Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 9/3/2005 7:39:01 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 10:06:07 PM EDT
Well that is real good news, 5,000 more savages we over-taxed taxpayers have to pay for
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 6:47:35 AM EDT
No shit....I was just thinking that the people we are probably going to recieve are people who needed the gov't down there for handouts to survive anyways. Now we are going to give them handouts up here for survival. If and when something bad happens in Murderapolis, that city is going to see the same types of problems we are seeing down in N.O. The product of socialism is a very scary thing.
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 10:25:18 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/4/2005 10:31:58 AM EDT by akajimmy]
Well maybe we should just send them back home then
After all they did lose everything they had.
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 1:17:53 PM EDT
If you're getting some from the NO "projects", once winter sets in they'll want to go home. Unless you folks put them up in the high-end hotels they will start complaining about descrimination.
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 1:54:32 PM EDT
i lived down there for two years and found most of the people just like people everywhere (if you need that explained i feel sorry for you), and i am disappointed that members of our hometown forum would post anything contrary to helping people in need (no matter where they were from). if any of you have forgotten there are arfcom members from NO. as far as any of us knows they may be one (or more) of the 5000.
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 10:12:02 PM EDT
A few questons to ponder regarding this situation:
How long will they stay? What will their situation be? by that I mean, will they just sit around Ripley, will they have a curfew, will the be allowed to leave? If not, who will stop them from leaving? They are US citizens, not convicted of a crime, can we prevent them from just up and leaving? What about logistics for the long haul? Food, clothes...what about the kids? School etc... Winter is coming. I can't believe they are used to winter here. Who decides when they return home. Do they have a home to return to? Who will police them? I'm all for helping out fellow citizens. This seems like a mistake. If the state wants to help, send resources to the area. Seems foolish to move 5000 people hundreds of miles to be put up for an undetermined amount of time, and then not have a plan to return them home. I don't have answers for this problem, just questions. My .02cents. worth what ya paid for it.
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 6:52:28 AM EDT
Some of the responses in this thread are embarrassing for our great state. It really makes me wonder if some of you truly understand the scope of the crisis.

There is an entire city down there that has been, for all intents and purposes, destroyed. That city is roughly the size of Mpls/St. Paul. 500,000 or so people (Americans, human beings) lost virtually everything they own and are homeless for the forseeable future. Those that don't want them here, please feel free to offer up an idea or two.

They're not all looters, degenerates, and/or savages.



Link Posted: 9/5/2005 7:32:49 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/5/2005 7:37:00 AM EDT by akajimmy]

Originally Posted By groovyrascal:
A few questons to ponder regarding this situation:
How long will they stay? What will their situation be? by that I mean, will they just sit around Ripley, will they have a curfew, will the be allowed to leave? If not, who will stop them from leaving? They are US citizens, not convicted of a crime, can we prevent them from just up and leaving? What about logistics for the long haul? Food, clothes...what about the kids? School etc... Winter is coming. I can't believe they are used to winter here. Who decides when they return home. Do they have a home to return to? Who will police them? I'm all for helping out fellow citizens. This seems like a mistake. If the state wants to help, send resources to the area. Seems foolish to move 5000 people hundreds of miles to be put up for an undetermined amount of time, and then not have a plan to return them home. I don't have answers for this problem, just questions. My .02cents. worth what ya paid for it.



How about we just answer all of your questions first, while they are still sitting on the rooftops of the homes they just lost, first, then we should allow them to come up here, after they have complied with your demands. I am truly disgusted.

A lot of those people are being told to gather their things and if they are lucky they can come back in 3-6 months. Their homes might also end up getting bulldozed over too.

What do you do? You have been sitting in your house for three days. THen you have to go up to the roof to get rescued and you are told this?

How do you uproot and move an ENTIRE CITY OF HALF A MILLION PEOPLE
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 7:53:31 AM EDT
NO proper is half a million. when you add in kenner, metarie, the west bank, chalmette, slidell, and the north shore of the lake you have over 2 million. that is the approx the same size and population of the msp/st.paul metro area (all un-inhabitable for at min. 3 months).
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 7:55:48 AM EDT
That is exactly the point. You dont. The resources need to be moved there, or near by there. It is easier and better to move things to the people rather than moving the people to the things. Your disgust is misplaced. It should be directed at those who were responsible in NO for planning for what they all knew would happen when you live 20 feet below sea level adjacent to the ocean. I dont demand anything. Do you think a couple of people opening their bed rooms in Woodbury is going to solve this dilemma? We need to sent resources to these folks so they can begin rebuilding their lives. If they choose to move on then thats what they choose. Knee jerk reactions don't solve long term problems. But then of course maybe you don't have the opportunity to worry about that type of planning and what the ramifications, long term, are. It is easy to say "Bring 'em up here". Well OK. then what. It is that type of thinking that put these people in their situation to begin with. Grow up.
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 9:20:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By groovyrascal:
That is exactly the point. You dont. The resources need to be moved there, or near by there. It is easier and better to move things to the people rather than moving the people to the things. Your disgust is misplaced. It should be directed at those who were responsible in NO for planning for what they all knew would happen when you live 20 feet below sea level adjacent to the ocean. I dont demand anything. Do you think a couple of people opening their bed rooms in Woodbury is going to solve this dilemma? We need to sent resources to these folks so they can begin rebuilding their lives. If they choose to move on then thats what they choose. Knee jerk reactions don't solve long term problems. But then of course maybe you don't have the opportunity to worry about that type of planning and what the ramifications, long term, are. It is easy to say "Bring 'em up here". Well OK. then what. It is that type of thinking that put these people in their situation to begin with. Grow up.


We are only taking 5000 people at Camp Ripley.

I am out of here. I can't take it any more.
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 9:40:07 AM EDT
Only 5000? Have you ever been to Ripley? The facilities are limited. Short stays there are the norm. They are not equipped to house 5000 people long term. 5000 is alot of people to care for. And that is what we are talking about here right? Taking care of them. It is only my opinion but our resources would be better placed if we sent it to the folks in NO and the surrounding areas. There are already agencies that would accept the help. Salvation Army, American Red Cross to name 2. I have sent a check for $1000. Not much I admit but it is all I can afford. Perhaps you believe I am unwilling or uncaring. That is far from the truth; which is why I hate to see our generosity misplaced, and this thing blow up in our face.

PS: "I am out of here, I can't take it any more."???
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 10:04:43 AM EDT
I'm not quitting....

Groovy,

While in some respects, your position makes sense, I still don't think you grasp the scope of the logistical problem. Where, down in that region, can they house 500,000+ people for three months or longer? They're currently housing them in sports stadiums and arenas. That's great if the intent is to ride out the storm. It's unrealistic if the intent is semi-long term housing. The facilities don't exist in any one region of the country to house 500,000+ displaced residents. The only way it can happen is to spread it out over the entire country.

BTW, good on you for the donation. I can't afford that much, but I donated as well.
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 12:09:46 PM EDT
You are right, the burden of this disaster should be spread throughout the entire county. We differ in opinion on how to best get that accomplished. "Things", money, food, construction materiel,clothing etc... are more readily transported and stored than people. That is the basis for my logic. In my opinion we should bring those things to them, not them to "those things". Short term relocation is possible. 1-2 months TOPPS! Relocation should be in a safe area adjacent to that area. Texas, Arkansas, Oklahoma ect... Send the "3 M's" to those areas. NO not 3M the company. Money, Materiel, Manpower. New Orleans cannot just be deserted. People must remain to clean up and start to rebuild. It is a large problem that cannot be solved on a gun forum. I,you or anyone else here can't solve it. I simply state my opinions on the matter. I am not in charge of any of it. The gov will do as they will do. I still hold fast to the belief that bringing 5000 displaced persons here will not help anything. It might just manufacure itself into a gigantic nightmare for us. Not all those people are criminals and looters, but some are and will continue to be. We must plan for the worst and hope for the best.

Regards.
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 12:56:17 PM EDT
I don't understand why they couldn't be housed in one of the southern Army bases that have been shut down in the last few years (Ft. McClellan, AL comes to mind). Bussing them across the country to have them take up valuable space in an internationally known winter training area does not make much sense to me. Camp Ripley is not just used for Summer annual training by the Guard. The SEALs, for instance, go there for arctic training...It was my understanding that Ripley was pretty much at capacity for training anyway, I suppose now more of the range area will go unused (in time of war) because barracks space is not available, although I suppose the infantry could drive right out to the field...

I hope the Minnesota Military Museum is locked up...
Link Posted: 9/5/2005 2:18:26 PM EDT
I was kind of disappointed that none of the stories that I have read gave any detail of what was in the future for these folks. It does not sound like there is anything to go back to maybe for years so I would expect they are going to be starting over here. It seems to be alright to bring thousands of people a year from other countries, many who will never be able to work so I would hope we could extend some help to people from America who lost everything. Hopefully we got people who are ready to rebuild their lives and not too many of the troublemakers. This should be a real eye opener to the government though. Where will people go if there is a major attack on several US cities? The Governor of Louisiana was given 600 million this year alone for homeland defense. If she didn’t use it for this kind of scenario what did she use it for? An attack on the levies was one of the things Governor Blanco was supposed to have planned for. Kind of makes one wonder where that money went. Because she has a (D) next to her name I suspect the media will not be doing any hard investigative reporting.

www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/budget/2006/states/la.html

$600 million for a Targeted Infrastructure Protection Program in the Department of Homeland Security to assist State and local governments in reducing the vulnerability of critical infrastructure, such as chemical facilities, ports, and transit systems.
Top Top