Higher Priorities

@anniepa (27955)
United States
October 24, 2007 7:35pm CST
The White House Press Secretary today said that the war in Iraq take priority over the wild fires raging in California. This was to justify the fact that, according to some reports, over 50% of the people and equipment needed to fight these fires are unavailable because they're in Iraq or elsewhere in the world of hadn't yet been funded. Dana Perrino also said "We'll find some other way to help California." Huh??? This was NO surprise as these fires had been predicted this spring and it was known THEN that there were no enough resources to deal with them. OK, let's discuss it! Annie
4 people like this
15 responses
• United States
25 Oct 07
Well it never fails that Bush is once again blamed for something. If RJ Smith and gang would have allowed for the underbrush and such to be cleared out then the fires would have been a lot easier to control. The forest have been ticking time bombs for decades now - WAY before Bush even became president.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
25 Oct 07
I said this before, no one has blamed Bush for the fires it's the handling of the problem and the fact that over 50% of the people and equipment needed to fight the fires are either not in the country or NOT YET FUNDED! Since when is Malibu in a forest? Annie
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
25 Oct 07
Actually, none of this is "according to me" it was reported on the news last evening. I guess whose "fault" it is depends on whose responsibiity you think it is to protect the citizens of this country. The National Guard was always meant to be there in the case of national disasters, or am I mistaken about that? Annie
• United States
25 Oct 07
So who's fault is it that (according to you) the problem isn't being handled properly, equipment isn't here or not even yet funded?
1 person likes this
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
31 Oct 07
So what exactly is the whitehouse suposed to do? Are we now supposed to call out the white house fire fighters? This is simply not a federal issue. It is the responsability of the state government and local and county emergency crews in the imediate. We could go on with out end and critisize the federal government on an disaster. A thunderstorm rolls through my town, lightning strikes my house and burns it down, the government saw the weather report, they knew the storms were comming, why didn't they do something? Of course they knew the fires would happen. It happens every year. Now that Bush is in the white house it's suddenly a federal issue? I suppose it'e his job too to stop tornadoes in the midwest? Or volcanoes in Hawaii? How about nor'easters in New England, we know ever year there gonna happen.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
31 Oct 07
OK, this is not a federal issue so let's get rid of FEMA, give the states the money they need to handle whatever disasters they're prone to according to past damages and expenses and current forecasts adjusted for inflation - the REAL kind of inflation, not the phoney administration figures - make it so the California (or New York, Florida, Louisiana, etc.) National Guards stay in their own state along with their equipment and keep the President in Washington or Crawford instead of having him show up for his photo-ops whenever a disaster does occur. It certainly didn't start becoming a federal issue because Bush is in the White House, it just seemed like past residents did a better job. Annie
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
31 Oct 07
"OK, this is not a federal issue so let's get rid of FEMA, give the states the money they need to handle whatever disasters they're prone to" You wont get a bit of arguement from me there annie. I agrea with ou 100% there. As far as the national guard though, even they aren't equipped to fight fires of this magnitude, nor should they be, it is simpl not what they ar there for. the money should go to local and county emergency services. And allow the communities to distribute the funds as it deems best and most effective. the guys on the ground know best what they need. The reaction to this on their part overall has been amazing. they tackled an inferno spanning 600 some plus square miles and to all accounts, they have done an amzing job quelling this. And all without the help of fema or the federal government. All the federal government should do now is write the checks. In all honesty I think the government made a good call in not jumping in and instead letting the state of California handle it without the hinderence of guy in a suit on capitol hill.
1 person likes this
@cliffcliff (1350)
• United States
25 Oct 07
you are hysterical over Bush... just because you have lots of people and equipment does not mean they can stop fires. Use your brains. You are afraid to send Marines to fight terrorists. Why would you send them in front of raging fires? that are out of control? Which reminds me, when will you say "the fires have won, bring the trops back to the base" ....hahaha! The california democrats have done nothing but blame the fires on Bush, do they have any ideas on how to help fight the fires? the terrorists?... nope.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
25 Oct 07
No, I'm not hysterical and I'm using my BRAIN; I learned quite a few years ago that we all have only one so we must be quite careful with it...lol Also, I was never afraid to send Marines to fight terorists, which is why I supported going to Afghanistan; the terrorists weren't in Iraq until after we got there. It's the National Guard who are needed now, and what is the actual purpose of the NATIONAL Guard anyway? They knew these fires were likely to happen and they knew they weren't prepared for them and they apparently didn't try to fix their mistake. I haven't heard anyone "blame Bush for the fires". Gee, we sure are defensive, aren't we? Annie
• United States
25 Oct 07
you must think the government is God.. That they can just stop fires because we know they will happen... They happen every year, every decade, every fire season. You cant fly airplanes, put 50% of the national guard in front of raging smoke and fire... even if Hillary was president!! the California Liuetenant Governor and Barbara Boxer are complete dolts for saying those things they said. By the way, the war on terror means we fight terrorists anywhere. We cannot just fight them where you THINK they should be. and if the islamists decided to come to Iraq to fight us in Iraq, because we got rid of a mass-murdering, Stalin-type thug that broke all his agreements from the first war he started and lost, so be it. It aint easy, but the anti-bushies do nothing but oppose whatever decisions Bush makes. Good things and bad things have happened, but in the end, a free Iraq is the only rational choice. Curiously, Iraq is slowly becoming a viable country again, only after 4 and half years of impressive tenacity from US troops and Bush's steadfastness... where is the news reports on that? where will your gratitude be if Iraq becomes a thriving, consensual government that treats its people with respect and dignity? and is an American ally right smack in the middle of the middle east?... will you credit Bush? or a sniveling democrat somewhere. The dems never mentioned anything about victory this whole time... they have been hoping for a surrender for their own poliical benefit. and of course I am defensive, if you arent then you havent been paying attention!!!
1 person likes this
@worldwise1 (14885)
• United States
26 Oct 07
If you listen to the right-wing radio talking heads, anniepa, you would know that they are trying to spin this information in the usual way. They are touting the wonderful American spirit that allowed these people to single-handedly rescue themselves without benefit of government assistance, as opposed to the welfare bums who sat on their butts during Katrina. I am so fed up with all the lies and half-truths they keep spouting. It's like comparing apples and oranges. In my opinion, the situations were entirely different.
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
27 Oct 07
Thanks for your excellent points. I, too, am totally fed up with these lies and half-truths yet the conservatives will insist it's the "mainstream media" that's always at fault and not telling the truth! They're not perfect either, not by a long shot but I'd sure be more likely to believe ABC News than Limbaugh or O'Reilly! Or anything or anyone on the Fake News Network! Annie
• United States
25 Oct 07
I'm unsure why the equipment is still an issue, after Katrina. Although, to be honest, I don't know what equipment we're talking about here. Personnel unavailability is more understandable. Obviously it's impossible to ship equipment and personnel back and forth from Iraq for each disaster back home. But if there's a perceived shortage of equipment for domestic disaster relief, what's stopping the supply of additional equipment? Yet another example, it seems, of the lack of forethought applied to this war.
1 person likes this
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
25 Oct 07
The equiptment needed to fight the fire is in California and the Commander of the National Guard has called a drill for those units so that when the Governor or Lt Governor(once he is done bashing Bush) decides to activate the guard they will b ready. The problem is that you just can't sent people in to fight a fire that is being driven by 40 to 60 mph winds. The marines at Camp Pendlenton are available and ready but the Fire Fighters are not ready for more people until the winds change. There were some Guard members that were called up that were interviewed on the radio and they were wondering what they were doing because there were so many who were just standing around doing nothing. Some people have even said that the National Guard is called out too much. when they are not needed. It does not do any good to call up a combat unit to rebuild a community. In Nothern Wisconsins several years ago we had a community devistated by a Tornado. There was a Nationa Guard Unit 20 miles away and it was an Engineering Unit. They were not activated and many questions were asked why wasn't the National Guard called out. The unit was a Combat Engerneeing Unit - they blow up things - and not a construction Unit. The community decided to call in a company that specializes in storm clean up and rebuild communities. This company was used to working with Insurance Companies and things went very smoothly. I found out that it all starts at the local level and works it way up. In the case of Katrina the local leadership did not know waht they wanted. Mayor Nagan summed it up best when he told the President givem me the money and I will get things done. As of the last report there was over a billion dollars available to New Orleans as soon as the Mayor told the governemnt how he was going to spend it. If you throw too many people at a problem you suddently make the problem managing the people rather than utilizing the people to solve the problem.
• United States
25 Oct 07
Thanks for the clarification.
1 person likes this
@angemac23 (2003)
• Canada
25 Oct 07
I don't understand why they don't have the resources to fight the fires, especially if they predicted them months ago...there is something not right here. Maybe if Americans were not in Iraq right now fighting a stupid, useless war, American people on American soil wouldn't be suffering under their own government. Something sinister going on here...
1 person likes this
• United States
26 Oct 07
Your post just got me thinking. Is it a possibility that part of the reason so many military people in Iraq and the rest of the Middle East are there to keep them off American Soil? I mean, Americans really are suffering under the government, and having small numbers of military here, means that they cannot rise up and protect the citizens who really need it. Just a crazy thought I had lol.
1 person likes this
@missybal (4490)
• United States
26 Oct 07
No surprise here. Same thing that happened with Katrina. Help didn't come as quick as it should have due to everyone being in Iraq. And that is real sad that everyone knew that this was coming for the state of California and there would be enough equipment and help and federal funding if it wasn't for our men being in Iraq. What's sad is that what Bush is saying is this war is more important than the American citizens. All that money that is being used to rebuild Iraq, when we need to rebuilt America. All the destruction of Katrina is still an issue. We haven't even finished rebuilding. It's very sad, and I'm very disappointed with our government. America is being left defensless.
1 person likes this
@venkatcse (234)
• India
25 Oct 07
Bush wants more Petroleum and keen in attacking for the same. He never seems to worry about california. Wat is happening is not nice around here
1 person likes this
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
25 Oct 07
In an interview yesterday (10-24-07) the Commander of the California National Guard had called a drill(the governor or Lt Governor had not issued an call up yet) for the Units trained to fight these fires so that they would be ready wehn they were called up. The drill would give the guard time to modify the equiptment for fire fighting duty. He also called in equiptment from other units around the state. It seems according to this that California has the manpower and equiptment needed to fight the fires. What they don't have is the power to change the winds or temptures. Maybe if people quit blaming President Bush for every problem that comes up and take responsiblity for our selves. I know that I have to have a well insulated house to survive in Norther Wisconsin winters, and I build my house with a basement to protect me from tornados. The people along the southern coast need to be prepared for a Hurrican. The people in California need to be prepared for fires and mud slides. They are building in known fire area and known mud slide areas. Remember a couple of years ago there was a hill side that sent whole houses sliding down the mountain. it was learned then that many of these houses were build where insurance companies would not insure them because of the certanity of the house being distroyed. To quote a famous passage "the foolish man built his house on the sand, the wise man build his house on the rock".
1 person likes this
@suspenseful (40193)
• Canada
25 Oct 07
It depends on who is in charge of fighting fires, whether Bush and his administration should be or whether it should be the firefighters in California. The president is not called the Commander In Chief for nothing. He is the head of the military. Fighting fires is under a different jurisdiction and it is the civilians who should pay for it. The National Guard is for emergencies, like keeping order, stopping riots. They are not fire fighters. In order for the National Guard to fight fires, especially like they have in California, they need special training in fire fighting techniques and that would mean that every National Guard unit in the States receive such training. And you cannot blame Bush for anything even for 9/11. You do not know if he personally knew of 9/11 or whether the terrorists were putting red herrings out, saying that an attack would happen at various places so many times, that the administration thought they were saying, "Wolf!" Next thing you will say that Bush orchestrated 9/11.
• United States
26 Oct 07
I am not surprised.Isn't California a blue state, i.e. a state that votes democratic.Why should This administration help? Maybe it is just the lack of listening skills. If the fires were predicted, there must have been a report. And if there were a report, it was up to the government,local or federal, to try to help.
1 person likes this
• United States
4 Dec 07
Hmmm.... let's keep thousands of resources on hand in the US, just in case there are wildfires. Besides, the mideast isn't really THAT important to the western world, is it? I think that people are grabbing at whatever they can, using any event, no matter how unrelated to Iraq, to say: "see! if only we hadn't gone to Iraq! Then these wildfires would be no problem!" The fires have nothing to do with Iraq, and the millions of resourceful people in CA and the surrounding states can surely figure out something on their own, without the federal government.
@Rozie37 (15499)
• Turkmenistan
25 Oct 07
Well, I do not know about the other places, but there seems to be fires in Malibu every year. I live very close to there and I do not understand what is so appealing about this city that people pay all that money to stay there knowing that their place could go up in smoke. I do not care how much money or insurance you have, it just doesn't seem worth it to me. I know that people like the idea of living on the beach and all that, but I can't see myself moving somewhere that is certain to be on fire soon. I don't get it.
@RosieS57 (889)
• United States
25 Oct 07
They took National Guard that were guarding the border to help fight the fires. The firefighters were also helped by firefighting teams from Tijuana! I guess border security against Mexicans is really really important UNLESS the Guard is needed to save American lives and property and unless Californians NEED real Mexicans to help save American lives and property. Then all the 'control our borders against ALIENS!!' goes right out the window. Because our Guard isn't Guarding here...but is dealing with protecting the lives, property and freedom of Iraqis, instead. Even though the majority of Iraqis don't want them there! Thanks for starting this discussion, Annie. I feel the IRONY of the situation of who is fighting what where and why is just too precious to pass up!! Just another note -- are you a right wingnut magnet in this thread or whut? You have my liberal sympathies, Hon!
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
26 Oct 07
Thank YOU, Hon! I'm a magnet here, alright! Thanks also for making some excellent, AWESOME points! Annie
@cliffcliff (1350)
• United States
25 Oct 07
you are hysterical over Bush... just because you have lots of people and equipment does not mean they can stop fires. Use your brains. You are afraid to send Marines to fight terrorists. Why would you send them in front of raging fires? that are out of control?Which reminds me, when will you say "the fires have won!! bring the troops back to the base!!" ....hahaha!The california democrats have done nothing but blame the fires on Bush, do they have any ideas on how to help fight the fires? the terrorists?... nope.