A question about airdropping supplies...

[rockymountaindem]

I was thinking about airdropping supplies to NOLA. I think the reason they are not doing this is because the authorities are afraid of what would happen if a giant crowd started to converge on the drop sites. I mean, hundreds of people died yesterday in Iraq during a stampede. The same thing could happen if all those stranded survivors started racing to piles of supplies and then fighting over them.

Does anyone else think this might be the case? I can't think of another explanation.

[TornadoTN]

1. Part of the answer

However, since the people are dieing anyway, I don't see any other solution.

Plus, with proper PLANNING, which this operation has none of, certain drop points could be secured throughout the city. But, thats too easy of an answer. Oh yeah, this stuff isn't happening per Chertoff and Brown.

[Niche]

2. Um, lack of empathy and/or compassion

on the part of this administration? There's an explination.

[skooooo]

3. if they drop enough, it shouldn't be an issue

[napi21]

4. No, I disagree. They drop food and water supplies in many

countries, and the worst problems I've ever heard were a few people getting hit with a falling supply box. Not to pick on them, but that is pretty dumb.

I don't know whaat their reason is, other than total incompetence and being totally unprepared to handle ANY emergency, no matter where it is!

[meisje]

5. The criminals in the group will attempt to control the goods

[Inland]

9. All one has to do is drop so much of it there's no point in "control" nt

[uppityperson]

6. I agree that this could happen,but not the reason no stuff dropped yet

At this point they would probably riot to reach whatever is dropped or brought in. Large amounts of guards are needed to get supplies distributed safely and where are they? And why weren't supplies dropped before now? I do agree that this will be a problem, it is handled in different ways in other countries- heavily armed guards may be needed, moreso the longer it goes on before supplies are recieved.

[leftofthedial]

7. that's logical

after they starve to death or die of thirst, they'll be much less likely to stampede.

[havocmom]

8. They'll use that as an excuse.

Since a musician managed to get some supplies in without a riot, I would think the US government could do likewise.

MSNBC reporter on the ground was telling that people who could get supplies were bringing them back to the people stranded at the center. Doesn't sound like the excues holds water any better than the budget cut levees did.

Want another explanation? Dem governor and poor people. Buscho has no regard for either and he will let people die, if they are poor, and blame the DEM governor. SOP for bushco.

Short version: bushco is LETTING people die. He wasted no time getting back to DC to sign Terri's Law. For the poor of NOLA, he takes his sweet time. HE IS LETTING THEM DIE

edit: typos

[Eloriel]

10. No. That's not a justifiable excuse IMO.

It's just not. Let them DIE because you're afraid they might fight?? Can you see a problem with that logic?

I think the threat is greatly exaggerated to start with, but make sure you drop enough, that's all.

[rockymountaindem]

11. I was just asking.

n/t

[daleo]

12. "Better not give these hungry, thirsty people food and water"

"Someone might get hurt."

That doesn't add up for me.