New Orleans ......... from Wikipedia

Maggie wrote:
TomCAt wrote:

New Orleans should never be rebuilt. Period. Until the federal government
stops trying to beat mother nature, this mess will continue to happen again
and again.


The thought of New Orleans gone forever is truly sad. Everything about
this is horrific. I can't even imagine not having New Orleans. Maybe
other people thought this would happen eventually, but I didn't. Call
me dumb, but I didn't. I had a trip planned to that wonderful city
next year. I can't believe it might be gone forever. I can't believe
the amount of suffering the people are going through. It is just so
hard to comprehend. I can't believe it is taking so long to get to
everyone. Sometimes I wonder if we are prepared to help other
countries, more than we are prepared to help our own. Just my two
cents.

Perhaps we are, but you have to remember that the rebuilding we have
been doing in Afghanistan and in Iraq has been occurring over the course
of more than three years now. New Orleans was destroyed less than a
week ago.

One week after Saddam was captured, they didn't have running water in
Baghdad, either (many parts of that city *still* don't).

--
Chris BeHanna
'03 Specialized Allez Elite 27
'04 Specialized Hardrock Pro Disc

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Chris BeHanna wrote:

Perhaps we are, but you have to remember that the rebuilding we have
been doing in Afghanistan and in Iraq has been occurring over the course
of more than three years now. New Orleans was destroyed less than a
week ago.

One week after Saddam was captured, they didn't have running water in
Baghdad, either (many parts of that city *still* don't).

How reassuring that FEMA has contracted with Halliburton for hurricane
work.

On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 21:42:57 -0700, Mark Hickey
wrote:

But you simply do NOT build a modern city in a river delta on an area
that's significantly under sea level. It's really never been a
question of "if", but of "when". Now we know.

Sure there are other "bad locations" - in the path of frequent
hurricanes or on faults, but NOT in an area where a fairly probably
incident is going to make it look like the top half of Venice...

Bull****. NO is a little more inconveniently situated than that, but you
actually build plenty of stuff in a river delta that's significantly under
sea level. That describes the 4 largest cities in my country and their
surrounding area with a collective easy 70-80% of the 16 million
population. The problem with NO is bad maintenance of the dikes, not
enough money to make them higher as necessary, and that there's a major
freaking river right next to the lake flooding dangers.

Jasper

On 2 Sep 2005 11:27:58 -0700, "Rick" wrote:

After Andrew levelled Homestead, there were analyses and new building
codes that should mitigate against a recurrence of the same magnitude
should another larg hurricane pass directly over it. Much of the
damage of Andrew could have been avoided if roof-lines had been
properly oriented and the structures allowed for less catastrophic
pressure equalization. Proper rebuilding is fine, but how can one
build in a 'bathtub' to mitigate against a recurrence?

"less catastrophic pressure equalisation"? You're not trying to claim the
thing about leaving a window open so the pressure can get out?

Jasper

On Sat, 3 Sep 2005 09:22:04 -0500, "AustinMN"
wrote:

Ask the Dutch. Huge areas of their country are below sea level.

About half, with all the big cities and 70-80% of the population. I live
above sea-level mainly because I'm on the third floor (counting ground as
first), although I don't think we'd get much more than 50 cm if magically
all the dikes broke.

It's actually quite simple. Make the sides of the bathtub high enough.

Also, sufficient pumping capacity. On many polders, the big old steam
engine pumps are still maintained for emergency use, and where available
due to museum functions even the windmills still pump in emergencies.


Jasper

Sure there are other "bad locations" - in the path of frequent
hurricanes or on faults, but NOT in an area where a fairly probably
incident is going to make it look like the top half of Venice...

Bull****. NO is a little more inconveniently situated than that, but you
actually build plenty of stuff in a river delta that's significantly under
sea level. That describes the 4 largest cities in my country and their
surrounding area with a collective easy 70-80% of the 16 million
population. The problem with NO is bad maintenance of the dikes, not
enough money to make them higher as necessary, and that there's a major
freaking river right next to the lake flooding dangers.

If you have engineering and construction talent and adequate $$$, you can
build a safe, livable city damn near anywhere.

It's becoming rapidly clear that although it was known improvements to New
Orleans' levee system were necessary to be able to survive a Cat 4 or 5
hurricane, actually doing something about it was not a priority.


Chris Neary


"Prize the doubt, low kinds exist without"
- Inscription at Ramsmeyer Hall, Ohio State University

"AustinMN" wrote:

Mark Hickey wrote
"wafflycat" waffles*$*A**T*v21net$*££*D*O*T*co*D£$£*O*T*uk wrote:
Well, many a city or town in the world, including the west is built in bad
topography one way or another.
snipped the list
I sure there's a lot more than that too.

But you simply do NOT build a modern city in a river delta on an area
that's significantly under sea level. It's really never been a
question of "if", but of "when". Now we know.

Sure there are other "bad locations" - in the path of frequent
hurricanes or on faults, but NOT in an area where a fairly probably
incident is going to make it look like the top half of Venice...

Another one misses the point.

What point would that be? None of the other cities on the list
(AFAIK) would be virtually destroyed by something that's very likely
to happen during any given year. Shaken up by an earthquake? Coastal
damage by a hurricane? Sure. Destroyed? Nope.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

Chris Neary wrote:

If you have engineering and construction talent and adequate $$$, you can
build a safe, livable city damn near anywhere.

In this case, I believe that should be "dam near anywhere." g

Anyone can relocate if they want to. Look at the immigrants who cross the
borders every day! ( and that is illegally). I lived here all my life and I
wouldn't move either. The weather here isn't perfect ,but we do get the 4
seasons. People complain about the winters, but I love the snow and cold. I
also like the warm summers. But you can bet your ass if I had winds of 150
mph, flooding, etc. coming at me all the time , I would do everything I
could to leave to a more secure area. I wouldn't put my kids or my own life
at risk.

"Tom Keats" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"chrisc" writes:
The blame belongs to A Baldwin Wood and all the civic, state, federal
agencies who came later. New Orleans was doomed because it should
never
have existed in the first place. It is a "bathtub".


I'd hate to say this now but- there is no one to blame except the
victims
themselves. We live in the US and those people choose to live there with
all
the risk involved.

I imagine it's the only place a lot of the citizens who
remained behind have only known. And I further suppose
the less affluent simply might not have the means to
pack up 'n go. Or for that matter, anywhere /to/ go to.

Personally , I wouldn't live in those areas if you paid
me! People risk their lives just for a little nice weather (one of the
biggest reasons). Well, how was the weather this weekend in the gulf
states?
I live in the good old state of Ny where taxes will kill you, but the
weather will not.

Where did you live before you chose to live where you do now?


cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

"Killer flood"? HUH! Where , when , and how?

"Killer" blizzard? I live in Rochester and we pray for blizzards here so we
can get the snowmobiling season going. The more snow, the better. But
killer? Where are you from? Maybe some old people died from the cold because
of power loss ? Can you inform me?

Yeah we had a couple of ice storms. So what. I didn't say it's perfect. So
you lose power, whoopee.

A blizzard (which are awesome once again) and an ice storm (rare and cool to
look at, and brings me firewood) are not events that would make me fear for
my families life unlike a deadly hurricane.

"AustinMN" wrote in message
...
chrisc wrote:
I'd hate to say this now but- there is no one to blame except the
victims
themselves. We live in the US and those people choose to live there with
all
the risk involved. Personally , I wouldn't live in those areas if you
paid
me! People risk their lives just for a little nice weather (one of the
biggest reasons). Well, how was the weather this weekend in the gulf
states?
I live in the good old state of Ny where taxes will kill you, but the
weather will not.

/sarcastic mode=on
Right.
Never been a killer flood in NY (happens every year).
Never been a killer blizzard (happens every hear).
Never been a killer ice storm (ok, happens one in a while)

Not exactly weather, but never been a killer terrorist attack either.
/sarcastic mode=off

There simply is no safe place to live, and we all choose our poison. We
ask
the government to try to protect us against some of the risks we choose.
Sometimes it fails, sometimes we make wrong choices. But blaming the
people
of New Orleans for what happened is basically tunnel vision.

Austin