They should stuff them in rubber crates and dive bomb them into crash mats then. Where's the ingenuity in the human race gone these days?

They should stuff them in rubber crates and dive bomb them into crash mats then. Where's the ingenuity in the human race gone these days?

 

Water's a better bet, IMO. Sling out a floating boom, and drop them into a river or lake.

 

I did read that suring the last Spanish civil war nationalist troops dropped food strapped to turkeys. The turkeys slowed the descent and then got eaten. Ironically using this method to feed and help people would now be considered inhumane.

At least they didn't drop them from a helicopter, thinking that turkeys could fly.

Those poor bastards cant catch a break:

 

New 6.1-quake hits Haiti, people flee into streets

 

Jan 20, 8:08 AM (ET)

 

By PAUL HAVEN and MICHELLE FAUL

 

PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti (AP) - A powerful new earthquake struck Haiti on Wednesday, shaking rubble from damaged buildings and sending screaming people running into the streets only eight days after the country's capital was devastated by an apocalyptic quake.

 

The magnitude-6.1 temblor was the largest aftershock yet to the Jan. 12 quake. The extent of additional damage or injuries was not immediately clear.

 

Wails of terror rose from frightened survivors as the earth shuddered at 6:03 a.m. U.S. soldiers and tent city refugees alike raced for open ground, and clouds of dust rose in the capital.

 

The U.S. Geological Survey said the quake was centered about 35 miles (56 kilometers) northwest of Port-au-Prince and was 13.7 miles (22 kilometers) below the surface.

Edited January 20, 201016 yr by Gfted1

I think it is time to consider full scale evacuations for the people there. If this sort of thing keeps up they will not be able to rebuild in such a tectonically active region.

Edited January 20, 201016 yr by Killian Kalthorne

Probably a bit OTT to flee. Strong aftershocks are the norm from what little I remember of school geography.

I don't think they need to abandon to island, they just need to make sure they rebuild with strong earthquake codes in mind. I understand this is easier said than done, though.

They should ask the japanese on how to do things. They seem to know how to cope with constant earthquakes.

They're also one of the richest countries in the world while Haiti is piss poor.

They're also one of the richest countries in the world while Haiti is piss poor.

 

With the aid pouring in, it would be great if they could take all those donations and really lay the groundwork for a solid infrastructure.

They're also one of the richest countries in the world while Haiti is piss poor.

 

With the aid pouring in, it would be great if they could take all those donations and really lay the groundwork for a solid infrastructure.

 

The issue there is, while that might seem like a good idea, unless there are people to maintain that infrastructure it would likely go to waste. But then you're left with a "the chicken or the egg" scenario - do you build things and hope to train people or train people and hope to build things?

I've read the same thing in several papers today. What is the point of the aid, given that much of Haiti was starving and completely fethed beforehand?

What is the point of the aid, given that much of Haiti was starving and completely fethed beforehand?

 

I'm not saying that there shouldn't be aid, but massive infrastructure projects might not be the best post-disaster aid compared to basic training and other such low(er)-tech, but vital, things.

Charity by Governments is just another form of socialism. You're redestributing the wealth of one country to another country that can't pull up their bootstraps.

Charity by Governments is just another form of socialism. You're redestributing the wealth of one country to another country that can't pull up their bootstraps.

 

lol. The sad thing is, a lot (but not all) of the Libertarians and similar I know actually believe this.

I was reading something about Ann Coulter (who I think is a fruitcake) but anyway, an article about Charity v. Socialism and I saw this statement "Research shows that Liberals tend to give less to charity than Conservatives. It's one thing to use other people's money to support what you believe to be a good cause. It's quite another to use your own money. The former is a form of socialism. The latter is charity." Funny, because unless charities ask if you are Liberal or Conservative, then how would they know if Liberals give less than Conservatives?

Edited January 21, 201016 yr by Hiro Protagonist

What is the point of the aid, given that much of Haiti was starving and completely fethed beforehand?

 

I'm not saying that there shouldn't be aid, but massive infrastructure projects might not be the best post-disaster aid compared to basic training and other such low(er)-tech, but vital, things.

 

Yeah. OK. I see what you mean.

I was reading something about Ann Coulter (who I think is a fruitcake) but anyway, an article about Charity v. Socialism and I saw this statement "Research shows that Liberals tend to give less to charity than Conservatives. It's one thing to use other people's money to support what you believe to be a good cause. It's quite another to use your own money. The former is a form of socialism. The latter is charity." Funny, because unless charities ask if you are Liberal or Conservative, then how would they know if Liberals give less than Conservatives?

 

I've also read studies that show conservatives on average have more money than liberals. It makes sense, liberals are too busy hugging trees and buying birkenstocks to hold down a good job.

Strange how one group of people (eg. Conservatives) always complain about other groups (eg. Liberals) not giving as much as they do to charities.

I like how it takes a 7.0 Earth-shattering quake to get these people some help

What I like is the fact that this 'sovereign nation' will sink back into obscurity after absorbing all the aid. It's like pouring water onto sand.

 

I'm still not saying we shouldn't help now. I'm just pointing out that as a species we refuse to move beyond the latter 20th century madness of isolationism.

I'm just pointing out that as a species we refuse to move beyond the latter 20th century madness of isolationism.

 

I wish you'd stop saying **** like that because given the evidence it makes no sense. Perhaps you should start by defining what you mean by 'isolationism'?

I'm just pointing out that as a species we refuse to move beyond the latter 20th century madness of isolationism.

 

I wish you'd stop saying **** like that because given the evidence it makes no sense. Perhaps you should start by defining what you mean by 'isolationism'?

 

You want the Moon on a stick, don't you?

I'm just pointing out that as a species we refuse to move beyond the latter 20th century madness of isolationism.

 

I wish you'd stop saying **** like that because given the evidence it makes no sense. Perhaps you should start by defining what you mean by 'isolationism'?

 

You want the Moon on a stick, don't you?

 

I'll ring your neck!