|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On August 25 2017 23:23 mikedebo wrote:As opposed to one of those innocuous disasters.
So i wasn't the only one thinking that this was a dumb headline. A natural disaster is always significant, that's what disaster kinda implies.
edit: nvm, didn't see dates
|
On August 25 2017 23:00 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2017 22:48 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:This is going to be both good and bad to watch. Depending on the response, we could be seeing the end. The Trump hysteria is so comical I'm wondering if you're talking the end of Trump as president or the end of Texas. "His response was so bad to this hurricane that we consulted lawyers and they said it was 'basically high crimes and misdemeanors, just go for it bro.'" Hysteria? Stop.
I left it open for a reason. While I have no love for trump, I also have no love for Te-has except for a very few people who live there. Either could go and I'll be fine.
And also, for reference, see Bush v Katrina. If trump handles this as bad as that, then...choose your own ending.
|
And also, for reference, see Bush v Katrina
Wasn't that where Top Gear UK went a year or so after, just to see everything literally in rubble still?
edit: yeah, New Orleans, and almost two years after.
|
No clue. But the operation to get relief there was bungled hardcore.
|
On August 25 2017 23:14 Plansix wrote: Did they forget to update their own website? NOAA isn't FEMA, i think only office of director is an appointment
|
@Zero
Well won't link the episode here, it's in the internet to find and watch. Season 9 Episode 3 is the one, where they go cross country in the US in cheap cars, with the intention to sell them at their destination, which was New Orleans roughly 1.5 years after the hurricane hit. I feel like they were genuinely shocked of what it looked like there at that time, that long after a disaster. In the end they actually didn't try to sell the cars, but just gave them away.
I remember that episode because i was shocked too. To this day i don't understand really how you can/could just ignore part of your country (city, blocks, whatever) in rubble after a natural disaster.
|
United States42008 Posts
On August 25 2017 23:42 m4ini wrote: I remember that episode because i was shocked too. To this day i don't understand really how you can/could just ignore part of your country (city, blocks, whatever) in rubble after a natural disaster. Two step process 1) Paint rubble black 2) "I'm so not racist I don't even see colour"
|
On August 25 2017 23:35 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2017 23:00 Danglars wrote:On August 25 2017 22:48 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:This is going to be both good and bad to watch. Depending on the response, we could be seeing the end. The Trump hysteria is so comical I'm wondering if you're talking the end of Trump as president or the end of Texas. "His response was so bad to this hurricane that we consulted lawyers and they said it was 'basically high crimes and misdemeanors, just go for it bro.'" Hysteria? Stop. I left it open for a reason. While I have no love for trump, I also have no love for Te-has except for a very few people who live there. Either could go and I'll be fine. And also, for reference, see Bush v Katrina. If trump handles this as bad as that, then...choose your own ending. I'm no closer to getting an answer. Unless you're walking back when you said "the end" for Trump by making an explicit comparison to Bush, who finished the term in regular fashion.
|
Yesterday someone posted a link to the FEMA website where their head was named.
|
I could show you a neighborhood in St Louis or Chicago that looks just as bad as New Orleans and it was never hit by a natural disaster. These kinds of places are just ignored altogether.
Coincidentally, these also have a good minority population. I think the 9th ward and other poverty stricken areas should just wait for gentrification. That's their best hope because the city won't fix them.
On August 25 2017 23:46 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2017 23:35 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2017 23:00 Danglars wrote:On August 25 2017 22:48 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:This is going to be both good and bad to watch. Depending on the response, we could be seeing the end. The Trump hysteria is so comical I'm wondering if you're talking the end of Trump as president or the end of Texas. "His response was so bad to this hurricane that we consulted lawyers and they said it was 'basically high crimes and misdemeanors, just go for it bro.'" Hysteria? Stop. I left it open for a reason. While I have no love for trump, I also have no love for Te-has except for a very few people who live there. Either could go and I'll be fine. And also, for reference, see Bush v Katrina. If trump handles this as bad as that, then...choose your own ending. I'm no closer to getting an answer. Unless you're walking back when you said "the end" for Trump by making an explicit comparison to Bush, who finished the term in regular fashion. You didn't ask a question.
|
On August 25 2017 23:44 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2017 23:42 m4ini wrote: I remember that episode because i was shocked too. To this day i don't understand really how you can/could just ignore part of your country (city, blocks, whatever) in rubble after a natural disaster. Two step process 1) Paint rubble black 2) "I'm so not racist I don't even see colour"
Lol, i guess that'd work.
Really though, there's no excuse or justification. Especially not after seeing how japan removed most of the evidence of a tsunami that killed almost 20.000 people in around half a year.
edit: @Zero, pm
|
On August 25 2017 23:46 Artisreal wrote: Yesterday someone posted a link to the FEMA website where their head was named. that's because they have one. Danglers just spouting alternative facts and blaming the dems. Trump-in-Training.
sorry, spouting not shouting.
|
United States42008 Posts
Danglars, you do know that Trump is protected by his own party and that impeachment is a political process, not a legal one, right?
Because it feels a lot like you're attempting to argue that all that could result from a cocked up natural disaster is unpopularity without realizing that unpopularity is what will get him, if anything does.
|
On August 25 2017 23:29 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2017 23:23 mikedebo wrote:As opposed to one of those innocuous disasters. So i wasn't the only one thinking that this was a dumb headline. A natural disaster is always significant, that's what disaster kinda implies. edit: nvm, didn't see dates
While I'm usually not on board with most cries of "hysteria!", I think that the effects of constantly pushing the giant red EXTREME button in public discourse are starting to show themselves in interesting ways like the distortion of how we use language.
Like, I'm pretty sure that the author of that headline felt the need to put 'very significant' there because 'disaster' on its own would not be enough to garner attention -- even if it was subconsciously.
|
Remember that news agencies also double down on the risk of storms because people don't take them seriously.
|
On August 25 2017 23:53 mikedebo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2017 23:29 m4ini wrote:On August 25 2017 23:23 mikedebo wrote:As opposed to one of those innocuous disasters. So i wasn't the only one thinking that this was a dumb headline. A natural disaster is always significant, that's what disaster kinda implies. edit: nvm, didn't see dates While I'm usually not on board with most cries of "hysteria!", I think that the effects of constantly pushing the giant red EXTREME button in public discourse are starting to show themselves in interesting ways like the distortion of how we use language. Like, I'm pretty sure that the author of that headline felt the need to put 'very significant' there because 'disaster' on its own would not be enough to garner attention -- even if it was subconsciously.
Yeah, but it begs the question as to what would be assumed an insignificant disaster. It's like saying that someone has very terminal cancer. Or the other way around, "only a little bit terminal cancer".
It's nitpicky, but i don't understand where that's supposed to lead. If that is a significant disaster, what was the japanese tsunami?
edit: btw not downplaying hurricanes, all natural disasters are inherently scaring the shit out of me, because kinda unstoppable.
|
On August 26 2017 00:00 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2017 23:53 mikedebo wrote:On August 25 2017 23:29 m4ini wrote:On August 25 2017 23:23 mikedebo wrote:As opposed to one of those innocuous disasters. So i wasn't the only one thinking that this was a dumb headline. A natural disaster is always significant, that's what disaster kinda implies. edit: nvm, didn't see dates While I'm usually not on board with most cries of "hysteria!", I think that the effects of constantly pushing the giant red EXTREME button in public discourse are starting to show themselves in interesting ways like the distortion of how we use language. Like, I'm pretty sure that the author of that headline felt the need to put 'very significant' there because 'disaster' on its own would not be enough to garner attention -- even if it was subconsciously. Yeah, but it begs the question as to what would be assumed an insignificant disaster. It's like saying that someone has very terminal cancer. Or the other way around, "only a little bit terminal cancer". It's nitpicky, but i don't understand where that's supposed to lead. If that is a significant disaster, what was the japanese tsunami? A series of unfortunate events. Or Gojira's awakening. I'm leaning towards the latter.
|
On August 26 2017 00:03 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2017 00:00 m4ini wrote:On August 25 2017 23:53 mikedebo wrote:On August 25 2017 23:29 m4ini wrote:On August 25 2017 23:23 mikedebo wrote:As opposed to one of those innocuous disasters. So i wasn't the only one thinking that this was a dumb headline. A natural disaster is always significant, that's what disaster kinda implies. edit: nvm, didn't see dates While I'm usually not on board with most cries of "hysteria!", I think that the effects of constantly pushing the giant red EXTREME button in public discourse are starting to show themselves in interesting ways like the distortion of how we use language. Like, I'm pretty sure that the author of that headline felt the need to put 'very significant' there because 'disaster' on its own would not be enough to garner attention -- even if it was subconsciously. Yeah, but it begs the question as to what would be assumed an insignificant disaster. It's like saying that someone has very terminal cancer. Or the other way around, "only a little bit terminal cancer". It's nitpicky, but i don't understand where that's supposed to lead. If that is a significant disaster, what was the japanese tsunami? A series of unfortunate events. Or Gojira's awakening. I'm leaning towards the latter.
Guess a hurricane would be Mothra then.
|
On August 25 2017 23:47 brian wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2017 23:46 Artisreal wrote: Yesterday someone posted a link to the FEMA website where their head was named. that's because they have one. Danglers just spouting alternative facts and blaming the dems. Trump-in-Training. sorry, spouting not shouting. Gah I didn't see the date on CNN story. It was delayed for months, but eventually went through. My bad guys.
|
word you can't say things like that if you want to be leader of the free world man
|
|
|
|