California Fires - Politics of Blame

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 478
  • Views: 7K
  • Politics 
Calheel said:
Palisades is a very, very old neighborhood (by LA standards). This is not a new situation where they just started building houses deeper and deeper into the hills. And it certainly wasn’t considered a high fire risk when those houses were originally built.

But times have changed. Any community with any kind of elevation near a canyon or wilderness is at a great risk of fire. The insurance companies have figured that out and stopped writing policies for anything even near the hills. So the palisades are definitely in a fire zone now - but so is a great deal of Southern California.
Click to expand...
Right. So it's not as if the problem here was building in fire zones. It's fire zones moving to buildings. Which is to say, if we abandon the area because they are now uninhabitable/uninsurable, that's an economic loss. It's better than cycles of building and rebuilding, but it's expensive either way.

If only we had done something about global warming before the catastrophes.
 
superrific said:
1. It wasn't just a lack of rain. It was a lack of rain after the tremendous rain last year. So lots of vegetation grew, and then died and dried out. It's the combination of the two and of course that's not something that can be managed.

2. Obviously building in fire zones is a problem, but it's also true that the fire zones have moved and continue to move. Was Palisades actually a fire zone when it was built up? Or has it become that way as the climate has changed? Serious question, 'cause I don't know the answer.
Click to expand...
2. Not sure. That would be a question for one of our Cali friends. But the reports indicate that it was, and local PTB allowed even more construction adding more properties to be dependent on limited resources in terms of what the "fire brigade" can access.

Regarding 1. what happened last year may have added potential fuel, the fact remains, the lack of "usual" rain this year prior to the usual winds allowed all dried vegetation to become a dangerous issue.

But let's not let those facts get in the way of the fact that callatroy and other trumpers are trying to make political hay out of this issue like they did in WNC after Helene.

ETA: I see Calheel weighed in on 2.
 
BoonetheAiredale said:
Again, define correctly. What does basic traffic management mean in the middle of a firestorm? What infrastructure, where, when? What are the national standards for infrastructure during events like this. What level of public safety personnel should any local government carry to protect against black swan events? Why wasn't WNC prepared for the inevitable catastrophic hurricane.

You're just saying words...after the fact...because you have slightly more information than officials did before this happened. There may certainly be areas for improvement, there always are...everywhere. Simply launching hindsight aided blame bombs just reeks of politization of an extraordinary event.
Click to expand...
Oh come on. Everyone knows that if high winds are predicted, the correct course of action is to add a couple of lanes to the major evac routes. You know, you've got a few days lead time. More than enough time.
 
Centerpiece said:
Regarding 1. what happened last year may have added potential fuel, the fact remains, the lack of "usual" rain this year prior to the usual winds allowed all dried vegetation to become a dangerous issue.
Click to expand...
I was adding to your point, not offering a rival consideration. I'm not always good about making that clear.
 
Callatoroy said:
While you are correct about some disasters, this particular one doesn't fall into that category. CA deals with this in some form almost every year. This isn't a "nobody could have seen this coming" event. The state and local officials dropped the ball in a huge way. Especially given the recent history from which to draw upon.
Click to expand...
CA deals with forest fires in the wild every year. Most of them start in fairly remote areas. What doesn't happen is several major fires in the LA area at once, compounded by 100 mph wind gusts. And in any event, understanding that fires like this are a possibility doesn't mean that it's easy or obvious how to stop or contain them under the current circumstances. Your post tellingly fails to identify what, exactly, could so easily have been done based on the experience with other fires, to prevent these fires from spreading at all. That's like suggesting that because Florida deals with hurricanes every year Florida shouldn't have any people killed or structures damaged by tornadoes. Unless you can point to experts saying there were obvious steps that can be taken to eliminate the possibility and spread of fires like this, then you're just mouthing empty criticisms like Trump is.
 
Callatoroy said:
www.nationalgeographic.com

Here's what really caused L.A. fire hydrants to run out of water

As unprecedented wildfires raged through Los Angeles, some firefighters suddenly lost access to water. City officials called one shortage a “worst-case scenario”—one they expect to see again in the future.
www.nationalgeographic.com www.nationalgeographic.com

“It was like a worst-case scenario, but I think we should be planning for those worst case scenarios,” she said. “You can't predict everything, but also, I do think this is where we're headed.”

Competent leadership has a plan for how to manage evacuations. I don't know what basic traffic management would be in PP but there should have been a plan for how traffic was going to be dealt with. You can't just say "Leave now" without knowing people will be leaving by car and the traffic problems that will create. This is CA. Where Malibu burns almost every other year it seems like. This is like a hurricane in the south. One would expect LA to have a comprehensive plan for dealing with wildfires just as you would expect FL to have a plan for dealing with a hurricane. Running out of water is mind blowing. Apparently Gavin thinks so to because he has used this event to call for an independent review. Wonder why so quick to announce it? Nothing political there to see.
Click to expand...
lol, do you think "traffic management" is what caused these fires to spread?

As has been exhaustively reported, they didn't "run out" of water; instead, the incredibly taxing demands on water pressure from having to fight multiple huge fires that sprung up at the same time made it impossible for the system to deliver water to several places at once. Unless you have a solution for how to fix hat, STFU.
 
rodoheel said:
lol, do you think "traffic management" is what caused these fires to spread?

As has been exhaustively reported, they didn't "run out" of water; instead, the incredibly taxing demands on water pressure from having to fight multiple huge fires that sprung up at the same time made it impossible for the system to deliver water to several places at once. Unless you have a solution for how to fix hat, STFU.
Click to expand...
He still doesn't understand the role that gravity plays in moving water.

The fires are at an elevation of about 1500-2500 feet. Santa Monica is at an elevation of about 75 feet. If they have any idea of how to move massive quantities of water up that elevation, it sure would be nice to hear. I mean, this is 10th grade physics.
 
rodoheel said:
lol, do you think "traffic management" is what caused these fires to spread?

As has been exhaustively reported, they didn't "run out" of water; instead, the incredibly taxing demands on water pressure from having to fight multiple huge fires that sprung up at the same time made it impossible for the system to deliver water to several places at once. Unless you have a solution for how to fix hat, STFU.
Click to expand...
So angry. So dumb, so naive. A trifecta of ignorance.
 
So much of our politics (and news) has been indoctrinated or is doing the indoctrination of something being done wrong. The amplification of failure due to...human hubris that can be "simply" solved by changing out the "bad" people with "good" people. Then, suddenly, failure will disappear (for the first time ever in human history).
 
rodoheel said:
CA deals with forest fires in the wild every year. Most of them start in fairly remote areas. What doesn't happen is several major fires in the LA area at once, compounded by 100 mph wind gusts. And in any event, understanding that fires like this are a possibility doesn't mean that it's easy or obvious how to stop or contain them under the current circumstances. Your post tellingly fails to identify what, exactly, could so easily have been done based on the experience with other fires, to prevent these fires from spreading at all. That's like suggesting that because Florida deals with hurricanes every year Florida shouldn't have any people killed or structures damaged by tornadoes. Unless you can point to experts saying there were obvious steps that can be taken to eliminate the possibility and spread of fires like this, then you're just mouthing empty criticisms like Trump is.
Click to expand...
Great response. Spoken like a true liberal. Excuses for everything. Maybe you should run for mayor
 
BoonetheAiredale said:
So much of our politics (and news) has been indoctrinated or is doing the indoctrination of something being done wrong. The amplification of failure due to...human hubris that can be "simply" solved by changing out the "bad" people with "good" people. Then, suddenly, failure will disappear (for the first time ever in human history).
Click to expand...
Yes, absolutely. The conflation of "mistakes" with "incompetence" goes back to W, when conservatives just couldn't deal with the fact that Bush was the buffoon that liberals said he was. So instead of acknowledging they screwed up, they just decided to pretend as if everyone is incompetent, as if invading Iraq and the Benghazi incident were remotely comparable.
 
BoonetheAiredale said:
So much of our politics (and news) has been indoctrinated or is doing the indoctrination of something being done wrong. The amplification of failure due to...human hubris that can be "simply" solved by changing out the "bad" people with "good" people. Then, suddenly, failure will disappear (for the first time ever in human history).
Click to expand...
It’s when the obvious is overlooked or pushed aside that it becomes glaring as in this case.
 
Callatoroy said:
It’s when the obvious is overlooked or pushed aside that it becomes glaring as in this case.
Click to expand...
Well you've set yourself up to hit a home run. What is so obvious about this fire that a nonfirefighter, non-politician, non-resident (I'm assuming you're from the East coast) could have figured this all out within 48 hours of the event. Things must have been really wrong, wrong enough to clarify, easily and precisely what could have been done correctly...given natural, monitary, and human/political constraints.
 
Callatoroy said:
Great response. Spoken like a true liberal. Excuses for everything. Maybe you should run for mayor
Click to expand...
Once again, not even close to a substantive response. Are you going to link something explaining why the current circumstances could have been easily anticipated and dealt with by preventative measures? Or as usual is your source "trust me bro, I'm an expert on everything"?

No one here is saying the authorities did everything right. We are simply saying, wait for this to play out and we have time to fully assess what happened and what could have stopped it. You're the one insisting that you have all the answers already. As usual.
 
rodoheel said:
Typical conservative - instead of citing facts in rebuttal, you just turn to personal insults.
Click to expand...
Whatever, but just like a true dem of accusing pubs of doing exactly what they are doing, you were the first to insult. I just responded to your level of discourse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top