[Leica] Jeffery is OK/ answering JB

[summicron at bellsouth.net (Frank F. Farmer)]

And, of course, there is no rest for the weary either.  My step-uncle-in-law 
(if there is such a thing) just returned from guard duty in Iraq (just over 
a year and a half over there).  He is now in Gulfport, Miss.  working SAR.  
He says the destruction is unbelievable (quite a statement from an engineer 
who was charged with rebuilding things in an actual war that had been blown 
up).

Frank Farmer
Jackson, Miss.

============================================================
From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@comcast.net>
Date: 2005/08/31 Wed PM 08:14:12 CDT
To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org>
Subject: Re: [Leica] Jeffery is OK/ answering JB

Texas, the Atlantic? Try Iraq. The resources were already stretched so thin
it was pitiful - take a look at some of the stories about how many thousands
of Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, and Arkansas National Guard troops are
deployed in Iraq.  


On 8/31/05 8:40 PM, "Adam Bridge" <abridge@gmail.com> wrote:

> Getting the ROV to the Russian submariners was a non-trivial evolution
> that had been PLANNED for in detail buy the combined
> submarine-operating services. They were lucky that only the minimal
> response had been required. Getting a DSRV onto the site would have
> taken a lot longer and would be much more difficult. And all of that
> is because the scenerio is one which can be planned for and which
> experts from the various nations meet together and talk about these
> things. Yes, even the Russians, finally. And the Chinese too.
> 
> There was a lot of Navy response to the tsunami because there were
> vessels in the area due to the war on terrorism operations so there
> was an aircraft carrier that could operate off-shore.
> 
> But the military doesn't routinely PLAN for these kinds of rescue
> evolution. It's not their primary mission.
> 
> No one plans for things like this - the submergance of a city is not
> common. Could the EU do better if, say, Venice sank? I don't think so.
> 
> It's frustrating to watch this and we all have movie-bred expectations
> of how quickly resources can be put on task. I don't know where those
> amphibious vehicles are kept, or if they are loaded onto ships, and
> how ready to steam the ships are - it just takes TIME. The Marine
> Corps vehicles might be on the Atlantic or down in Texas - or even on
> the west coast. it's not like they are staged, ready to roll. And the
> ships to carry them may have maintenance operations going on that need
> to be finished before they can set to sea.
> 
> It's just a difficult problem and it's NOT that the military doesn't
> want to respond.
> 
> Adam bridge
> 
> 
> On 8/31/05, Douglas Sharp <douglas.sharp@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
>> I always find it absolutely sickening that the military forces around
>> the world , which have the most advanced rescue and recovery equipment,
>> are always the last to get to a disaster area.
>> If my country (the UK) can get an ROV to rescue a few Russian
>> submariners within 12 hours then how come other equipment can't be
>> deployed in a disaster area just as fast.
>> The Coast Guard / Lifeboat service / Helicopter Medics are always there
>> days before - This is not a US problem this is global,
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
============================================================