Euro Myopia and Tsunamis

Not living in the real world...

Published on January 10, 2005 By Draginol In Current Events

People seem to be really obsessed over how much cash different countries are pledging. One thing that doesn't (surprise) get that much coverage is how much money different countries have already spent in reality.

As I surf the web, one thing that comes up over and over is the utter lack of understanding of logistics. It's as if some people imagine that food, water, shelter, clothing just magically appear to victims of the Tsunamis. One almost imagines they they picture a Star Trek like beaming sequence of food stuffs to isolated groups of people in the Indian ocean region.

But in reality, this stuff has to be delivered and it has to be delivered quickly. How long can you go without fresh water? How long can you go without food? How about medical treatment? That's where the US military comes into play. And it's amazing how little coverage this is getting because as a practical matter, the US (and Australia) are the only two countries that are able to effectively deliver aid in a timely manner.

Rebuilding funds from around the world months from now will be very helpful. But they'd be pretty useless to the tens of thousands who would die if there wasn't a US Navy to actually provide the logistics to provide all the stuff.

As Varifrank wrote:

Today, during an afternoon conference that wrapped up my project of the last 18 months, one of my Euro collegues tossed this little turd out to no one in particular:

" See, this is why George Bush is so dumb, theres a disaster in the world and he sends an Aircraft Carrier..."

After which he and many of my Euro collegues laughed out loud.

And then they looked at me. I wasn't laughing, and neither was my Hindi friend sitting next to me, who has lost family in the disaster.

I'm afraid I was "unprofessional", I let it loose -

"Hmmm, let's see, what would be the ideal ship to send to a disaster, now what kind of ship would we want?

Something with its own inexhuastible power supply?

Something that can produce 900,000 gallons of fresh water a day from sea water?

Something with its own airfield? So that after producing the fresh water, it could help distribute it?

Something with 4 hospitals and lots of open space for emergency supplies?

Something with a global communications facility to make the coordination of disaster relief in the region easier?

Well "Franz", us peasants in America call that kind of ship an "Aircraft Carrier". We have 12 of them. How many do you have?

Comments (Page 1)

Bob G

on Jan 10, 2005

Just goes to prove it's easy to throw rocks when standing behind a wall of ignorance.
Most people tend to overlook the logistics of a situation, especially when their mind is made up already. Good article.

Kobrano

on Jan 10, 2005

People don't get it, and being an Ex-Military guy myself, I know a bit about logistics. We're the one doing a majority of the logistics there.

I saw a program 2 nights ago, and said for one ship of ours to be there (and we have many), its something like 150 million dollars a day. For ONE ship.. Not counting the helicopters and everything else. The expenses of our military there is going to be massive, i'd expect nearly a billion dollars in military costs alone after its all over.

What did china and france send, a couple row boats?

Dr Guy

on Jan 10, 2005

It makes you wonder on the intelligence of the Bush Haters. Honest disagreement with the man's policies is one thing, but to make a fool of yourself at every step trying to belittle him just shows your own stupidity.

Redshirt #3

on Jan 10, 2005

This makes me think of an old saying: "Amateurs study tactics; professionals study logistics."

RedneckHunter

on Jan 10, 2005

It makes you wonder on the intelligence of the Bush Haters

I would like the guy alot better if he would occasionally state..

"Get er done" and scratch his nads.....

paxx

on Jan 10, 2005

Are we done tooting our own horn here, or are we going to start actually caring for people who need us?

ParaTed2k

on Jan 10, 2005

It's the same old song. It doesn't matter to some people what you are actually doing to help, as long as people think that you're helping. The industrialized world seems to be in a bidding war, loudly trying point out how low the others' bids are. Well, after the bidding is over, and all the money gets thrown at the disaster relief, all that will matter is that the disaster relief occured.

The naysayers would do well to quit talking about who is merely pledging "help" and who is actually helping.

(and no I don't mean just the US, I mean all who are actually helping).

Solitair

on Jan 11, 2005

What did china and france send, a couple row boats?

nice to see more ignorance from the US side by the second post. France also sent a carrier to the region, but can we say well done France? No we can't. We just look at this as an oppertunity to spread ignorance and slander France. China has sent more aid to this disaster than to any other event ever. It's a huge symbol from it and it is heavily involved in helping Thailand identify bodies. Can we say well done China? No we can't.

Yes the US has done an excellent job in sending an aircraft carrier to the region, but that's no reason to bash the contributions from other countries. Logistics are important, but so are skilled people and aid. Let's stop putting contributions from other countries down. Do feel free to correct peoples misconceptions as to the importance of logistics but do so in a positive manner. So thank every country for their aid, correct people with misconceptions, and stop trying to put down other countries.

Paul.

BobG

on Jan 11, 2005

As you have pointed out, ignorance is not confined to one particular group; good to see someone is looking at the whole picture, and with more objectivity than some.

BobG

on Jan 11, 2005

As you have pointed out, ignorance is not confined to one particular group; good to see someone is looking at the whole picture, and with more objectivity than some.

Dr Guy

on Jan 11, 2005

Yes the US has done an excellent job in sending an aircraft carrier to the region, but that's no reason to bash the contributions from other countries. Logistics are important, but so are skilled people and aid. Let's stop putting contributions from other countries down. Do feel free to correct peoples misconceptions as to the importance of logistics but do so in a positive manner. So thank every country for their aid, correct people with misconceptions, and stop trying to put down other countries.

The article was not bashing other countries, and you had to read far into the comments to find some France Bashing. But your first comment was to pick the nits. WHy not comment on the article first, and then pick the nits? You are guilty of what you accuse others of. It would kill you to say "Well done Bush" Or "America".

Me thinks you best not look into a mirror. You will not like the man staring back.

ParaTed2k

on Jan 11, 2005

nice to see more ignorance from the US side by the second post. France also sent a carrier to the region, but can we say well done France? No we can't.

I say well done France, in the Indian Ocean relief effort and the war on terror also. While the French wouldn't help us in Iraq, there are French troops and sailors in nearly every other facet. I'm not defending France's (or anyone else's) participation in the joke the UN called the "oil for food" program, or the equally unfunny pun of "containment" of Hussein. However, I am willing to give credit where credit is due.

Ok, your turn.

Solitair

on Jan 11, 2005

Dr Guy,
I have many times stated that the US is doing a good job here and should be appluaded. What part of 'an excellent job' makes you think that I don't see this as 'well done America'?
To argue about my paragraph order is very pedantic and purely a matter of writing sytle. There are two short paragraphs with me clearly referrencing the question the first paragraph was responding to. The second paragraph then stresses the good work the US is doing, stressing that logistics is important and that Brad is right to clear peoples misconceptions. It concludes that all contributions should be applauded (effectively saying that waving the US flag and pointing out the good things they are doing does not require the burning of the French or Chinese flags).

Paul.

Dr Guy

on Jan 11, 2005

To argue about my paragraph order is very pedantic and purely a matter of writing sytle

Yes......, But...........

Hardly a testimonial.

And check out that flagship of France. It had to be a French Carrier. NO other Country could be so inept.

http://www.strategypage.com/dls/articles/2003127.asp

paxx

on Jan 11, 2005

Amazing how a disaster in one country can be yet another excuse to criticize other countries.
While I was proud of humanity in this disaster relief, the more I read comments such as some here the more I'm revising my human pride again...

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!