HU&W Posted October 16, 2014 Posted October 16, 2014 https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ebola-virus-outbreak/obama-authorizes-national-guard-reserves-ebola-fight-n227336 President Barack Obama issued an executive order on Thursday paving the way for the deployment of National Guard and Reserve forces to West Africa to help contain the Ebola outbreak there.
matmacwc Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 ANG and reserve to fight Ebola.........what?
HeloDude Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 ANG and reserve to fight Ebola.........what? Yep--1 weekend a month, two weeks a year...what could go wrong?
SurelySerious Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 Yep--1 weekend a month, two weeks a year...what could go wrong? No, it's good; we'll issue an FCIF telling you not to get Ebola. Whew, glad the risk is mitigated.
Clark Griswold Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 Yep--1 weekend a month, two weeks a year...what could go wrong? You might be surprised how good and how often some units prepare for these incidents. We just need an Executive wiling to use the capabilities that exist, the civilian leadership is afraid of looking panicky and overreacting, I think it would inspire some confidence (which is sorely lacking) in the Federal Government's competency / seriousness. Guard’s civil support team trains to respond to chemical, biological warfare
Gravedigger Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 I'm all for this. This is a mission that I absolutely think is in our national interest to support, and the military is uniquely qualified in this arena. Humanitarian support buys us goodwill with the public and international community. That leads to broader support for military funding initiatives and military pay/entitlements. 1
pcola Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 No, it's good; we'll issue an FCIF telling you not to get Ebola. Whew, glad the risk is mitigated. Don't forget the Malaria pills. And maybe throw in some iodine pills for good measure. What could go wrong? Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
SurelySerious Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 I'm all for this. This is a mission that I absolutely think is in our national interest to support, and the military is uniquely qualified in this arena. Humanitarian support buys us goodwill with the public and international community. That leads to broader support for military funding initiatives and military pay/entitlements. Definitely not discounting the value in our humanitarian efforts, purely because we can help people or because it looks good, either way, but the leadership cover-my-ass reaction to this threat our people will be facing was classic.
guineapigfury Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 No, it's good; we'll issue an FCIF telling you not to get Ebola. Whew, glad the risk is mitigated. This happened about two weeks ago.
AnimalMother Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 I like how the first thing they do is shut down the entrances. I thought they told us that restricting access (i.e. flights) wasn't a useful/viable option. I'll show my misanthropic side here and admit that in some ways, I'm actually rooting for ebola this time around...
SuperWSO Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 Hey, this disease has killed 1 and made 2 nurses sick in the US. Time to go full "Contageon". Driving to work poses 10,000 times greater risk to most Americans than Ebola 1
TreeA10 Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 Hey, this disease has killed 1 and made 2 nurses sick in the US. Time to go full "Contageon". Driving to work poses 10,000 times greater risk to most Americans than Ebola If driving to work had a Pk of 70%, I doubt too many folks would allow cars in their neighborhood.
SuperWSO Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 If driving to work had a Pk of 70%, I doubt too many folks would allow cars in their neighborhood. Getting hit by a car probably does have a PK around 70 if the speed is high enough. Motor vehicle fatalities in 2012 were 33,561. We've had one death from Ebola. Its spread by contact with bodily fluids. How often have you been puked on recently? The news media is making this into way more of a panic than it should be. I'm just saying to keep the probability of meeting a contagious ebola patient in the US in perspective. 2
Fuzz Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 Talking with friends that work in the medical field they are horribly equipped to deal with this on even a basic level. They have neither the training, equipment or facilities to handle even one case. Staffs are threatening to walk off the job becuase they refuse to unecessarily expose themselves to this. Yeah only one person has died but he would have made it through our laughable "screenings" at the airports. There was another study published that Ebola could possibly travel through sneezes and such. I'm not saying we should go DEFCON 5 on this but why are we still allowing people in?
pawnman Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 Getting hit by a car probably does have a PK around 70 if the speed is high enough. Motor vehicle fatalities in 2012 were 33,561. We've had one death from Ebola. Its spread by contact with bodily fluids. How often have you been puked on recently? The news media is making this into way more of a panic than it should be. I'm just saying to keep the probability of meeting a contagious ebola patient in the US in perspective. Unless you happen to live near Dallas...or maybe share a base with a unit tasked to West Africa. I'm not panicking...but I have elevated my ebola response from "passing interest" to "mild concern". I may even elevate to "moderate alarm" when folks start rotating back home from Africa. 1
TreeA10 Posted October 18, 2014 Posted October 18, 2014 I'm not ready to panic yet but tempting fate with this potential wildfire of a disease is just plain stupid. Good article on why this should raise more paranoia. I like the people who listen to experts and parrot the "this disease is not easily transmitted". Two experts caught it in Dallas. This article details a report by 58 epidemiologists regarding Ebola and 5 of them died of ebola before it was published. IF experts are being killed off, the rest of us are screwed if this gets a foot hold. https://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/six-reasons-panic_816387.html
BonedRiver Posted October 18, 2014 Posted October 18, 2014 No, it's good; we'll issue an FCIF telling you not to get Ebola. Whew, glad the risk is mitigated. Right. I'm just expecting another FCIF with another new ORM worksheet with an Ebola risk column (1-pt low; 3-pts mod; 5-pts high)...Hell, maybe even a West Africa Ebola paragraph in the local IFG.
AnimalMother Posted October 18, 2014 Posted October 18, 2014 While I agree that driving to work poses a higher threat to the average individual in the near term, the remoteness of probability is not sufficient justification--in my opinion--for lack of mitigating action, particularly given the potential severity of the consequences. The time for preventative measures is beforehand, not during or after the fact. You don't wait to buckle into your should harness as you're flying through the air after pulling the handles--despite the remoteness of the probability of ejection. If anything is clear here, it's that the transmissibility of this virus is not as low as originally advertised--swimming in vomit is not required. Finally if there's one thing I still have faith in, it's the utter inability of large beauracratic organizations to have any coherent idea of what the hell they should be doing, much less do it correctly. While the media certainly loves to sound the alarm to sell papers, the consequences of Ebola going--dare I say viral--in the US, are almost unfathomable, and certainly not worth the risk or inconvience of robust preventative measures--yesterday.
HU&W Posted October 18, 2014 Author Posted October 18, 2014 (edited) Its spread by contact with bodily fluids. How often have you been puked on recently? The news media is making this into way more of a panic than it should be. I'm just saying to keep the probability of meeting a contagious ebola patient in the US in perspective. It's a disease that makes you sweat, bleed, cough, and vomit. It's spread through sweat, blood, saliva, mucous, and vomit, even hours after those "bodily fluids" are deposited on doorknobs, keyboards, etc... It's concerning enough that we have a new czar. I don't think it's doomsday preppers bad, but also not something to just blow off. Edited October 18, 2014 by HU&W
SuperWSO Posted October 18, 2014 Posted October 18, 2014 It's a disease that makes you sweat, bleed, cough, and vomit. It's spread through sweat, blood, saliva, mucous, and vomit, even hours after those "bodily fluids" are deposited on doorknobs, keyboards, etc... It's concerning enough that we have a new czar. I don't think it's doomsday preppers bad, but also not something to just blow off. We also have an ethics czar, a copyright czar, auto recovery czar, and a Guantanamo Bay czar. The only thing these all have in common is that the administration needed to be "doing something." In this case, they appointed a doctor? Nope, he is Joe Bidens former Chief of Staff. I'm getting the feeling that I'm in the minority, but it shocks me that for a group who normally defends the freedom of US citizens, everyone is ready to shut down the airports and start anal probing everyone arriving from overseas over a death toll of one person in the US. I understand the losses have been horrific in West Africa, but the US medical system is far better than what they have in West Africa. I've seen medical isolation up close when someone I knew was thought to have active Tuberculosis. It was a week in a hospital with airlock doors and medical staff in full gear. I think the medical system is more capable than the news media give them credit. The whole panic that is setting in reminds me of the early days of AIDS when people worried about getting sick from a toilet seat. If the cases start piling up, I retract my previous statements, but the response is getting far out of hand for the level of the threat. Definitely not something to blow off, definitely something to keep an eye on, but not a full blown panic. 2
disgruntledemployee Posted October 18, 2014 Posted October 18, 2014 I'm getting the feeling that I'm in the minority, but it shocks me that for a group who normally defends the freedom of US citizens, everyone is ready to shut down the airports and start anal probing everyone arriving from overseas over a death toll of one person in the US. I understand the losses have been horrific in West Africa, but the US medical system is far better than what they have in West Africa. I've seen medical isolation up close when someone I knew was thought to have active Tuberculosis. It was a week in a hospital with airlock doors and medical staff in full gear. I think the medical system is more capable than the news media give them credit. The whole panic that is setting in reminds me of the early days of AIDS when people worried about getting sick from a toilet seat. If the cases start piling up, I retract my previous statements, but the response is getting far out of hand for the level of the threat. Definitely not something to blow off, definitely something to keep an eye on, but not a full blown panic. And yet, with our wonderful, tip top medical system, we have our nurses contracting the disease. Our docs, nurses, and hospitals are outstanding with gun shot wounds, broken skateboarder bones and nuts, and heart attacks, but ebola? How often have they had to deal with that? Out
TreeA10 Posted October 18, 2014 Posted October 18, 2014 The number of facilities in the US designed to handle Ebola is in the single digits, the total number of beds in all those facilities is south of 50. Haven't heard anybody say shut down airports, just entry into the country by persons that are from or have traveled to areas overwhelmed with a very deadly disease.
guineapigfury Posted October 18, 2014 Posted October 18, 2014 I don't think the idea is stopping entry into America, but stopping exit from the affected countries. Quarantines have only worked for thousands of years, I see no reason to abandon them now.
pawnman Posted October 18, 2014 Posted October 18, 2014 The number of facilities in the US designed to handle Ebola is in the single digits, the total number of beds in all those facilities is south of 50. Haven't heard anybody say shut down airports, just entry into the country by persons that are from or have traveled to areas overwhelmed with a very deadly disease. Including the military folks deployed to Africa to help?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now