Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Katrina damage is Bush's Fault!

  1. Sep 25, 2005 #1

    Mk

    User Avatar

    Why is Katrina damage Bush's fault?

    Well who else is there to blame but Bush and FEMA?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 25, 2005 #2

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    ... mother nature?

    I've always had a feeling that she's to blame for a lot of things
     
  4. Sep 25, 2005 #3

    loseyourname

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    I guess a hurricane isn't a person, but you could start by blaming that.

    After that,

    1) City planners who built a city on a river delta, largely below sea level.
    2) Millions of people over the years who allowed so much of the city to fall into a state of disrepair.
    3) Senators who authorized the war in Iraq, which diverted funding from the levees.
    4) The Army Corps of Engineers (I don't think it's particularly fair to blame them, as their funding was cut, but levee maintenance is their job).

    Outside of these, Bush is about the only one you could blame, primarily for cutting funding for the levees. Whether or not they would have held anyway probably isn't known, but even so. FEMA is not to blame in this at all. Their job is to respond to an emergency. They may have done this job terribly, but the physical damage to the city was already done by the time their responsibilities kicked in. The blame on FEMA lies in the area of human causalties rather than damage to the city.

    If you believe that greenhouse gases have contributed to strengthening gulf hurricanes, then you can blame atmospheric polluters as well, but that's getting to be an awful stretch.
     
  5. Sep 25, 2005 #4

    Mk

    User Avatar

    My question was why is Bush taking heat about Katrina, and why him? Because of the War in Iraq New Orleans was destroyed?
     
  6. Sep 25, 2005 #5

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Well supposedly its directly his fault because an agency that doesn't take direct orders from him didn't do a perfect job after the disaster area's city and state governments failed to take action with their own established emergency procedures.

    Completely bush's fault.
     
  7. Sep 25, 2005 #6

    loseyourname

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    It was the levees breaking that caused most of the damage. Bush signed the budget that cut the maintenance funds for them, and you could argue it was necessary because of the war. It's hard to single out Bush for this, though, as the budget is put together by Congress.
     
  8. Sep 25, 2005 #7

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    And of course, what most people ignore is that the study for the levee improvements was alone going to take until 2008.
     
  9. Sep 25, 2005 #8

    Mk

    User Avatar

    Ok, thanks I see.
     
  10. Sep 25, 2005 #9

    kat

    User Avatar

    and of course...pengwuino...they also forget to mention that the portion of the levee that failed is the portion that had been improved.
     
  11. Sep 25, 2005 #10

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The damage was caused by a storm and a long history of poor planning. The fact that Bush cut funding shows that he is at least as much of the problem as anyone else.

    Some number of people who died can be traced directly to Bush's style of so called "leadership". For starters, the coffee boy that he appointed to head FEMA was too busy giving interviews on TV to do his job. And Bush was too busy playing golf, or whatever, while on yet another vacation. Oh yes, and half of the guard's equipment is in Iraq since it was too costly politically to imposed a draft in order to fight a war. If that equipment was here as it is suppposed to be, twice as many rescue helicopters would have been available in three of the affected states, for starters.
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2005
  12. Sep 25, 2005 #11

    cronxeh

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    The dead people are Mayor Nagin's fault. The broken leevee is engineers' fault. The post hurricane chaos is FEMA's fault. The poor realization and acting upon those facts is Bush's fault.
     
  13. Sep 25, 2005 #12

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    To diminish the deaths caused by Bush is to spit in the face of every 911 victim.
     
  14. Sep 25, 2005 #13

    cronxeh

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    You know you are not really supposed to glue yourself to the TV watching the hurricane deflower the New Orleans if you are the President. I'm sure there are more important things to do. The local authority, particularly the mayor Nagin, received his warning at least 3 days in advance. If you dont act upon the information of a category 5 storm then you are just as guilty of murdering those people as you are of malpractice.
     
  15. Sep 25, 2005 #14

    loseyourname

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    None of that would have reduced any of the damage done to the city. From what I can tell, the OP was not asking who is responsible for human casualties. He specifically said "damage to the city." There are a hundred other threads devoted to blaming Bush for the deaths.
     
  16. Sep 25, 2005 #15

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Because he has an office in a room in a building in Washington. Simple as that. People in general are so short-sighted that they can't see beyond immediate coincident events.

    -The economy was good (for a while, anyway) while Clinton was President, therefore, Clinton was responsible.
    -A hurricane hit New Orleans while Bush was President, therefore Bush was responsible.

    I do, however, think that shortsightedness is more a trait of liberals than conservatives. They are far more interested in instant gratification than long-term planning.
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2005
  17. Sep 25, 2005 #16

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    To blame deaths not caused by Bush on Bush is to spit in the face of every 9/11 victim.

    ....not to mention spitting in the face of every servicemember serving this country, including those who participated in the Katrina relief effort.
     
  18. Sep 25, 2005 #17
    Well, the levees definitely should have been reinforced. However, I do understand why they held off. It's just like when you have a project which is due in 4 months, and you keep putting it off because you have more important things to do, like study for the next day's test, etc....
     
  19. Sep 25, 2005 #18

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Well, there were plenty of inept government officials at every level who share the blame for the loss of lives (with the exception of the pigheaded people who had the means to evacuate but chose not to do so; they are responsible for themselves and have faced the consequences of their own poor decisions). But, in terms of the property damage, perhaps we need to go back in time and slap around the founders of the city who decided it was a good idea to build a big city in what should be a river delta?
     
  20. Sep 26, 2005 #19

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Sounds like humans were put in charge...

    Think we all know the weak link in this chain :rolleyes:
     
  21. Sep 26, 2005 #20
    If you had been paying attention, you'd have noticed there were two disasters. One was the hurricane, the other was the federal government ****ing up.
     
  22. Sep 27, 2005 #21
    I hate to repond this late, but its not Bush's fault. It really gets annoying when people try to pin every bad thing on bush (not saying that is what you are doing).

    The way the goverment works, Bush or actually FEMA could not do anything until the state goverment asked them to. The state goverment is the one that is fault. Everyone wants to call it racism against black people. That entire state, at the local and state level, is ran by black people. It was the black leaders who dropped the ball...
     
  23. Sep 27, 2005 #22
    You are correct that this can be a double-edge sword, but let's make comparisons within an administration. Bush's approval ratings rocketed to something like 90% right after 9-11 due to perception of good leadership -- because he has an office in a room in a building in Washington, when in reality any president would have behaved similarly.
    I realize you are expressing an opinion so there is no evidence for this, but really it is a trait of Americans in general. Ask people from other countries.
     
  24. Sep 27, 2005 #23
    The way i see it i dont think there is a point to rebuilding a city wich judging by the bowl shaped area should ahve been built in the first place. It is gonna cost an extreme amount of money and another hurricane will probably strike again before they the city can rebuild the levees to a high enough standard to defend the city from catgeory 5 hurricanes.
    I dont live in new Orleans so it is hard for me to put my self in a situation iof having to leacve my home but the levees were built cat. 3 and a cat. 5 hurricane is heading towards the city with a 30 foot storm surge ? I think i would get myself out of there!
    I would just salvage what i could from the rubble and let mother nature have its way.
     
  25. Sep 27, 2005 #24

    SOS2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Just last week, the $250 billion Hurricane Katrina Disaster Relief and Recovery Act was introduced, and a number of well connected Washington insiders quietly cheered because they stand to make a mint for themselves and their clients on questionable "hurricane relief" projects. So far, the government has awarded a number of large reconstruction contracts, with little or no competition, to the same politically-connected companies like Halliburton that won no-bid contracts for reconstruction work in Iraq.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/25/AR2005092501413.html

    The Washington Post reported today that FEMA plans to broadly reimburse houses of worship for their relief efforts. The move, the newspaper noted, “would mark the first time that the government has made large-scale payments to religious groups for helping to cope with a domestic natural disaster.”

    “Some religious organizations are openly using the hurricane relief efforts to win new converts,” Lynn said. “If these groups can’t separate their evangelism from their relief work, they should not be eligible for public funding. People displaced by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita should not be subjected to unwanted, high-pressure religious coercion as the price of getting help from their own government.”

    http://www.au.org/site/News2?JServS...ticle&id=7579&security=1002&news_iv_ctrl=1241

    For more links on Katrina’s Aftermath and Accountability:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/09/09/LI2005090901637.html

    Who's responsible for these things?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 21, 2017
  26. Sep 27, 2005 #25

    BobG

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    What's Lynn's solution? Turn the homeless out so they'll eventually find a shelter with no religious connections? After all, making sure they don't come into contact with religion is the most important thing, right. :rolleyes:

    All in all, Lynn's comments have to be just about the lamest thing I've heard during the Katrina crisis - even lamer than Brown :eek: . The Americans United for Separation of Church and State are embarrassing themselves.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 21, 2017
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook