- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
They are our servicemen/servicewomen and deserve better treatment than being guinea pigs for political agendas.
This is the type of thing the WHO is supposed to deal with.
2. It is not OUR responsibility to provide any or all resources to deal with this in Africa or anywhere else outside our own borders. We have no obligation at all on that front. We provide more than enough of the UN budget to be on the hook for this too. Heck considering the actions of the UN we should be giving them exactly $0 and serving them a vacate order for their complex.
What private sector entity would you designate that is not corrupt?
I'm not sure I understand your question. There are plenty of bio-tech firms that are not crony who want to be at the forefront of this. They could figure it out, but are they allowed in? I defer to experts. Let's find some private sector ones to balance the govt nonsense we're getting
It is another country they do not need US permission to do so.
Even more importantly they do not need US funding to go get involved, do research, whatever they want to do.
The only countries that can grant or refuse permission are the affected ones. Not the US, the UN or anyone else.
Governments are the most effective at two and only two things....
Wasting money & wasting time
Specialization in jobs is there for an important reason: efficiency.
Also, not sure if you're aware, but the unit that Obama sent over are crack troops - not just run-of-the-mill soldiers. These guys are the ones who should be held in reserve or deployed to fight ISIS.
Every single service member gets required training in how to survive in a hostile environment (NBC). In this respect, they have more effective training to protect themselves around Ebola than health care workers in general do. And the services keep the required supplies on hand for limited duration use. Key words LIMITED DURATION.
That does not however, mean the military should be used for this ... period. It is outside their mission. And frankly we have no compelling interest to use our military to do this.
Full on NBC training covers a lot more things than simply self protection in a hostile environment, and is not given to every service member. I went through it back in the day, but there were only a handful of us in my entire command and we then became training resources for everyone else. We did retraining and graded performance of the rest of the command periodically too, but not every person was trained in every facet of NBC. That is one of the things the military believes in doing, adequate training and keeping said training current.
The fact that training in epidemiology safety practices is not commonly done to health care workers is a failure in the health care industry/system. Even if they had been trained the requisite materials for their use would likely not be present in the quantities needed either. Training and supplies both cost money and time.
Yes, there are specific units of each wing of the military which specialize in different aspects. My point was that of all the teams he could have sent, he picked a COMBAT-oriented team that would probably be better suited in a COMBAT role.
+1
Also, missions like this will have a negative impact on recruitment for the military.
Signing up or re-enlisting to defend your country in combat is one thing, getting sent to a disease hot zone for no good national security reason is something else entirely.
Although on second thought, this would not make much difference right now since the current administration is RIFing experienced service people.
The National Guard exists for the same mission at the state level. Their additional m/o is to help in time of natural emergencies and crisis.
How is an outbreak of a deadly disease on Africa relevant to this definition?
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
Whether or not we should send aid at all is a different question. We are though. In fact, the first units are crossing the Atlantic even as I type this. I know one of the senior officers who will be there.
Obvious does not equate to correct or sensible however.
except as trainers for locals who carry the workload.
that's my view, and I'm sticking to it. -- j
maybe it's the discipline of/in the military that might help?...
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials...
No defined and measurable goal
No effective actions that can be taken
No way to useably measure progress for the mission.
Continuous risk, with a very long lag time for errors to crop up.
High mortality for any errors that do crop up
Nothing but continuous danger with no visible progress or goal
"This time it's different," right?
:)
Bridgestone America, a/k/a "Firestone."
They already had to take some hard measures to carve out an island of health in a sea of disease. If they don't want to risk that disease breaking through to their plantation again, let them offer such aid, or abandon their property. And that goes for any other company who has any sort of mining or farming operation in the stricken region.