Cali Wildfires vs. Hurricane Katrina

[Gromgor]

Originally posted by Wrent

Katrina was known to be a danger for days (nearly a week if I remember right) prior to it's landing. The dilapidated levies are the single largest failing of government (I believe the State held responsibility for their upkeep? anyone recall that being accurate?) support/safety in a long long long time. Their piss poor condition is a major reason the flooding and damage was SO FAST and SO EXTENSIVE.

Money granted by the Federal Government was given to the state of LA specifically for dealing with the levees. It wasn't used for that purpose and resulted in them being in a completely ruinous state. Katrina was a huge disaster because of the mismanagement of millions of dollars. I'm not saying bad things wouldn't have happened, but when your entire city is BELOW SEA LEVEL and you have walls holding the water out, you had best make damn fucking sure that those walls are as solid as is humanly possible to make them.

New Orleans is a corrupt shit hole and failed to take proper safety measures. Then it had at least a week of notice to get shit done that needed to be done, like mandatory evacuations that actually are mandatory. (I've never understood how a mandatory evacuation order could really be ignored. Big scary men with loaded weapons should bust in your house and drag you kicking and screaming if you don't comply. Otherwise it's not mandatory. But that's for another topic)

[Rosuav]

Originally posted by Gromgor
I'm not saying bad things wouldn't have happened, but when your entire city is BELOW SEA LEVEL and you have walls holding the water out, you had best make damn fucking sure that those walls are as solid as is humanly possible to make them.

Employ some Dutch people. The whole concept of living below sea level has been tried and tested. Would Holland dare skimp on their dykes? I doubt it.

[Malacasta]

Gromgor could you supply a cite for your assertions that money was supplied to maintain the levies, but was diverted? I've read all sorts of things that argue different failures depending on what side of the political fence people stand. However, this seems pretty definitive to me:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Admits Fault

On April 5, 2006, months after independent investigators had demonstrated that levee failures were not due to natural forces beyond intended design strength, Lt. Gen. Carl Strock testified before the U. S. Senate Subcommittee on Energy and Water that, "We have now concluded we had problems with the design of the structure." He also testified that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers did not know of this mechanism of failure prior to August 29, 2005. The claim of ignorance is refuted, however, by the National Science Foundation investigators hired by the Army Corps of Engineers, who point to a 1986 study by the Corps itself that such separations were possible in the I-wall design.[16]

Nearly two months later, June 1, 2006, the USACE finally and unequivocally admitted responsibility for the events in New Orleans with the release of the completed report. The Final Draft of the IPET report states the destructive forces of Katrina were "aided by incomplete protection, lower than authorized structures, and levee sections with erodible materials."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_le...er_New_Orleans

[Wrent]

I definitely remember that hot potato being thrown around for awhile... no one wanting to admit such a massive fuck up.

I remembered the state saying "We didn't have the money!" and the feds saying "We gave you $xxx million to do it on this date!" I don't remember that testimony mentioned by Mala.... Likely they just stalled till most people would "miss" the news about the actual fault.


But, hey it was only a few hundred billion dollars of fuck up, right?