Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: gleeaikin
Sure, shutting off the natural water flow (there is, BTW, no natural water flow there since the diversion of the Mississippi River many years ago) could cause problems if that went on for a long time, but that's not the case here ~ it's an emergency; the waterflow must be diverted for what the US government's own agents (BP is an agent in this case) promise; and the barriers can be easily removed once the danger is gone.

It is inconceivable to me, or most anyone else for that matter, that a long term potential danger should be allowed to interfere with a necessary response to a short term devastating event.

Thinking that the long term potential problem should take precedence is just not natural. Those people are NUTS.

177 posted on 05/28/2010 4:50:10 AM PDT by muawiyah ("Git Out The Way")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies ]


To: muawiyah; All

I was not thinking of the Mississippi flow, I was thinking of the tidal flow, high and low tides. Also there was a report today that constructing these berms could take a number of months, so will not solve anything immediate.


184 posted on 05/28/2010 12:48:24 PM PDT by gleeaikin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson