Tsunami Death Toll Tops 80,000 - (Could reach 100,000)

cnn.com ^ | Wednesday, December 29, 2004 | cnn

[crushelits]

Officials just reaching hardest hit areas in Indonesia.

BANDA ACEH, Indonesia (CNN) -- The latest death toll from the Asian tsunami has increased to more than 80,000 as relief workers and supplies begin to reach some of the most devastated areas.

The dramatic rise of the number of deaths came Wednesday as officials were finally able to reach remote regions -- like Indonesia's Aceh province, India's Andaman and Nicobar Islands and the Maldives.

More than half of those deaths were reported in Indonesia, the nearest land mass to Sunday's undersea earthquake that triggered the deadly waves and flooding in about a dozen countries, from Thailand to East Africa.

Four days after the quake, Indonesian authorities said they had found mass destruction in Aceh. The capital of Banda Aceh, which was closest to epicenter of the quake, was described as largely destroyed.

Red Cross: Tsunami Toll Could Top 100,000
GENEVA (AP) - The international Red Cross said Wednesday that the death toll from this week's earthquake and tsunamis in the Indian Ocean could rise to more than 100,000. ``We're facing a disaster of unprecedented proportion in nature,'' said Simon Missiri, Asia Pacific chief at the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. More »

[Howlin]

The magnitude of this loss is big enough that we don't have to compare it to others.

And, as I said, you don't need to warn us; we invented that right here.

[RedBloodedAmerican]

This isn't a chat room, nor a blog

Hmmm. That comment should be the title of its own thread created by the Admin Moderator. My main beef right now...too many new folks within the last few months using FR to pimp their sites for traffic/hits.

[BobL]

Thanks for the comment - the Washington Post already has labeled Bush as insensitive, so you're on the mark. I wonder if they would have said the same had Clinton been president.

Next, they'll find that we vetoed an early-warning system that could have saved thousands of lives (just making this up, who knows if true).

But they'll comment on the tens of thousands of more deaths they'll contribute to this tragedy because of Malaria (through the banning of DDT), and other preventable causes. They get a free pass.

[RobRoy]

I agree with your assessments in that post. Your earlier post was deleted before I could read it. What I have gleaned from what others have quoted from it leads me to the following:

Although I agree with the thought process that led to your statement - myself being do distrustful of the media that I dumped tv almost eight years ago - I think you may be fighting the wrong battle here.

A natural disaster which kills this many people in this many diverse places is a news story - one of the biggest of the century. The pictures in this case merely drive the point home.

Now, the Scott peterson case...that's a different story.

[Howlin]

No kidding.

[RobRoy]

Your post is insensisive and very un-PC.

I believe it is also accurate.

[proud_2_B_texasgal]

"Take away the pictures and this is virtually a non-story."

Unless it happens to YOU, my friend. Some people are just out-of-sight out-of-mind kinda people I guess.

This is one of the biggest, most tragic, worldwide,"non-story" of our lifetime.

[BobL]

"It will have a major effect on the rest of the World...But it won't alter our society, if that's what you meant."

That's basically it. The really important stuff that can alter or destroy our society gets virtually ignored by the media, and events like this, bad as they are, are covered 24/7.

Any time this many people die from a single event is legitimately a huge story. But I'm a lot more worried about China's impending development of a blue-water navy than I am about this disaster repeating.

...and that's for one simple reason - we can easily prevent something like this from happening again. I'm still trying to figure out what our plan is when we meet the Chinese navy in the middle of the Pacific. I guess I can keep watching the MSM, but no luck so far.

[BobL]

"Unless it happens to YOU, my friend. Some people are just out-of-sight out-of-mind kinda people I guess."

That's my point - of course it's bad when it happens to me. But the out-of-sight, out-of-mind is exactly what happened in Cambodia with Pol Pot. I was in grade school at the time and read some accounts - but the bottom line was that no one cared in this country - because the no reporters could get in there. About 2,000,000 people died there.

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

My main beef right now...too many new folks within the last few months

Ain't that the truth, bigger is not always better.

And you see more fights between the old guard and the newbies on all the threads.

BigMack

[RedBloodedAmerican]

Close the borders! :)

[television is just wrong]

Drudge Report has the death toll at 100k already.

[RedBloodedAmerican]

well, yea those are major stories. But they shouldn't under-report this one. Should they? At least, nothing like this has happened during mine or my parents generation (as far as natural disasters go. Hiroshima et al was different and a necessary evil, IMO). I guess when it comes to the Geraldo/Sustern types, I'll change the channel.

[BobL]

"Now, the Scott peterson case...that's a different story."

You do have a good point and maybe it was having to watch Scott Peterson garbage on election day that got me so angered.

Anyway, I think that my first posting listed the number of people killed under bad governments, along with some other stuff - it was just to try to get this tragedy into proportion with the degree of almost unreported suffering in the 20th century.

[BobL]

" But they shouldn't under-report this one."

I think that I've learned a lesson here - and I do agree with what you've said (above). It's probably best to concentrate my venting on the media in different threads - this was a terrible event.

[proud_2_B_texasgal]

That's my point - of course it's bad when it happens to me.

So why the need to somehow lessen the scope of this disaster because those other "more-important-to-you" stories didn't get covered? Those folks over there don't think it's a non-story.

Sure, there are things that go on all the time that don't get reported. Whether some get the coverage and others don't isn't what makes a story tragic - or not.

I guess it just sounds like sour grapes because the "more-important-to-you" stories aren't getting the coverage.

[BobL]

You're probably right - as I said before, there are many FR threads to deal with these other subjects. Sorry.

[dfrussell]

we pay 21% of UN budget...I never said give more $ to the UN. Screw that.

That's who was complaining that they wanted more.

what, Russia and China have no planes? France, Germany?

Nothing like the heavy transports that the US has.

I know we pay more than our fair share, that's what I was talking about. I said we should send material aid proportionate to the help we've received in Iraq.

Your statement makes no sense.

[Jon Alvarez]

how's this:

Iraq--US and new Iraqi gov't fighting terrorists

Some countries in the Tsunami-effected areas have not helped in the fight in Iraq.

Thus, US aid to those countries should be proportional to the aid we've received in that fight.

In other words, help those who have helped us...easier to understand?

material goods--can be readily used. that's good.
money--can be misappropriated, leads to corruption, that's bad.

[dfrussell]

Under the circumstances, placing conditions on aid simply makes the US look petty.

If you're going to help someone, do it and don't expect to be thanked.