Haiti Should Be A No Politics Zone
As we watch the tragedy in Haiti and the amazing efforts of the world community (led as is often the case by the United States) I hope that for once we can avoid the partisanship that seems to flow in to almost any story these days.
So just to make it clear.
This is not the time for those on the right to try and attack Obama for not doing enough or for spending money where he should not or any other attack.
This is also not the time for those on the left to raise the Katrina story and talk about how Bush would have done this or that wrong now.
This is not the time for any other partisan political attack, critique, etc. You do NOT make political hay out of dying people. Not now, not ever.
People are dying and for once it’s time for all of us to put aside politics and unite to help the suffering end.
17 Responses to “Haiti Should Be A No Politics Zone”
I knew that wasn't going to happen, and even made earlier predictions about how politics might develop.
Well said Patrick. This is a time for all partisans to put down their pitchforks and torches and join in common cause to make donations. . . and/or pray (to whatever god floats your boat) for the people of Haiti.
Of course you did, DLS…
Yet we shouldn't let the dead die in vain either. What a waste!
We should at least glean from the situation that there is a definite need to pay attention to building codes. Also to pay attention to the eerie earthquake-echo syndrome that seems to play out. Cali just had a near-sized quake and within just four days while that area was still experiencing aftershocks, Haita gets a 7.0. If a quake strikes anywhere of this magnitude zone, people should first be on the lookout for tsunamis and then second for another one in another place on the globe. In other words, these deaths can teach us to be very wary and prepared for a shaker at anywhere in the world just after another especially.
Another thing that could keep their deaths from being in vain is to see how fragile any society is and that all it takes is one disaster to cause utter mayhem in people. No society is completely immune from this and if mayhem ensues, everyone loses..
“Of course you did”
I was among the very first to express concern at the number of casualties, as well as to hope aloud that our Army's Chinooks would be dispatched. I also expressed concern that politics would taint this event, and elsewhere already gave examples how it might come about. There's a clear distinction between saying it might happen, and making it happen by doing it one's self, which I obviously did not do — or by starting threads, that will be political (which has in fact happened, at the hand of others, already).
It's unfortunate that not everyone can understand what is plainly obvious (or can't handle not understanding it well).
As I said,
.
“We should at least glean from the situation that there is a definite need to pay attention to building codes.”
That's not an issue here in the States, as a rule. It is in places like India (where it even entered into an elaborate description of what might be the consequences of a nuclear war on the Subcontinent involved large cities like Mumbai) as well as there. (There is no cheap-shot material here that can be employed against those complaining about excessive regulation, it should not need much reminding.)
Things like building codes are almost little other than a superficiality in a place that's truly as primitive and lacks progress to the extent that Haiti does. Another item I've deliberately neglected to mention until now becausei it likely would have been misinterpreted on here and the object of silliness is that we are not hearing (though US media incompetence, despite liberal infatuation with its “charismatic” leader) is what Cuba, the giant of the Caribbean, is or is not currently doing to assist the Haitians in this disaster. I have been curious from the start. Note that Cuba is poor, and inhibited itself in its state of development (which is partly, though not wholly, due to the embargo the US largely maintains aginst it), but that despite facing disasters itself (hurricanes) that would have exposed problems, there is no widespread news of Cuban structural failures, for example, or civil unrest from domestic problems, or other things that a liberal media would nevertheless choose to broadcast because of the sensationalist appeal of these things (“if it bleeds, it leads”). (In fact, Cuba has problems, but is not notably retarded in development compared to its other Latin neighbors.) Haiti truly is in a primitive class even compared to its neighbors, or say, even to India, where substandard construction is also a concern.
I believe that helicopters do not have the range to fly to Haiti. The Army helicopters would have to be disassembled, packed up and shipped. Takes to long. The Navy and Marines have helicopter carriers that can be used for this.
“I believe that helicopters do not have the range to fly to Haiti.”
They would be airlifted to Haiti. (The supplies for distribution would be airlifted there as well.)
“The Navy and Marines have helicopter carriers that can be used for this.”
True. Still, nothing competes with the Chinooks (okay, I like them most, too) and they've already done well in Pakistan.
Note that I'm thinking about delivery of supplies (using Chinooks, and perhaps Sea Kings) primarily rather than using the smaller helicopters for search and rescue work. I should have explained earlier.
Look DLS, the helicopters the Navy and Marines have ARE Chinooks. They just call them Sea Knights and Sea Stallions, Sea Kings. CH-46 and CH-47. There is also the CH-53 which is bigger than the “Chinook”.
Where are you going to deliver supplies too? Once the supplies arrive at the airport via air freighter they can go by truck except in a few places. You just don't need that many helicopters anyway.
1. Airlift means pack up and ship.
2. Pakistan is not Haiti.
“CH-46 and CH-47″
… are not the same, Father Time. There issssssssssssssssssss nothing like Chinook.
(I like all helicopters, but “the Bus,” as I call it sometimes, is in a class by itself.)
“Once the supplies arrive at the airport via air freighter they can go by truck except in a few places. You just don't need that many helicopters anyway.”
Haiti is like Africa, just after a big natural disaster. Poor roads, blocked by God knows what all. “Except in a _few_ places?” And you had already thought about using helicopters and using the smaller ones, too? (People will be putting all those hoists, hoist operators, and hoist operations to the test, even without a hurricane or other source of flooding and people on rooftops for that reason.)
Father Time,
“the helicopters the Navy and Marines have ARE Chinooks. They just call them Sea Knights and Sea Stallions, Sea Kings. CH-46 and CH-47. There is also the CH-53 “
Apparently you don't know what each of these are. The Chinook is the large tandem-rotor helicopter that can deliver large quanties of supplies (including large sling loads) and personnel in large numbers. It's the primary big bird to use for relief work. The smaller helicopters (medium-lift) are for search and rescue and for smaller, dispersed or distributed tasks in a disaster relief operation.
The Chinook (CH-47) is this:
http://www.boeing.com/rotorcraft/military/ch47d…
http://www.army.mil/factfiles/equipment/aircraf…
The Sea Knight (CH-46) is a smaller, repeat, smaller tandem-rotor helicopter. It's not the same bird.
http://www.marines.com/main/index/winning_battl…
The others are conventional (single-rotor with anti-torque rotor on a tail boom):
The Sea King (H-3)
http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?c…
The Sea Stallion (CH-53)
http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?c…
If the Army were involved at some time, we'd probably not only see Chinooks, but the Black Hawk, too:
http://www.sikorsky.com/vgn-ext-templating-SIK/…
http://www.army.mil/factfiles/equipment/aircraf…
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by emilyanne, Kurt. Kurt said: Haiti Should Be A No Politics Zone http://bit.ly/4X0Tb5 [...]
Whatever. You don't impress me internet boy. I'm a pilot.
They just don't need that many large helicopters. They are NOT the primary “relief bird”. Thats the dumbest thing I ever heard. Why…because the military is not the primary relief anything.
“Why…because the military is not the primary relief anything”
Ah, change subject…OK. Good luck flying, as long as you know what aircraft you're trying to operate.
Chinook is bigger than the CH-53E? Cabin size maybe, but lift capability is even more important for these relief efforts. Sure, sing the Chinook's praises, but they pale in comparison to the Marines' Super Stallion. It's marinized and provides true heavy-lift capability. Far beyond what other modern helicopters can provide (at least within the US military).
The CH-46 Sea Knights are medium lift, meaning they can provide a little more than the Seahawks. The Sea Knights were part of the navy but they've mostly been retired and replaced by the newer SH-60 Romeo's and SH-60 Sierra's. The larger army Chinooks are not designed for naval operations and thus would really just stress the carrier crew and deck crew even more. If the army wished to deploy the larger, newer CH-47F's then they would have to dismantle them and load them onto c-5s or c-17s which wouldn't be wise since the Haitian airport is already operating to full capacity–and no they can't and won't land on carriers. The CH-53Es and the SH-60s are the best choice in provide lift capability to these relief efforts.
Before you criticize the military response, it may help to do your research on the hardware they use.
Disclaimer: I work at Sikorsky, but I know my rotary aircraft.
[...] Haiti Should Be A No Politics Zone (themoderatevoice.com) [...]