keepthefaith Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 Obama has sent the military because in his mind this is one of the only good uses of our armed forces. Kinda like NASA's Muslim outreach. Next I expect the department of energy to start recruiting illegal immigrants to build wind farms on land recently confiscated by the government in the path of the would be Keystone pipeline.
DC Tom Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 Obama has sent the military because in his mind this is one of the only good uses of our armed forces. Kinda like NASA's Muslim outreach. Next I expect the department of energy to start recruiting illegal immigrants to build wind farms on land recently confiscated by the government in the path of the would be Keystone pipeline. No, Obama sent the military because only the US military has the logistic capabilities to move the resources to a severely under-developed theater overseas on the scale necessary at short notice within a reasonable time frame to address the epidemic. Literally no other organization on the planet can do that. The US military is the only group that's even approximately prepared for a situation like Liberia. Note: I understand why you believe the Ebola crisis is not something we should be handling unilaterally here in the US, and I agree with you. Declaring matial law across the nation on the other hand puts the military at odds with the public so there is no easy answer here IMO. What the !@#$ is this? I don't believe that at all. Who are you talking to?
Donald Duck Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) No, Obama sent the military because only the US military has the logistic capabilities to move the resources to a severely under-developed theater overseas on the scale necessary at short notice within a reasonable time frame to address the epidemic. Literally no other organization on the planet can do that. The US military is the only group that's even approximately prepared for a situation like Liberia. What the !@#$ is this? I don't believe that at all. Who are you talking to? You said the message was inconsistent so what do you mean then? Edited October 30, 2014 by Donald Duck
boyst Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 So I'm on a job site in FL this week. One of the other contractors heard I was from NY, and has been running around telling everyone to be careful around me because "I's gots the Ebola". So I told him I was also working near Dallas the week that guy died. Then I followed it up with some coughing. Should have seen the fear in his eyes. You should fake a call from the Dr's office before you go to lunch or something... "Yeah? Ok, so I need to go get checked immediately?!" ... "Is there a specific hospital or facility better equipped for this?" ... "Alright, I hope the tests come back negative."
DC Tom Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 You said the message was inconsistent so what do you mean then? The administration is saying that people don't need to be quarantined, coming back from West Africa. But then they turn around and quarantine troops coming back. That's not a consistent message.
Donald Duck Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 The administration is saying that people don't need to be quarantined, coming back from West Africa. But then they turn around and quarantine troops coming back. That's not a consistent message. Handling the Ebola crisis unilaterally is basically saying the same thing, Perhaps you misunderstood ...
DC Tom Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 Handling the Ebola crisis unilaterally is basically saying the same thing, Perhaps you misunderstood ... What does "the administration saying one thing and doing the opposite" have to do with unilateralism? What the !@#$ are you talking about? What is wrong with you?
Donald Duck Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 What does "the administration saying one thing and doing the opposite" have to do with unilateralism? What the !@#$ are you talking about? What is wrong with you? What is wrong with you? hahahaha Oh well, I tried..
DC Tom Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 What is wrong with you? hahahaha Oh well, I tried.. Tried what? You're not even having the same conversation as everyone else. Ebola researchers banned from tropical disease conference... http://news.sciencemag.org/health/2014/10/been-ebola-affected-country-stay-away-tropical-medicine-meeting-louisiana-says Smart.
4merper4mer Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 Tried what? You're not even having the same conversation as everyone else. Ebola researchers banned from tropical disease conference... http://news.sciencemag.org/health/2014/10/been-ebola-affected-country-stay-away-tropical-medicine-meeting-louisiana-says Smart. Perhaps they have heard of Webex?
Donald Duck Posted October 31, 2014 Posted October 31, 2014 Tried what? You're not even having the same conversation as everyone else. Ebola researchers banned from tropical disease conference... http://news.sciencem...-louisiana-says Smart. Let me spell it out for you. Military handles the Ebola crisis as a seperate entity, with its own rules to follow, its own chain of command, and missions to complete. (working unilaterally) United States Goverment handles the Ebola crisis not only seperate from the military, but the state to state legislation differs. (working unilaterally) So why would you expect the same actions taken when a branch of the military is doing its job? Or the same so called message given? Its really not that hard to understand IMO...
Azalin Posted October 31, 2014 Posted October 31, 2014 Let me spell it out for you. Military handles the Ebola crisis as a seperate entity, with its own rules to follow, its own chain of command, and missions to complete. (working unilaterally) United States Goverment handles the Ebola crisis not only seperate from the military, but the state to state legislation differs. (working unilaterally) So why would you expect the same actions taken when a branch of the military is doing its job? Or the same so called message given? Its really not that hard to understand IMO... the military may function as it's own separate entity, but the president is commander-in-chief of all the armed forces, so he's absolutely directly involved and completely responsible for the military's involvement in the fight to combat ebola in west Africa, having been the one to deploy the troops in the first place. I don't understand at all your statement 'United States Goverment handles the Ebola crisis not only seperate from the military, but the state to state legislation differs. (working unilaterally)' state to state legislation differs? unilaterally??? the president has insinuated himself into the manner in which individual states handle the ebola scare, specifically by making statements and taking a stand against what governors Cuomo and Christie felt was the proper way to handle the issue in their respective states. Obama has also taken it upon himself to appoint an 'ebola czar', increasing the federal government's role in the handling of the issue even further. when you have a president ordering quarantines for the soldiers that he deploys, and at the same time speaking out against any such quarantines here at home, after having directly involved himself in how this is handled both in Africa and domestically, then you indeed have a hypocritical handling of things.
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 31, 2014 Posted October 31, 2014 (edited) I know the military does a lot of stupid things, but what part of "they don't differentiate between various infectious diseases" does anybody understand? It is all about maintaining good order. What's 21 days to be on the ultra safe side? Why would they break from policy and cause confusion. Why would they create a clusterphuck of disorder? Who knows what the heck they were doing anyway? I knew somebody who tested for sickle cell trait (carrier) and they stuck him in a holding pattern for a few weeks before they could figure out what to do with him... Stay or push out. Now come on! They let him stay (actually served 20 years before retiring), but not before hanging out with all the other group W's that tested positive for God knows what things (drugs, HIV, etc...)... Oh my! Then again, it was 20 some years ago. Edited October 31, 2014 by ExiledInIllinois
Donald Duck Posted October 31, 2014 Posted October 31, 2014 the military may function as it's own separate entity, but the president is commander-in-chief of all the armed forces, so he's absolutely directly involved and completely responsible for the military's involvement in the fight to combat ebola in west Africa, having been the one to deploy the troops in the first place. I don't understand at all your statement 'United States Goverment handles the Ebola crisis not only seperate from the military, but the state to state legislation differs. (working unilaterally)' state to state legislation differs? unilaterally??? the president has insinuated himself into the manner in which individual states handle the ebola scare, specifically by making statements and taking a stand against what governors Cuomo and Christie felt was the proper way to handle the issue in their respective states. Obama has also taken it upon himself to appoint an 'ebola czar', increasing the federal government's role in the handling of the issue even further. when you have a president ordering quarantines for the soldiers that he deploys, and at the same time speaking out against any such quarantines here at home, after having directly involved himself in how this is handled both in Africa and domestically, then you indeed have a hypocritical handling of things. Thats my point, the President doesn't have the same kind of authority over civilians as he does the military. Ask yourself this, are all laws the same from state to state? Is every state governed the same way? I understand the desire to have everyone on the same page, again, there is no easy answer IMO.
DC Tom Posted October 31, 2014 Posted October 31, 2014 Thats my point, the President doesn't have the same kind of authority over civilians as he does the military. Ask yourself this, are all laws the same from state to state? Is every state governed the same way? I understand the desire to have everyone on the same page, again, there is no easy answer IMO. We're not talking about the president's command authority, you friggin' dipshit. We're talking about the inconsistency of the presentation.
Donald Duck Posted October 31, 2014 Posted October 31, 2014 We're not talking about the president's command authority, you friggin' dipshit. We're talking about the inconsistency of the presentation. I understand, but when I told you I shared your concerns I wasn't speaking the right language
DC Tom Posted October 31, 2014 Posted October 31, 2014 I understand, but when I told you I shared your concerns I wasn't speaking the right language If you understand, then why do you keep disagreeing with everyone based on a completely different subject?
Donald Duck Posted October 31, 2014 Posted October 31, 2014 If you understand, then why do you keep disagreeing with everyone based on a completely different subject? I'm not disagreeing with your concerns, just explaining why ...
DC Tom Posted October 31, 2014 Posted October 31, 2014 I'm not disagreeing with your concerns, just explaining why ... No, you're not even. EII gave an explanation. You gave a half-assed bizarro-world cluster-!@#$ of disconnected blather whose only accomplishment was to butcher the very meaning of the word "unilateral." And EII never makes a comprehensible point. When EII is making more sense than you, you've got a serious problem. The sort of problem that likely requires medical intervention.
Azalin Posted October 31, 2014 Posted October 31, 2014 Thats my point, the President doesn't have the same kind of authority over civilians as he does the military. Ask yourself this, are all laws the same from state to state? Is every state governed the same way? I understand the desire to have everyone on the same page, again, there is no easy answer IMO. there absolutely is an easy answer: take a consistent stand and stick with it. in placing military personnel into quarantine and then undermining state governors' similar actions with their own citizens, he is being completely inconsistent. that's the point.
Recommended Posts