Army Corp Liable for Katrina Damage - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

kknudson · #1 11-19-2009, 10:33 PM

I don't understand this, maybe in the eyes of the law, but in the eyes of reality ??
And it was only a short spot on the news, that I wasn't initially paying close attention to so the details are limited. I'll search more later.

A high court has determined that the Army Corp of Engineers IS liable for all of the houses flooded during Huricane Katrina. This was just an initial court finding, so now it can be tried again for the thousands that lost their houses etc.

Now I'm not judging wether the Corp did everything right or not, maybe (probably) they could have done a better job.

BUT

You are living 30+ feet below sea level, at the shore !
It's not a matter of IF it will flood, but WHEN, no matter what the Corp does.

And yes I feel very bad for the people, that is not the point.

I don't get it.

Brandon_SLC · #2 11-19-2009, 11:15 PM

Unless they can make a system similar to what Holland has done, then I think the entire area lying below sea level should be off limits to development.

I doubt it's economically feasible.

The area continues to sink. The only way I can imagine New Orleans surviving, long term, would be to raise it to above sea level, then build a dike around it. But who should pay?

I wouldn't live there. IMO it's crazy to live 30 feet below sea level, surrounded by water. You can live there if you want, but I shouldn't be forced to subsidize you.

There are risks everywhere. Here on my mountain I'm subject to Fire and Earthquakes. I've taken precautions such as making my home more fire resistant, and strapping tall furniture to walls. I also keep a wrench handy for turning off my gas and water. (Among other things)

I won't be asking for handouts if disaster strikes. Neither should New Orleans. The way I see it the Corps of engineers simply delayed the inevitable. The inevitability still exists.

Chas H · #3 11-19-2009, 11:17 PM

I think the the levees were placed to enhance shipping, not to make a dry place for folks to live. That is why the victims of flooding can sue. If the levees were placed to make a dry place the flood victims could not sue. That's my understanding of how it was explained. Personally, I think it's not prudent to live below sealevel.

450slcguy · #4 11-19-2009, 11:47 PM

I would thing the state and city have much to answer for. They've known for many decades, even centuries, that the whole area was prone to hurricanes and flooding.

Chas H · #5 11-20-2009, 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 450slcguy

I would thing the state and city have much to answer for. They've known for many decades, even centuries, that the whole area was prone to hurricanes and flooding.

The shipping channel constructed by the engineers allowed the storm surge to move much further inland.

Nate · #6 11-20-2009, 12:38 AM

Build the house of sand by the water if you dare, but know that time has advised against such acts.

I'm sorry about what happened and the lives effected by it... However, I think they should remove the levees, let the ocean reclaim it's natural level, and be done with it.

~Nate

Hatterasguy · #7 11-20-2009, 12:51 AM

I think its BS, as a taxpayer its going to cost me money so those bums can live 30ft below sea level.

Live where you want I don't give a damn, just don't come crying to the rest of the country when your house floats away.

This is one example where it should all be private insurance. If they want to live their they can pay for it, if they can't afford it live somewhere else. This is no different than the people who build on sand bars in NC, or on cliff's in CA.

Jorn · #8 11-20-2009, 12:59 AM

Looks like you guys have never been in New Orleans. It's a pretty amazing city, worth saving.

riorust · #9 11-20-2009, 01:26 AM

New Orleans is a fantastic little city and was only possible due to the engineering that allowed for the development. The Army Corps of Engineers dropped the ball on maintenance and is probably is responsible for a large portion of the damages incurred.

I would rather the government help out hapless residents, injured by a government failure, than bail out financial institutions that raped there depositors for greed.

Nate · #10 11-20-2009, 02:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by riorust

I would rather the government help out hapless residents, injured by a government failure, than bail out financial institutions that raped there depositors for greed.

I've never been to New Orleans, but, it doesnt take much logic to figure out living below sea level is a BAD IDEA.

Wheres the option for no New Orleans, AND let AIG burn?

~Nate

MS Fowler · #11 11-20-2009, 06:13 AM

IIRC, funds to maintain the levys had been diverted for local political reasons. Whether those diverted monies prevented the ACOE from doing their job or not, I do not know. The ACOE is capable of fine engineering. Unfortunately they also exude an arrogance that works against getting the job done. From my experience, they often write poor specs, and then insist in exact compliance.

#12 11-20-2009, 07:42 AM

Army Corps of engineers knew of these problems since 1988 and still did nothing to fix them. They knew the dangers and the hazards and still did nothing. Is that not negligence?

Txjake · #13 11-20-2009, 08:25 AM

people have been living there since at least the 1500s....it is worth saving....

aklim · #14 11-20-2009, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nate

I've never been to New Orleans, but, it doesnt take much logic to figure out living below sea level is a BAD IDEA.

Wheres the option for no New Orleans, AND let AIG burn?

~Nate

Doesn't matter. I have a bad idea, you have to make it work somehow. If you can't, it's your fault.

I wish. Thanks to the Bush-Obama partnership, we have sunk more money into organizations that have no business being afloat.

aklim · #15 11-20-2009, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by helpplease

Army Corps of engineers knew of these problems since 1988 and still did nothing to fix them. They knew the dangers and the hazards and still did nothing. Is that not negligence?

People also knew that they were living BELOW SEA LEVEL. What is their responsibility for that? You live in a place where brush fires occur and you want someone else to blamed while you walk away?