emergency supplies Can beach landing craft be used to get emergency supplies to Haiti?
If they can be used to get troops to shore, why not use them to deliver supplies when there are logistics problems getting them in through the port or the airport?
Helos can carry more in a shorter amount of time, and get places where trucks can't.
We're sending an aircraft carrier,(USS Carl Vinson 70...a friend of mine is the PAO on board...will be getting updates from him soon). and 10 other ships, including amphibious ships (one can carry 2,000 U.S. Marines) and the hospital ship, USNS Comfort (with hundreds of doctors and other medical personnel on board). There will be 3,500 SOLDIERS (not counting the sailors on the ships) and hundreds of medical workers (not counting the medical personnel on the ships).
Oh yeah, the NASTY, WAR MONGERING UNITED STATES is sticking their noses in another country again. That's for those who like to bad mouth the U.S. and our OUTSTANDING military forces.
(USN retired 1965 - 1985))
Later: Thanks to 'BOATS' for catching my brain ffffft...I typed USS GEORGE WASHINGTON....we oldsum dudes mess up often. Don't know what I was thinking.
Israeli Aid Delegation Prepares Supplies for Haiti
Can beach landing craft be used to get emergency supplies to Haiti?
If they can be used to get troops to shore, why not use them to deliver supplies when there are logistics problems getting them in through the port or the airport?
Helos can carry more in a shorter amount of time, and get places where trucks can't.
We're sending an aircraft carrier,(USS Carl Vinson 70...a friend of mine is the PAO on board...will be getting updates from him soon). and 10 other ships, including amphibious ships (one can carry 2,000 U.S. Marines) and the hospital ship, USNS Comfort (with hundreds of doctors and other medical personnel on board). There will be 3,500 SOLDIERS (not counting the sailors on the ships) and hundreds of medical workers (not counting the medical personnel on the ships).
Oh yeah, the NASTY, WAR MONGERING UNITED STATES is sticking their noses in another country again. That's for those who like to bad mouth the U.S. and our OUTSTANDING military forces.
(USN retired 1965 - 1985))
Later: Thanks to 'BOATS' for catching my brain ffffft...I typed USS GEORGE WASHINGTON....we oldsum dudes mess up often. Don't know what I was thinking.
Article publié sur le site du Parti socialiste de Grande-Bretagne:
Haiti – An Un-natural Disaster
The earthquake in Haiti and similar misfortunes are presented as unavoidable natural disasters. To some extent, this is true. But it ignores the consequences of the deliberate pursuit of profit at the expense of environmental protection. It is not a coincidence that the number of victims of recent disasters such as the Asian tsunami and the Katrina hurricane and now Haiti are clearly related to the degree of their poverty.
The reality with earthquakes is they kill only if we let them. They are inevitable, but the death toll is not.
It is collapsing buildings that take lives, not tremors in the ground. Throughout the animal kingdom, creatures have adapted to survive in their surroundings, but in our environment, where earthquakes are a fact of life, though nature challenges us to do something to protect ourselves, capitalism compels us to surrender safety to monetary profits and savings. No matter how severe earthquakes are, if buildings were properly built in the first place, then the vast majority of people would survive. This does not happen under capitalism, particularly in poorer countries, since the unavoidable pressure to make and save money affects what does, or more importantly, does not happen. There are pressures to build quickly and slapdashly to meet housing needs by landless labourers forced by poverty to find work in urban areas; inferior materials and construction methods are used in accordance with market forces, with poor people getting poorly-built homes; building inspectors are persuaded by politicians or back-handers to ignore breaches of rules so that businesses get the cheap employees they want and workers get hovels they can afford; landowners lobby governments, hand over party “donations” or resort to simple bribery to have new housing built on their land, even if it is unsuitable or downright dangerous. With, moneyless, socialism human needs and safety come second to nothing.
Though seismologists don't know precisely where or when earthquakes may strike, general areas of risk are identifiable. In a socialist society, how we respond to this information would be very different. There would be far greater freedom for those in danger to move to safer areas—action under capitalism that can involve huge financial losses from writing off unsafe homes, shifting businesses to where workers then live, adapting that region's infrastructure to aid in exploiting the new workforce etc. And those who, for whatever reason, chose to reside in seismic zones, they would then have access to the best buildings capable of withstanding the most powerful of quakes. Although Japanese and Californian architects have designed “active buildings”, some on top of massive rubber shock absorbers or with computerised counterbalancing systems that identify and counteract seismic shocks, what's the likelihood of such sophisticated technology being used under capitalism on multi-storey dwellings in poverty-stricken areas for workers on subsistence wages? Using superior designs, building methods and materials, there is no reason why populated areas should suffer any loss of life or major disruption after experiencing very powerful quakes.
The surviving victims of the disaster in Haiti need food, fresh water, clothing, medication and many other items. Some of those needs are being met, but not nearly enough. Governments of the richer countries have offered niggardly help. Ordinary citizens, appalled by the extent of the tragedy as revealed by the media, have responded generously to appeals by the charities.In times of natural disasters volunteers are never lacking, nor slow to offer assistance, whether practical or monetary.Humans are endowed with the ability to sympathise and empathise with their fellow humans. Humans derive great pleasure from doing good, are at their best when faced with the worst and will go to extraordinary lengths to help alleviate the suffering of others.
Most natural dangers are well known and socialism would not need to leave communities exposed to them. This would avoid many disasters. Also, contingency plans would exist throughout the regions and at a world level for the relief of any catastrophe. Emergency supplies of food, clean water, medical supplies would be maintained at strategic points whilst machinery, equipment and helpers would be moved quickly to the area of crisis. The present appeals for money are a pathetic substitute for the availability of real resources and the freedom that communities in socialism would have to immediately use them.
We have access to more comprehensive information and news coverage about world disasters than any previous generation of humans, and yet it appears that people don't feel driven to bring about an end to such catastrophes. It seems our society has been influenced to believe that nothing can be done. That big death tolls from quakes, volcanoes or droughts are inevitable. What efforts do the media make to change this, by explaining both capitalism's culpability and socialism's solutions? If people don't understand, then all there will be are yet more channel-changing “Not-another-disaster. There's-nothing-I-can-do ” indifference.
I’ve been in Colorado (Fort Collins, about an hour north of Denver) my entire life. The beer here is great. The food is good, sports entertainment is great, and the Denver Art Museum is pretty kick ass. Traffic can be bad (I used to commute between Boulder and Fort Collins for a couple of years), but it can be bad anywhere in the country, honestly. The economy sucks, sure, but everyone in the country is taking a bite of that. The weather can be unpredictable, so always have a couple of layers on hand. The air is very dry, and lotion / chapstick is your friend. Many residents have SUVs and think this makes up for a lack of actual driving skill. If the roads are icy, try to stay as far away from other vehicles as possible; you can, within reason, control your own car on a slick surface… however you have no control over the stupidity of other drivers. Keep emergency supplies (food, water, blankets / sleeping bag, first aid, squares of carpet or cat litter to deal with ice) in your car just in case you get stranded or stuck somewhere.
You are more demanding of others than most of us. Most people are less observant and far less preoccupied with performance…just trying to do the job, collect the paycheck and keep on moving along in life without obsessing.
The things you mention are not going unnoticed by others, we simply accept that people generally try their best and perhaps they sometimes fail to see themselves objectively. We've grown accustomed to checking our critical natures at the door in an effort to get along with people in all situations, be it work or leisure.
You are more demanding of others than most of us. Most people are less observant and far less preoccupied with performance…just trying to do the job, collect the paycheck and keep on moving along in life without obsessing.
The things you mention are not going unnoticed by others, we simply accept that people generally try their best and perhaps they sometimes fail to see themselves objectively. We've grown accustomed to checking our critical natures at the door in an effort to get along with people in all situations, be it work or leisure.
4 Comments
Article publié sur le site du Parti socialiste de Grande-Bretagne:
Haiti – An Un-natural Disaster
The earthquake in Haiti and similar misfortunes are presented as unavoidable natural disasters. To some extent, this is true. But it ignores the consequences of the deliberate pursuit of profit at the expense of environmental protection. It is not a coincidence that the number of victims of recent disasters such as the Asian tsunami and the Katrina hurricane and now Haiti are clearly related to the degree of their poverty.
The reality with earthquakes is they kill only if we let them. They are inevitable, but the death toll is not.
It is collapsing buildings that take lives, not tremors in the ground. Throughout the animal kingdom, creatures have adapted to survive in their surroundings, but in our environment, where earthquakes are a fact of life, though nature challenges us to do something to protect ourselves, capitalism compels us to surrender safety to monetary profits and savings. No matter how severe earthquakes are, if buildings were properly built in the first place, then the vast majority of people would survive. This does not happen under capitalism, particularly in poorer countries, since the unavoidable pressure to make and save money affects what does, or more importantly, does not happen. There are pressures to build quickly and slapdashly to meet housing needs by landless labourers forced by poverty to find work in urban areas; inferior materials and construction methods are used in accordance with market forces, with poor people getting poorly-built homes; building inspectors are persuaded by politicians or back-handers to ignore breaches of rules so that businesses get the cheap employees they want and workers get hovels they can afford; landowners lobby governments, hand over party “donations” or resort to simple bribery to have new housing built on their land, even if it is unsuitable or downright dangerous. With, moneyless, socialism human needs and safety come second to nothing.
Though seismologists don't know precisely where or when earthquakes may strike, general areas of risk are identifiable. In a socialist society, how we respond to this information would be very different. There would be far greater freedom for those in danger to move to safer areas—action under capitalism that can involve huge financial losses from writing off unsafe homes, shifting businesses to where workers then live, adapting that region's infrastructure to aid in exploiting the new workforce etc. And those who, for whatever reason, chose to reside in seismic zones, they would then have access to the best buildings capable of withstanding the most powerful of quakes. Although Japanese and Californian architects have designed “active buildings”, some on top of massive rubber shock absorbers or with computerised counterbalancing systems that identify and counteract seismic shocks, what's the likelihood of such sophisticated technology being used under capitalism on multi-storey dwellings in poverty-stricken areas for workers on subsistence wages? Using superior designs, building methods and materials, there is no reason why populated areas should suffer any loss of life or major disruption after experiencing very powerful quakes.
The surviving victims of the disaster in Haiti need food, fresh water, clothing, medication and many other items. Some of those needs are being met, but not nearly enough. Governments of the richer countries have offered niggardly help. Ordinary citizens, appalled by the extent of the tragedy as revealed by the media, have responded generously to appeals by the charities.In times of natural disasters volunteers are never lacking, nor slow to offer assistance, whether practical or monetary.Humans are endowed with the ability to sympathise and empathise with their fellow humans. Humans derive great pleasure from doing good, are at their best when faced with the worst and will go to extraordinary lengths to help alleviate the suffering of others.
Most natural dangers are well known and socialism would not need to leave communities exposed to them. This would avoid many disasters. Also, contingency plans would exist throughout the regions and at a world level for the relief of any catastrophe. Emergency supplies of food, clean water, medical supplies would be maintained at strategic points whilst machinery, equipment and helpers would be moved quickly to the area of crisis. The present appeals for money are a pathetic substitute for the availability of real resources and the freedom that communities in socialism would have to immediately use them.
We have access to more comprehensive information and news coverage about world disasters than any previous generation of humans, and yet it appears that people don't feel driven to bring about an end to such catastrophes. It seems our society has been influenced to believe that nothing can be done. That big death tolls from quakes, volcanoes or droughts are inevitable. What efforts do the media make to change this, by explaining both capitalism's culpability and socialism's solutions? If people don't understand, then all there will be are yet more channel-changing “Not-another-disaster. There's-nothing-I-can-do ” indifference.
Max Hess and Alan Johnstone
http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/Haiti_Unnatural_Disaster.html
I’ve been in Colorado (Fort Collins, about an hour north of Denver) my entire life. The beer here is great. The food is good, sports entertainment is great, and the Denver Art Museum is pretty kick ass. Traffic can be bad (I used to commute between Boulder and Fort Collins for a couple of years), but it can be bad anywhere in the country, honestly. The economy sucks, sure, but everyone in the country is taking a bite of that. The weather can be unpredictable, so always have a couple of layers on hand. The air is very dry, and lotion / chapstick is your friend. Many residents have SUVs and think this makes up for a lack of actual driving skill. If the roads are icy, try to stay as far away from other vehicles as possible; you can, within reason, control your own car on a slick surface… however you have no control over the stupidity of other drivers. Keep emergency supplies (food, water, blankets / sleeping bag, first aid, squares of carpet or cat litter to deal with ice) in your car just in case you get stranded or stuck somewhere.
You are more demanding of others than most of us. Most people are less observant and far less preoccupied with performance…just trying to do the job, collect the paycheck and keep on moving along in life without obsessing.
The things you mention are not going unnoticed by others, we simply accept that people generally try their best and perhaps they sometimes fail to see themselves objectively. We've grown accustomed to checking our critical natures at the door in an effort to get along with people in all situations, be it work or leisure.
Len
You are more demanding of others than most of us. Most people are less observant and far less preoccupied with performance…just trying to do the job, collect the paycheck and keep on moving along in life without obsessing.
The things you mention are not going unnoticed by others, we simply accept that people generally try their best and perhaps they sometimes fail to see themselves objectively. We've grown accustomed to checking our critical natures at the door in an effort to get along with people in all situations, be it work or leisure.
Len