Replies

Allow Ebola to fester over there, and keep people safe over here.

Nobody is saying that. People are saying that we should take the fight to Ebola over there. Not once have I heard somebody in their right mind say that we need to close our proverbial windows and doors and simply watch people over there die by the thousands. This is a BS argument meant to make people feel guilty about wanting travel bans and border security.

In opposing this idea, public health experts unanimously agree: sealing borders will not stop Ebola spread and will only exacerbate the crisis in West Africa

Unanimous? So EVERY public health expert is saying this? Even if true, how about PRIVATE health experts, ones not beholden the the government. Are they unanimous?

"Even when governments restrict travel and trade, people in affected countries still find a way to move and it is even harder to track them systematically." In other words, determined people will find a way to cross borders anyway, but unlike at airports, we can't track their movements.

Can you promise me that this isn't already happening? Even without a travel ban? And let's say you are tracking their movements. Are you tracking the movements of everybody they come in contact with? Apparently not since the CDC is asking people aboard commercial flights to contact them.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said, "To completely seal off and don't let planes in or out of the West African countries involved, then you could paradoxically make things much worse in the sense that you can't get supplies in, you can't get help in, you can't get the kinds of things in there that we need to contain the epidemic."

BS. Chartered, private, and military flights could be arranged and mobilized. These people spend billions of dollars like it's water from a tap. I refuse to believe that an effective leader couldn't arrange a counter-disease mobilization effort.

The day they flew that first doctor back here, I knew it was a bad idea. He came here and thankfully got better. But what you did was signal to everybody in that region that their best hope is to find a way, any way, to make it to the U.S. Sending our best resources there to treat the doctor and swiftly imposing a travel ban right then would have been our best chance at preventing what we are seeing today.

"The day they flew that first doctor back here, I knew it was a bad idea. He came here and thankfully got better. But what you did was signal to everybody in that region that their best hope is to find a way, any way, to make it to the U.S. Sending our best resources there to treat the doctor and swiftly imposing a travel ban right then would have been our best chance at preventing what we are seeing today." You nailed that one right on the head.

Wait a couple months, though, to see how much more true that statement will be.