Federal Response to Katrina FASTER than to Andrew, Hugo & Others

[BluffTHIS!]

From this column:

"It is settled wisdom among journalists that the federal response to the devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina was unconscionably slow.



Jack Kelly is national security writer for the Post-Gazette and The Blade of Toledo, Ohio (jkelly@post-gazette.com, 412-263-1476).


"Mr. Bush's performance last week will rank as one of the worst ever during a dire national emergency," wrote New York Times columnist Bob Herbert in a somewhat more strident expression of the conventional wisdom.

But the conventional wisdom is the opposite of the truth.

Jason van Steenwyk is a Florida Army National Guardsman who has been mobilized six times for hurricane relief. He notes that:

"The federal government pretty much met its standard time lines, but the volume of support provided during the 72-96 hour was unprecedented. The federal response here was faster than Hugo, faster than Andrew, faster than Iniki, faster than Francine and Jeanne."

For instance, it took five days for National Guard troops to arrive in strength on the scene in Homestead, Fla. after Hurricane Andrew hit in 2002. But after Katrina, there was a significant National Guard presence in the afflicted region in three.

Journalists who are long on opinions and short on knowledge have no idea what is involved in moving hundreds of tons of relief supplies into an area the size of England in which power lines are down, telecommunications are out, no gasoline is available, bridges are damaged, roads and airports are covered with debris, and apparently have little interest in finding out.

So they libel as a "national disgrace" the most monumental and successful disaster relief operation in world history.

I write this column a week and a day after the main levee protecting New Orleans breached. In the course of that week:

More than 32,000 people have been rescued, many plucked from rooftops by Coast Guard helicopters.

The Army Corps of Engineers has all but repaired the breaches and begun pumping water out of New Orleans.

Shelter, food and medical care have been provided to more than 180,000 refugees.

Journalists complain that it took a whole week to do this. A former Air Force logistics officer had some words of advice for us in the Fourth Estate on his blog, Moltenthought:

"We do not yet have teleporter or replicator technology like you saw on 'Star Trek' in college between hookah hits and waiting to pick up your worthless communications degree while the grown-ups actually engaged in the recovery effort were studying engineering.

"The United States military can wipe out the Taliban and the Iraqi Republican Guard far more swiftly than they can bring 3 million Swanson dinners to an underwater city through an area the size of Great Britain which has no power, no working ports or airports, and a devastated and impassable road network.

"You cannot speed recovery and relief efforts up by prepositioning assets (in the affected areas) since the assets are endangered by the very storm which destroyed the region.

"No amount of yelling, crying and mustering of moral indignation will change any of the facts above."

"You cannot just snap your fingers and make the military appear somewhere," van Steenwyk said.

Guardsmen need to receive mobilization orders; report to their armories; draw equipment; receive orders and convoy to the disaster area. Guardsmen driving down from Pennsylvania or Navy ships sailing from Norfolk can't be on the scene immediately.

Relief efforts must be planned. Other than prepositioning supplies near the area likely to be afflicted (which was done quite efficiently), this cannot be done until the hurricane has struck and a damage assessment can be made. There must be a route reconnaissance to determine if roads are open, and bridges along the way can bear the weight of heavily laden trucks.

And federal troops and Guardsmen from other states cannot be sent to a disaster area until their presence has been requested by the governors of the afflicted states."

[dtbog]

How many Americans are actually qualified to evaluate the federal response to Katrina?

I could editorialize for hours about what I think, or what I read on the news the other day, but the fact is that I've never been to New Orleans... and aside from some rudimentary knowledge that I picked up in science classes, I know next-to-nothing about hurricanes.

Millions of people like me are passing their own judgment on the way this catastrophe was handled by our government -- but how many of us really have the slightest clue?

[lehighguy]

I never even thought of it like that. Good research.

[MaxPower]

You should know by now that what really happened doesn't matter. What matters is what people believe about it.

[twowords]

[ QUOTE ]

...the most monumental and successful disaster relief operation in world history.


[/ QUOTE ]

Its not the operation or the guys on the ground itself that is criticized, it is the leadership.

After this hurricane, we needed a leader to cut corners and make things happen any way he could. People are dying lets cut through some red tape, ditch some SOPs. Leaders who could see that the local gov was not doing anything right because its capabilities were already devastated and [i[its[/i] leaders were ineffective. Instead we had one who continued his vacation with photo ops for a few more days. And leaders (Bush, Brown) who showed striking ignorance of the situation days after the fact. Many American had learned more after an hour of watching cable news.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
Its not the operation or the guys on the ground itself that is criticized, it is the leadership.

[/ QUOTE ]

What aren't you able to grasp about what the article said? If the response was good which it was then there was NO leadership problem only a phantom one created by the media and liberal/Bush-bashing spin-meisters.

[cardcounter0]

Special note:

[ QUOTE ]
And federal troops and Guardsmen from other states cannot be sent to a disaster area until their presence has been requested by the governors of the afflicted states."


[/ QUOTE ]

All media reports about the response must now contain the following lie. Repeat it enough, people might believe it.
Then they can start referencing each other's articles as "proof" that it is true.

Continue to repeat the above lie until further notice. That is all.

[twowords]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its not the operation or the guys on the ground itself that is criticized, it is the leadership.

[/ QUOTE ]

What aren't you able to grasp about what the article said? If the response was good which it was then there was NO leadership problem only a phantom one created by the media and liberal/Bush-bashing spin-meisters.

[/ QUOTE ]

SOP is not good enough for the worst natural disaster in US history and the grimmest post-disaster situation, when hundred of lives are at stake; we must demand better from all our leadership, and not be satisfied with excuses involving procedures and red tape. Care to respond the actual meat of my previous post instead of avoiding it completely?

[Autocratic]

As was said, this was worse than any previous natural disaster, which is pretty obvious by now. On top of that, past failures aren't meant to pave the way for future failures.

And even if that were so, I have trouble reading sources that think Hurricane Andrew hit in 2002.

[slamdunkpro]

[ QUOTE ]
And even if that were so, I have trouble reading sources that think Hurricane Andrew hit in 2002.

[/ QUOTE ]

Typo - the original artical says:

[ QUOTE ]
For instance, it took five days for National Guard troops to arrive in strength on the scene in Homestead, Fla. after Hurricane Andrew hit in 1992. But after Katrina, there was a significant National Guard presence in the afflicted region in three.

[/ QUOTE ]

Original