Oh believe me I realize that. The rules of engagement are very different when they are deployed within the US and engaging is a very last resort.
Even with FEMA on the ground they have to depend on reports from the State. I think one of the fallouts of this tragedy is that States may loose some rights. That may be Ok under this administration but imagine this under Hillary. I think she can make Wacko look like a walk in the park if we change response guidelines.
States may lose some rights, but the standard or criterion should be responding effectively to the victims to reduce suffering and save lives. When you have an unprecedented major disaster such as Katrina, there may need to be exceptions or thresholds concerning Federal intervention and States' rights. If a suitcase nuke goes off or the Big One hits California, no state can respond by itself or should call the tune. They just don't have the expertise or resources.
That's guaranteed if people don't start thinking. The Articles of our Constitution were set up as they were in such a way that the previously independent territories signing on retained a measure of that independence in the event of a dictatorship. Thus any state or commonwealth which secedes from the union, or in the event of catastrophic invasion resulting in the break up of the union, is already set up to act as an independent country. It's a brilliant and beautiful system. It's our country's major strength. Under this system, at least SOME of the federal republic will survive.
If states give up this independence because some people are worried about future flooding, we've lost our greatest weapon against conquer by a foreign invader or dictator.