General Discussion

mopinko

(73,749 posts)

41. if they are bringing supplies in, presumably they are going back empty.

Wed Sep 27, 2017, 03:14 PM

Sep 2017

people wont be going "back and forth", they will only be going one way, the opposite way the aid is going. why cant they accomplish both?

you take the sickest, oldest, most vulnerable first. duh.
we dont have to put them anywhere. this is their country. they can go where they please. where did we "put" people from katrina? yes, there was some support for resettlement, and i dont know what percentage of people needed that.
but it has to be cheaper than supporting them in a complete humanitarian crisis.

people have families, ya know. friends. people who are dying to help them, in fact.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

59 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

i'm sorry, but i will say it again- we should be evacuating as many people [View all] mopinko Sep 2017 OP

Don't be sorry for saying it again. MontanaMama Sep 2017 #1

Big ideas come with annoying details. For example, fly them WHERE? Florida?! WinkyDink Sep 2017 #2

i suspect that most who want to get out have family elsewhere in the us. mopinko Sep 2017 #5

You want to provide door to door transportation for milliions of people over thousands of miles? gilbert sullivan Sep 2017 #37

fine. that does not negate the need to do what we can, for who we can. mopinko Sep 2017 #42

We used to be able to pull off the Berlin Air Drops and save people from dying. DK504 Sep 2017 #54

I agree TexasBushwhacker Sep 2017 #3

This. Yes. Weekend Warrior Sep 2017 #4

It's not possible localroger Sep 2017 #6

Informative post. Thanks. bluepen Sep 2017 #7

ffs. just like the post i put up before the storm hit- no, you cant evacuate 3.5M. mopinko Sep 2017 #8

Well, you can evacuate the hospitals and nursing homes. Got to start somewhere. Ninsianna Sep 2017 #13

and- for everyone who stays mopinko Sep 2017 #9

Sigh, you really have no clue to the difficulty of what you want Lurks Often Sep 2017 #17

the navy transports the marines. mopinko Sep 2017 #18

It's not controversial, its just a really poorly thought out knee-jerk idea. FLPanhandle Sep 2017 #22

So how many people do you think want to leave PR? Lurks Often Sep 2017 #27

if they are bringing supplies in, presumably they are going back empty. mopinko Sep 2017 #41

As always you have no real plan Lurks Often Sep 2017 #46

i have to have a plan? i'm just calling for all available resources to help mopinko Sep 2017 #50

See post #48 for ANOTHER explanation of why what you want isn't realistic Lurks Often Sep 2017 #51

The C-40 is basically a Boeing 737. MineralMan Sep 2017 #21

So how many people do you think want to leave PR? Lurks Often Sep 2017 #34

I have no idea, of course, how many want to leave. MineralMan Sep 2017 #38

From an article dated 9/23/17 "Aid begins to flow to hurricane-hit Puerto Rico" Lurks Often Sep 2017 #40

from your link- mopinko Sep 2017 #43

Get back to me when you can supply a plan that addresses all the issues Lurks Often Sep 2017 #47

so all available c-17s should be there. mopinko Sep 2017 #36

Im sorry but that idea is simply batshit nuts. gilbert sullivan Sep 2017 #39

A navy ship can probably pull 40 or 50 barges, how many people per a barge? snooper2 Sep 2017 #23

Maybe we would deploy a fleet of blimps Orrex Sep 2017 #24

thanks you saved from pulling out my calculator... Locrian Sep 2017 #16

+1 FLPanhandle Sep 2017 #19

No more and no less than their "expert" critics. LanternWaste Sep 2017 #25

Post one good example FLPanhandle Sep 2017 #29

katrina mopinko Sep 2017 #44

That's a storm name FLPanhandle Sep 2017 #45

Just for discussion - pangaia Sep 2017 #53

. mopinko Sep 2017 #10

. mopinko Sep 2017 #11

. mopinko Sep 2017 #12

Until Trump tries to put a travel ban on refugees from Puerto Rico. Binkie The Clown Sep 2017 #14

i have to wonder if that is not the whole problem. mopinko Sep 2017 #15

Not necessarily against, but take them where? Adrahil Sep 2017 #20

Drop them off at a cruise ship dock in Miami apparently jberryhill Sep 2017 #28

where ever the hell they want to go. they are americans, not refugees. mopinko Sep 2017 #31

I have seen requests for private planes to help evacuate seriously ill patients from the hospitals. redstatebluegirl Sep 2017 #26

just not right. mopinko Sep 2017 #33

Absolutely, if this were Houston it would be. redstatebluegirl Sep 2017 #35

Well, it's not like the odds are good... yallerdawg Sep 2017 #30

and i reckon that price just went way the fuck up. mopinko Sep 2017 #32

I've actually done military logistics Lee-Lee Sep 2017 #48

Good post FLPanhandle Sep 2017 #49

dang du. who woulda thunk that aiding americans in distress could mopinko Sep 2017 #52

gee mopinko Sep 2017 #55

Stage 1 would be setting up the dreaded FEMA camp for 2 million people and arranging to process them Not Ruth Sep 2017 #56

much easier to do here than in pr. mopinko Sep 2017 #57

Of course they need sponsors Not Ruth Sep 2017 #58

it would be nice but these are americans. mopinko Sep 2017 #59