordered from the north and south by bodies of water.

There is a big difference between wanting a city destroyed and not minding if it is destroyed . . . just like there is a big difference between being a Republican and a Reformist, but then again you have the same genetic flaw as Miss Catholic.  

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

That's exactly why they want it wiped out. It looks like the Republicans' wishes are coming true.

Republicans want New Orleans to be destroyed?  That is quite possibly the most ridiculous thing I've heard you say yet.

Ummm....

Yeah, but Mobile was slammed.  Personally, I wouldn't have minded if New Orleans was reclaimed by the sea.  That's what they get for building a city 6 feet below sea level, and bordered from the north and south by bodies of water.

There is a big difference between wanting a city destroyed and not minding if it is destroyed . . . just like there is a big difference between being a Republican and a Reformist, but then again you have the same genetic flaw as Miss Catholic. 

There's not much of a difference between not minding it destroyed and wanting it destroyed, and no, you're not much of a reformist.

[MODU]

Notice MODU is not a Republican.

hehehe . . . some folks will believe what they want.  In their case, just because I don't agree with Democrats on ever issue, I must be a Republican.  Sadly, they fail to understand that the world is not black or white, yet a nice happy rainbow full of colors.    Which is ok, if being a "Republican" means I'm not a Jfern or MC, then I guess I can embrace that label.  hahaha

[MODU]

There's not much of a difference between not minding it destroyed and wanting it destroyed, and no, you're not much of a reformist.

Oh you poor little man, how wrong you are.  The big difference is intent.  While I wouldn't want people to lose their homes and valuables in New Orleans (I do have friends that live in New Orleans, btw), I don't mind that they do.  They knew the risk of living in a city below sea level and surrounded by water.  It was just a matter of time that the walls gave way and the Earth reclaimed what's hers.  Those people were foolish to live there, and if this serves as a lesson to all the other cities begging to be swollowed up by the seas, then good.  It's time for New Orleans to be rebuilt, but this time above sea level AND above flood plane. 

[minionofmidas]

Here's an interesting article... NYT...

By CORNELIA DEAN
and ANDREW C. REVKIN
Published: August 30, 2005
The Gulf Coast has always been vulnerable to coastal storms, but over the years people have made things worse, particularly in Louisiana, where Hurricane Katrina struck yesterday. Since the 18th century, when French colonial administrators required land claimants to establish ownership by building levees along bayous, streams and rivers, people have been trying to dominate the region's landscape and the forces of its nature.

As long as people could control floods, they could do business. But, as people learned too late, the landscape of South Louisiana depends on floods: it is made of loose Mississippi River silt, and the ground subsides as this silt consolidates. Only regular floods of muddy water can replenish the sediment and keep the landscape above water. But flood control projects channel the river's nourishing sediment to the end of the birdfoot delta and out into the deep water of the Gulf of Mexico.

Although early travelers realized the irrationality of building a port on shifting mud in an area regularly ravaged by storms and disease, the opportunities to make money overrode all objections.

When most transport was by water, people would of course settle along the Mississippi River, and of course they would build a port city near its mouth. In the 20th century, when oil and gas fields were developed in the gulf, of course people added petrochemical refineries and factories to the river mix, convenient to both drillers and shippers. To protect it all, they built an elaborate system of levees, dams, spillways and other installations.

As one 19th-century traveler put it, according to Ari Kelman, an environmental historian at the University of California, Davis, "New Orleans is surprising evidence of what men will endure, when cheered by the hopes of an ever-flowing tide of dollars and cents."

In the last few decades, more and more people have realized what a terrible bargain the region made when it embraced - unwittingly, perhaps - environmental degradation in exchange for economic gains.

Abby Sallenger, a scientist with the United States Geological Survey who has studied the Louisiana landscape for years, sees the results of this bargain when he makes his regular flights over the Gulf Coast or goes by boat to one of the string of sandy barrier islands that line the state's coast.

The islands are the region's first line of defense against hurricane waves and storm surges. Marshes, which can normally absorb storm water, are its second.

But, starved of sediment, the islands have shrunk significantly in recent decades. And though the rate of the marshes' loss has slowed somewhat, they are still disappearing, "almost changing before your eyes," as Dr. Sallenger put it in a telephone interview from his office in St. Petersburg, Fla. "Grassland turns into open water, ponds turn into lakes."

Without the fine sediment that nourishes marshes and the coarser sediment that feeds eroding barrier islands, "the entire delta region is sinking," he said. In effect, he said, it is suffering a rise in sea level of about a centimeter - about a third of an inch - a year, 10 times the average rate globally.

"Some of the future projections of sea level rise elsewhere in the country due to global warming would approach what we presently see in Louisiana," Dr. Sallenger said.

Hurricane Katrina was a strong storm, Category 4, when it came ashore east of New Orleans, near a string of barriers called the Chandeleur Islands. "They were already vulnerable, extremely so," Dr. Sallenger said.

He said he and his colleagues were reviewing photos, radar images and other measurements made of the islands after Hurricane Lili, a Category 2 hurricane that passed over them in 2002.

"The degree of change in that storm was extreme," he said. "So we had a discussion this morning: O.K., if Lili can do this, who knows what Katrina is going to do?" The scientists expect to fly over the coast on Wednesday and find out.

Of course, New Orleans is vulnerable to flooding from the Mississippi River as well as from coastal storms. North of the city, the Army Corps of Engineers has marked out several places where the levees would be deliberately breached in the event of a potentially disastrous river flood threat, sending water instead into uninhabited "spillways."

But there is no way to stop a hurricane storm surge from thundering over a degraded landscape - except, perhaps, by restoring the landscape to let the Mississippi flow over it more often.

Some small efforts are being made. For example, at the Old River Control Structure, an installation of dams, turbines and other facilities just north of Baton Rouge that keeps the Mississippi on its established path, workers collect sediment that piles along the dams and cart it by truck into the marshes.

But truly letting the river run would exact unacceptably heavy costs - costs that would be paid immediately by people in the region and in particular by any politician rash enough to endorse such a plan.

Instead, there continue to be efforts to build more capacity into New Orleans flood control efforts, said Craig E. Colten, a geographer at Louisiana State University and the author of a new book, "An Unnatural Metropolis: Wresting New Orleans From Nature" (Louisiana State University Press, 2005). That will mean ever more costs, Mr. Colten said, given that the city, which is below sea level, must run pumps simply to keep from being flooded in an ordinary rainstorm.

Roy K. Dokka, a geologist at Louisiana State, said flooding would be even worse for decades to come, not just in New Orleans but in the entire Gulf Coast region.

The consequences were clear yesterday, Dr. Dokka said, around Port Fourchon, La., where the single road that is the commuting route for oil workers heading to offshore rigs lay under water. "That road that all the roughnecks and oil workers drive down every day has sunk a foot in 20 years," he said. "It's now under water every time there's a significant south wind blowing."

But as Dr. Kelman said: "Once you've invested enough in urban infrastructure, you have to keep on buying in. And that doesn't even count the cultural dimension." The reference was to the region's cuisine, culture and mystique.

"With billions of dollars sunk into the soil in southern Louisiana and the Gulf Coast," Dr. Kelman said, "it's kind of too late. We're there, and we're staying there."

[Keystone Phil]

IM A REPUBLICAN WH*RE (if i was with you now..i would slap you very hard and you would deserve it. you get more honesty from a terrorist)

Really?

HOWS YOUR HOMPHOBE SANTORUM TODAY?

Oh he's fine. Thanks for asking.

[minionofmidas]

IM A REPUBLICAN WH*RE (if i was with you now..i would slap you very hard and you would deserve it. you get more honesty from a terrorist)

Really?

HOWS YOUR HOMPHOBE SANTORUM TODAY?

Oh he's fine. Thanks for asking.

How do you know?

[angus]

yes.  it's all accurate.  and it's not pontificating.  something for republicans:  "New Orleans is surprising evidence of what men will endure, when cheered by the hopes of an ever-flowing tide of dollars and cents."  and something for democrats:  "Some of the future projections of sea level rise elsewhere in the country due to global warming would approach what we presently see in Louisiana..." 

Basically, none of that land is particularly habitable.  But if folks are going to set up oil towns and cotton towns, they can expect to ocassionally expect to get their belongings blown away. 

And, yes, we ought to let the Mississippi take its own natural course, but New Orleans tourism officials don't like that idea.  The people who brought us the Suez Canal and the Eiffel Tower certainly have fine engineering schools, but they're not very good at hanging on to empires or picking good places to build cities.  I'm sure there are advantages and disadvantages to allowing the river to run its natural course, though.  See also "The incredible shrinking bayou" pp. 88-105, National Geographic Magazine, October 2004.  My money's on the tourism board winning out over the Sierra Club types.  They just have more clout.

Not much to say, really, except to continue to make fun of the French.  It's seems there's never really a bad time to do that.  And, it takes our minds of natural (Katrina) and man-made (Iraq) disasters.  And, in fact, all of this was all their fault.

[minionofmidas]

Whatever you just had to drink...I want one.

[angus]

Actually, I'm enjoying a nice full-bodied côtes-du-rhone, mon ami.   

[minionofmidas]

Actually, I'm enjoying a nice full-bodied côtes-du-rhone, mon ami.   

Damn, where am I gonna get that now?
I'll just have to do with a nice full-bodied Schobbepetzer.

[Defarge]

Unless handled catastrophically, incumbents will always get a boost from natural disasters, regardless of political affiliation.  And for good reason, since we pray the government does a good job in handling a crisis.

[Gabu]

That's exactly why they want it wiped out. It looks like the Republicans' wishes are coming true.

Republicans want New Orleans to be destroyed?  That is quite possibly the most ridiculous thing I've heard you say yet.

Ummm....

Yeah, but Mobile was slammed.  Personally, I wouldn't have minded if New Orleans was reclaimed by the sea.  That's what they get for building a city 6 feet below sea level, and bordered from the north and south by bodies of water.

MODU is not a Republican, nor is he (as far as I know) more than one person, so saying "conservatives" would not exactly have worked, either.  Taking his statement in context, as well, it appears that he was saying that he wouldn't have minded purely because it's bound to happen sometime, not because it's liberal in nature.

I can't find anything in your statement that holds an ounce of truth.

[Flying Dog]

I heard somewhere that when the french started the settlement of New Orleans the city was only 1 or 2 feet below sea level. After hurricane Betsey in the 1960s, the city flooded , promping the levves being installed. I heard somewhere that it is because of this that the city is now sinking even lower into the earth. You can read more into this if you want, I dont know if I myself believe such a story

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

New Orleans was much higher when it was founded in 1718, long before the dangers of such a place were known. Funny that the Republicans don't seem to blame the victim for rich people in the San Diego exurbs who choose to build in the middle of a fire prone forest, and voted down fire taxes on the ballot.

[??????????]

New Orleans was much higher when it was founded in 1718, long before the dangers of such a place were known. Funny that the Republicans don't seem to blame the victim for rich people in the San Diego exurbs who choose to build in the middle of a fire prone forest, and voted down fire taxes on the ballot.

Is everything, "OMFG those d*mn republicans!!", with you?

[Jake]

It's obvious his mind is even more one track than BRTD's or opebo's. In twenty years, he'll either be in a mental facility or San Francisco's City Council.

[Platypus]

it can't be the latter; he's not a black disabled lesbian single mother formerly with a drug addiction and a native spanish-speaker (whose child is half asian and is good at tech stuff).

[MODU]

MODU is not a Republican, nor is he (as far as I know) more than one person, so saying "conservatives" would not exactly have worked, either.  Taking his statement in context, as well, it appears that he was saying that he wouldn't have minded purely because it's bound to happen sometime, not because it's liberal in nature.

I can't find anything in your statement that holds an ounce of truth.

Thanks Gabu. 

New Orleans was much higher when it was founded in 1718, long before the dangers of such a place were known.

Surprisingly, this part of your message is correct.  The problem is that the city, even then, was built on silt.  As the city grew in size, it grew in weight.  That weight compressed the silt, sinking the city.  Levee's were built, channelling the water around the city.  However, with the increased hieght of the water, the weight increased more, sinking the city further, which lead to taller levee's, leading to more weight . . . so on and so forth.  Once the flooding is under control, people should be allowed in to reclaim what is left of their possessions, and once that is done, a clean-up crew should go in and scrape the land clean.  Once all the debris and trucks are out of the area, blow the rest of the levees and let the Earth reclaim the land.  New Orleans can be rebuilt, but not between the lake and the river, and definitely not on silt.  It will be a smaller city, but it will carry the name on into the future.

[Wakie]

Oh you poor little man, how wrong you are.  The big difference is intent.  While I wouldn't want people to lose their homes and valuables in New Orleans (I do have friends that live in New Orleans, btw), I don't mind that they do.  They knew the risk of living in a city below sea level and surrounded by water.  It was just a matter of time that the walls gave way and the Earth reclaimed what's hers.  Those people were foolish to live there, and if this serves as a lesson to all the other cities begging to be swollowed up by the seas, then good.  It's time for New Orleans to be rebuilt, but this time above sea level AND above flood plane. 

Geez man .... you're cold.

[MODU]

Oh you poor little man, how wrong you are.  The big difference is intent.  While I wouldn't want people to lose their homes and valuables in New Orleans (I do have friends that live in New Orleans, btw), I don't mind that they do.  They knew the risk of living in a city below sea level and surrounded by water.  It was just a matter of time that the walls gave way and the Earth reclaimed what's hers.  Those people were foolish to live there, and if this serves as a lesson to all the other cities begging to be swollowed up by the seas, then good.  It's time for New Orleans to be rebuilt, but this time above sea level AND above flood plane. 

Geez man .... you're cold.

At times.  And like I said earlier, I am sorry to hear about all the loss, and wouldn't wish that upon anyone, but now that it's done, let's fix it so it won't happen ever again.  As humans, we should learn from our mistakes.  This isn't like Sumatra, where a tsunami came in and wiped out town after town without warning.  In this case, there was almost a full week heads up notice, and a mandatory evacuation notice was given.  They were warned that the levee's would give with this size storm and all would be lost.  PLUS, New Orleans has a history of destruction from flooding.  Put all those pieced together, there was no exucse for anyone to stay behind. 

But, the blame doesn't rest solely on the residents.  The city planners as well as the state government hold some responsibility for never calling for growth control as well as requiring homes to be built above sea level.  In fact, they did just the opposite by cramming as many houses and businesses they could behind the levee's.  If you look at some of these photo's, the homes were right at the base of the levee, meaning that either a land-based crane or a barge-based crane would have been required to work on the levee in order to get around the house.  Additionally, these levee's were rather narrow, relying too much on manufactured walls to hold back the water pressure.  Successful levee's are a mix on concrete, steel, and a lot of dirt.  These levee's needed to be at least 4 times as wide with enough dirt, anchored by steel and concrete, to provide more than enough counterforce to keep back the water even under the worse conditions.  (But then again, we're not suppose to be building cities below sea level to begin with.)

City planners and developers around the world better be taking notes on this whole event and incorporate it in their regions to ensure a blunder this big doesn't happen again.

[MODU]

It didn't take long for one talking head to blame a politician for this:

"For They That Sow the Wind Shall Reap the Whirlwind" by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

And while I have to shake my head in disbelief as to Kennedy's rant, I am even more shocked by some of the comments after the article. 

[??????????]

MODU,

In theory I can agree with your stance on NOLA. But the fact remains the city has existed there for well over 200 years and to pick up a city and move it is practically impossible. Especially with the strategic importance of such a city. You continue to say that you want them to build a New New Orleans above sea level but again, where do you propose to put such a city? Most of that area of LA is already below sea level or at sea level as well as many hundreds of small towns and cities along the coastal united states. The best thing for them to do is to do what they did with Galveston after the storm. Build a huge seawall and fill in the middle or "bowl" with sand and make it level with the top of the seawall. Moving such a large city is impracticle and would never happen in reality.

I also found those comments in that article you posted to be f'in hilarious.

"Its globabl warming for sure!!! In the last 50 years hurricane speeds have picked up 50%!!"

Oh Really? What about the 1935 Labor Day storm with recorded winds of 200 mph? These storms have little to do with global warming and more to do with normal weather cycles.