How to respond to a national incident?

[pankwindu]

The President, Vice President, Secretary of Defense, and Secretary of State are all on vacation in different locations.

One of the following two scenarios occurs.

1. A terrorist attack blows out the levees of a large coastal city, and the city floods. Tens of thousands of American citizens are in danger.

2. A hurricane devastates a large area of three states, flooding a large coastal city in the process. Tens of thousands of American citizens are in danger.

What should the President, the Vice President, Secretary of Defense, and Secretary of State do?

[ptmusic]

The funniest statistic so far is that one guy who voted get your ass back to the White House for terrorism also voted mosey on down in 5 or 6 days for the 3 state Hurricane.

-ptmusic

[pankwindu]

I wouldn't mind hearing some rationales from those selecting minority opinions (so far), or those selecting different options in the two scenarios.

Is anyone going to choose stay on vacation?

If we add another variable to the equation, does anybody's answer change? The variable if this:

Suppose, hypothetically, the Department of Homeland Security's official National Response Plan defines both terrorist attacks and natural disasters as "Incidents of National Significance". Suppose the plan directs the federal government to take proactive action and bypass normal protocols to save lives in such incidents. Is there any justification to treat a terrorist attack with a different level of urgency than a natural disaster?

[Roybert]

[ QUOTE ]
Is anyone going to choose stay on vacation?


[/ QUOTE ]

George W. Bush?

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is anyone going to choose stay on vacation?


[/ QUOTE ]

George W. Bush?

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't I tell you already he is posting on 2+2 ?