Bridge Commander Universe

Micheal_Yar · **Posted**: 09-09-2005 02:45 PM

well i really want to know what you guys think of rebuilding New Orleans no disrespect intended or something.
myself the opinions are divided.

1 to rebuild is like showing that nothing can take humanity down.

2 to show that humans can't controll everything .

cpt.Eagleeye · **Posted**: 09-09-2005 03:20 PM

Hmmmm...
It's pretty hard to decide because I'm not American
Sorry to all those who will hate me
But I say the should leave it under water
The reason : The most parts of New Orleans is flooded or destroyed
And I don't think that the people who lost all want live there again

When they rebuild it it would cost Millions of US Dollars
In one interview of an survivor he said that this was the revenge of the nature

This is definalty like The day after tommorow film

And one more time I'm very sad that the most people died there or lost anything the once had !

I hope that those people who lost anything get help

Imperial_Destroyer · **Posted**: 09-09-2005 03:35 PM

they are gonna rebuild, too much history, and human stubornness, though there are gonna be major changes to the city, it won't be the same that is for sure

Brett008 · **Posted**: 09-09-2005 06:50 PM

rather silly question... they cant just leave it as is... so they have to rebuild

Micheal_Yar · **Posted**: 09-09-2005 06:53 PM

well it isn't a quistion if they are going to do it it is a quistion to what YOU think they should do.

Darkthunder · **Posted**: 09-09-2005 10:16 PM

Where do you suggest the people that lost everything should live then, if they dont rebuild New Orleans? Thats a lot of space that gets unused and covered with water if they just leave it as is.

They will rebuild it, thats for sure. I see no logical reason to leave it as is.

**RCgothic** · **Posted**: 09-09-2005 10:47 PM

Of course they'll rebuild. Joseph Sisco lives there in 2374.

But on a slgihtly more serious note, it's not just water that floods the city now. The water is toxic and disease ridden. Rescue workers have to wear face masks.

Simply pumping out the water is not going to take away the health hazard.

Rebuilding is going to be very unpleasant work.

ModderMan · **Posted**: 09-09-2005 11:20 PM

i say leave it because this much damage may and probally will happen again.

lost_jedi · **Posted**: 09-10-2005 12:24 AM

I say PLAN CAREFULLY and rebuild it. If i lived in america i would go and help.

**USS Phoenix** · **Posted**: 09-10-2005 01:18 AM

Here's my opinion, and I'll probably get burned for saying it: I hated Luisiana to begin with. Not the people, mind you, just the mind-set of the place. "Woohoo! Let's all get drunk, party all day and be losers!" It just seemed like such a pitifully poor litte beer-drinking party town. And the people that I've seen that lived there looked like they had very little money in the first place, and the "Before" shots I've seen give the impression that it was a nasty place to live before this happened. I don't think the city contributed in a good way to the health, intelligence, sofistication, etc of the country.

I say let it rot.

**Senator** · Moderator Joined: 18 Dec 2001 Posts: 2480

Not ALL of New Orleans has been destroyed, so there will still be a city called New Orleans, as for the now ex-underwater part, I think it will be rebuilt.

JimmyB76 · **Posted**: 09-15-2005 01:17 AM

granted, most of the homes would have to be bulldozed, but ya they should rebuild it... after all, no doubt they'll actually fix the levys and such so this doesnt happen again...
in fact, i imagine that once everything is rebuilt in a year or so, buying a house down there would prolly be rather easy and low-cost, not to mention all the new jobs that would be available there with the new businesses and such...

Weasel · **Posted**: 09-15-2005 02:22 AM

They will rebuild it, of course. I wouldn't live there if I was paid.
But they definately can't leave it as is. Maybe after it's rebuilt, it will be a halfway decent place to live. It sure wasn't the last time I was there.

**Armondikov** · **Posted**: 09-15-2005 01:51 PM

Considering how long repair work will take, along side making the place safe, they may have to star from scratch on a area that's above sea level.

They should obviously rebuild the place, with that many people displaced, you have to put them somewhere. Perhaps building the place on stilts and making an American Venice where people use boats rather than cars?

Plus, thing of the ability to rebuild a city almost from scratch? There re very few oppotunites ever to build a perfectly designed masterpiece of a city. A metropolis to rival all others. The only problem is that people need land and houses immediately, they still own the land and are unlikely to give it up just so the city can be designed better (same problem London had in 1666).

Weasel · **Posted**: 09-15-2005 04:33 PM

My opinion: The only thing that should seriously be considered right now, is to demolish what is standing and fill the bowl in so that the new foundations are above sea level. And THAT is not going to happen, because the losses would outweigh the gains.
I kind of like the American Venice analogy, but, there is a major difference between both cities... Venice does not recieve hurricains on a regular basis. Even with the foundations of the city raised to sea-level, the storm-surge phenominon would still cause flooding and damage.
Realistically speaking the only way to reduce the likely hood that this tragedy will happen again in the next 30 years of this storm cycle, is to:
Fill in the bowl, raising the city to sea level. Strengthen/waterproof the new construction. House at least some of the vital infrastructure on positively boyant/watertight buildings.
And build new, heavy construction levies, no less than 25 feet above sea level.

And the next time they elect a mayor and govenor, they may want to consider their ability to manage in a crisis. Clearly these two left much to be desired in dealing with the issues, including making some basic common-sense decisions in the days before the storm actually hit.

Right now, IIRC, the cost to rebuild the city as is, will cost upwards of $100 billion. Well, unless they REALLY rebuild to withstand the next level 4-5 hurricaine, that's $100 billion dollars wasted.

Micheal_Yar · **Posted**: 09-15-2005 06:01 PM

another thing to do is to take advice of the dutch Wink

because after the 195* ramp in holland they built a uber water resisting flood control device and here something like that never happened again.

PS:mind you it is now still the most technology advanced flood device in the world.Jip we dutch surely now how to work with water.

Proud to be a Dutchman Smile

**Armondikov** · **Posted**: 09-15-2005 06:43 PM

Thats the best part of a country below sea level if I remember correctly. Mad b*****ds.

Anyway, they will definitely have to make it withstand some serious hurricane damage as it looks like we'll have more of them in the future.

**gamesfunk** · **Posted**: 09-15-2005 07:37 PM

We, the Dutch, have sent some of our best dyke experts to help rebuild and fortify the New Orleans dykes. I hope that your American (no offence) stubbornness is gone and let us help you. We do have the best of the best in this matter. We have entire deltas, enormous dykes (the Afsluitdyke) and we sure know how to handle floods.

And yes, that's the best we can offer (but that's because we have a stupid prime minister). We have also sent you a frigate full of supplies.

Btw, the Dutch flood distaster was in 1953.

G.

Weasel · **Posted**: 09-16-2005 12:03 AM

Yeah, I'm sure the Dutch are the world's best authority on dykes.... er, uh, dyke building that is. Mr. Green

I appreciate your sentiment and the advice, and I do believe the US government could afford to ask for some free foreign expert advice.
That said, we should keep in mind that my nation has achieved some of our own amazing achievements in controlling water, including the Hoover Dam, ( one of the wonders of the world. ) and the Tennessee Valley Authority. We've also had some experience in reclaiming/creating land in coastal areas, including Manhattan, the San Francisco Bay area, and Washington DC. Our capital was a marsh swamp not so long ago....
And another consideration, is that Holland does not have to deal with our massive, violent hurricaines that rival some of the most powerful storms on the planet. I've lived in the Pacific, and sailed on ships that have faced typhoons nearing the intensity of Katrina. I've also lived in the Benelux, and I can assure you, that as cold and wet as Central Europe can get, a 300km/h offshore wind is quite a serious blowjob, indeed.
Let's just say that those ancient wooden windmills that you are famous for would not last long on our Eastern, and Southern shores before being torn to toothpicks.

**Armondikov** · **Posted**: 09-16-2005 12:10 AM

Well, the Netherlands ones are pretty damn big, the sort of thing the area needs. Strength and hurricane resistance is something that will come out of constructing them well. You can't just build a larger version of the Hoover dam to solve the problem though.

Micheal_Yar · **Posted**: 09-16-2005 06:48 AM

Weasel · **Posted**: 09-16-2005 12:05 PM

As I said, Michael, I'm sure that you all have a great deal of experience with this sort of thing. I do hope we'll gather information from all experts in this field, including the Dutch.
And in addition to what I said, there are the storm conditions that must be taken into account.

In any case, I'm not particulary fond of New Orleans anyway, and, I don't have any sort responisbilty for rebuilding that city. Thank the Gods! I felt the need to help the survivors, and I have. I have donated food, clothes and money and hand carried the stuff to the local shelter at the airbase. My wife is providing them with medical care- she happens to work at that same airbase. Even my mother in law is providing tharapy, and greif counceling at the shelter in Austin and down here in San Antonio.

But frankly rebuilding the city of New Orleans is not my problem. They Knew about the potential for flooding since the early '70's, and they blew it off.
I hope they learned a lesson THIS time, but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. I've got enough common sence to not build a home on the Gulf coast. If others want to live there, that's their problem.

**Armondikov** · **Posted**: 09-16-2005 01:03 PM

Americans learning a lesson? What?!? [sic] Razz

Anyway, you mentioned grief counselling, I've read of a report saying that it can actually be bad for people and that "stiff upper lip" attitudes can help during a crisis since A)people stay calm B)it helps wipe painful memories keeping you far more stable in the aftermath of a disaster. I'll try and find it.

EDIT

Found a refference.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4245378.stm

**Senator** · Moderator Joined: 18 Dec 2001 Posts: 2480

A Hurricane is nothing more than lots of wind, (bad for wooden houses, and dangerous because you can get hit by a sizeable treebranch or stopsign, but it doesn't lift off concrete) and the water level rises, either because of the rain, (as in the case of the lake and the river in New Orleans) or because of the low atmospheric pressure, from the dyke's perspective, it's no different than a flood. Water goes up, water must not go from the other side.

Micheal_Yar · **Posted**: 09-23-2005 01:20 PM

alright with this new develment of Rita and the BIG chance that New Orleans will be flooded again , maybe it is a sign not to rebuild it again cause the chance of another hurrican that will throw her back under water is there.

as always opinions

**Armondikov** · **Posted**: 09-23-2005 02:37 PM

Not necessarily. We've got a lot of landfalling storms recently, but it's no reason not to go ahead and repopulate these places if people want to move back there and suffer the risk.

But considering they don't want to distribute some of the food sent over from foreign aid because of the risk of CJD I think we may see the coastal population drop a little.

MSpencer1313 · **Posted**: 09-24-2005 09:33 PM

I voted for rebuild simply because I know they're going to rebuild it one way or another. There are people out there who want to see it again, and they're going to die from diseases which haven't been seen since the glory days of the Black Plague. You know what happens when you have bodies floating in the water, right?