• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Worst Disaster Since the Civil War But Not as News Worthy as an Oil Spill

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
24,380
Reaction score
7,805
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Obi is slooooooooooooow on this one too.
Schlo-Mo-0.

If this was Bush, dare I say we would be awash in claims by the press of utter and absolute incompetence?
That the press would be running this 2/7?
"Yes", we can say.

Mr. Resident, This is the time people have been waiting for some leadership.
Judgment.
You know, what you claimed you had in spades.

The Worst Disaster Since the Civil War But Not as News Worthy as an Oil Spill | NewsReal Blog


As a note to our friends in TN: the Red River flood was pretty horrific too, and the folks there behaved much as you have.

.
 
Last edited:
1) The Mississippi River and its many tributaries flood every year, its just a question of where.

2) "Worse rain in 500 years" sounds like a tough statement to prove, and thats not even to mention the other articles where this same blogger blasts the global warming trend theory because "they use unproven techniques to try and guess weather patterns hundreds of years ago." Sounds like a bit of hypocrisy, but lets focus on the facts.

3) The Civil War turned over a million people into causalities, so far 19 people have died in Tennessee, 9 from elsewhere. Now I don't have the numbers right in front of me, but I'm pretty sure more than 19 people from Tennessee died in the Civil War, and 9 from elsewhere, and I'm pretty sure given all the battles fought in that state they suffered more property destruction.

4) But wait you say "I'm not says it was as bad as the Civil War, I'm saying its the worst since!" Sorry buddy but that's also false. If one looks at the Great Mississippi Flooding of 1927 and 1933, you'll see those were far worse disasters in terms of both lives lost, people affected, inches of rain, and width of the river.
This link goes to the description of the 1927 Flood
Man vs. Nature: The Great Mississippi Flood of 1927
This one goes to CNN for the most recent flooding
Cumberland River recedes as Tennessee cleans up - CNN.com

5) But wait there's still more you say "Obama isn't reacting, Obama isn't doing anything, etc etc etc" Well thats also wrong, and since you are obviously using "Obama" as interchangeable with "government," here's a link to FEMA and its efforts in Tennessee. Also you can stop complaining about whats not on the news and actually go watch it along with research it on the internet and see plenty of examples of the gov't working. I watched CNN today and saw plenty of Nashville flooding, did you watch?
FEMA: Tennessee State Disaster History

6) But wait one last thing! The President isn't showing any leadership or judgement, he's not making the tough calls! I'm sorry but what tough calls? This isn't exactly something that requires Presidential involvement, because it happens all the time. Just look at my FEMA link if you doubt me. What's he going to do? Get up there and say "I've made a decision we should pile up some sand-bags!" Don't be ridiculous.
And lastly, because you say he's not doing anything or saying anything about it, here's the link to his declaration of the affected Tennessee counties as a disaster area thus giving FEMA and other organizations the ability to work there to help the people.

President Obama Signs Tennessee Disaster Declaration | The White House

Ta-da
 
Wiseone said:
1) The Mississippi River and its many tributaries flood every year, its just a question of where.


Ta-da
Click to expand...

I hate to break the news to you... but the Mississippi River is no where near Nashville. The Cumberland River flows through downtown Nashville. :lol:

You would have known that if you had actually taken the time to read the link zimmer provided.
 
Gill said:
I hate to break the news to you... but the Mississippi River is no where near Nashville. The Cumberland River flows through downtown Nashville. :lol:

You would have known that if you had actually taken the time to read the link zimmer provided.
Click to expand...

He said the Mississippi and it's many tributaries. Cumberland flows into the Ohio river and the Ohio flows into the Mississippi.
 
roughdraft274 said:
He said the Mississippi and it's many tributaries. Cumberland flows into the Ohio river and the Ohio flows into the Mississippi.
Click to expand...

I'm well aware of that... then why did he post links to articles on the Miss. River flooding that have nothing to do with the Cumberland???

Every river from the Rocky Mts. to the Smokey Mts. flows into the Miss. River eventually.
 
Gill said:
I'm well aware of that... then why did he post links to articles on the Miss. River flooding that have nothing to do with the Cumberland???

Every river from the Rocky Mts. to the Smokey Mts. flows into the Miss. River eventually.
Click to expand...

You claim this is the worst disaster since the civil war.

He posts articles about how floods happen every year and on particulars of certain floods.

You correct (for lack of better term) him by telling him that these having nothing to do with the Cumberland.

...

If you make the claim that it's the worst disaster in the country since the civil war, you can't then complain about him linking to articles of disasters and floods in different parts of the country. By default they become part of the debate if you claim it's the worst disaster ever since the civil war, as long as it relates to disasters that occurred after the civil war. Whether or not it's directly related to Cumberland makes no difference once you make that claim.

EDIT: sorry didn't realize I wasn't talking directly to the original poster but what i said still stands, but ignore how I put you compared it to etc... I should have put "the original poster compared it to" etc.
 
Last edited:

Floods, especially anywhere near this magnitude DO NOT happen every year in Nashville from the Cumberland River.

If he had posted links to articles stating that the Cumberland floods downtown Nashville regularly, you might have a point. I have lived in the area for over 50 years and have never heard of Nashville flooding like this. The Grand Ole Opry and the Opryland Hotel are under water. If that wasn't bad enough, Bass Pro Shops is flooded.
 

I understand and agree with you. This river doesn't flood in Nashville every year. However, that's not what were talking about.

The original poster said this is the worst flood/disaster since the civil war. That means that links to other floods/disasters to prove that floods are common, happen all the time, and that it isn't the worst in history are completely relevant.

If the OP made the argument that this is the worst flood in that area from that river since the civil war, you'd be completely right. But he didn't. The subject of the thread is "The Worst Disaster Since the Civil War But Not as News Worthy as an Oil Spill" meaning that he is comparing it to all disasters, therefor all disasters are relevant to the discussion, either to prove or disprove his assertion.

To say that this is the worst disaster in history and then to say that you're not allowed to use links about any other disaster to disprove the claim is silly.

It's like me saying that I'm the only person in the word named Robert, and you're not allowed to reference anyone else named Robert in order to disprove me.
 

It's not news because the people of Tenn. are getting what they deserve for voting for Bush over Gore in 2000 see...
 

Gotcha... so if a poster links to a story about a tornado that destroys 10 homes and kills 4 people in Oregon, I can post links proving its no big deal since we have deadly tornadoes here in the south all the time.

And.. I never claimed it is the worst disaster anywhere since the Civil war and neither did the OP. You should try reading the part he bolded. It says "WE" experienced the worst disaster since the Civil War, meaning Nashville residents.
 
Gill said:
Gotcha... so if a poster links to a story about a tornado that destroys 10 homes and kills 4 people in Oregon, I can post links proving its no big deal since we have deadly tornadoes here in the south all the time.
Click to expand...
If that poster is lying and trying to say that it's the worst tornado in history, then yes you can. I don't think anyone here is trying to act like this flood is no big deal though, so trying to act like that is the point I'm trying to make is unneeded.


Gill said:
And.. I never claimed it is the worst disaster anywhere since the Civil war and neither did the OP. You should try reading the part he bolded. It says "WE" experienced the worst disaster since the Civil War, meaning Nashville residents.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I must have misunderstood that since the title of the thread is "The Worst Disaster Since the Civil War But Not as News Worthy as an Oil Spill" :roll:

EDIT: also, why did they point out that it was the worst non-hurricane disaster? How much hurricane disaster has Nashville had over the years? Maybe they say that because they are talking about the whole country, kinda like what was in the title of the story, and they wanted to leave out Katrina and the like that they knew were worse in terms of damage and lives than the tragedy that has just happened there. There's really no other reason to mention "non-hurricane disaster" if you were just talking about Nashville, but of course I'm the idiot that's misconstruing everything. :shrug:

You'll note that the article says in american history, not in Nashville's history.
 
Last edited:
He said "worst disaster since the Civil War" now I take disaster to mean any disaster, meaning he's saying this river flooding is worst than any other disaster. Also I take the Civil War to be a national tragedy, you know since people from all over the country were killed and involved and half the US was destroyed. So when I plan to refute this plan I think, what disaster since 1865 has been worse than the Cumberland River flooding in 2010 and killing 24 people.

I picked the Mississippi Flooding because I thought I'd not only point out that there were worse disasters, but also worse floods. I could have picked the Spanish Flu or any number of other things.

Thats the point.
 
I see this as evidence that any moron can start a blog.

I'd like to know how, in this jackasses mind, the Civil War was a "disaster".

But moving on... Really, the Nashville flood is not getting coverage???

6,530 RESULTS WITH GOOGLE NEWS SEARCH
 


I say what I said to the democrats with the hurricane. This is POLITICAL SPIN AND I DONT GIVE A ****!!!!
 
hazlnut said:
I see this as evidence that any moron can start a blog.

I'd like to know how, in this jackasses mind, the Civil War was a "disaster".

But moving on... Really, the Nashville flood is not getting coverage???

6,530 RESULTS WITH GOOGLE NEWS SEARCH
Click to expand...

It's not getting as much press as The Chocolate City got. I think we all know why.

When you hear the words, "hurricane", and, "Louisiana", everyone automatically thinks, "Katrina". Most of them have never heard of, "Rita", that made landfall 4 weeks later and wiped entire towns off the map.
 

Yes, because Katrina and the Tennessee flooding are the same scale of disaster. In Tennessee we've seen roughly 24 deaths and a few million dollars in damage. Katrina killed over 1800 people and caused almost 100 billion in damage.

I hate to jump to conclusions but I'm pretty sure the massive difference in the destruction is a reason why the media coverage has been less for Nashville as it was for Katrina.
 
I live in Nashville and I can say this is the worst flooding we have ever had. This isn't normal for us and the damage was devastated. I personally know many friends who have had their homes ruined by the water. My school is acting as a place for refugees to live due to their devastated homes. In and around my neighborhood I took pictures of some of the flooding, I might post them later.

This disaster is devastating for my city, yet Obama hasn't even visited or addressed the issue at length. I guess as a Nashvillian can I say that Obama hates white Christians?
 
Last edited:

Ya Think? God, it is hard to tell if they are stupid or if they just think the rest of us are. It really does have to be one or the other.
 
So because Katrina did more monetary damage that means Obama can give Nashville a pass? This arrogant president doesn't care. They all screamed that Bush hates black people because he didn't "do enough" for New Orleans. Nashville has been devastated and Obama doesn't even have the decency to visit an American city that is in ruin. Instead he is sending Janet Nepolitard. As a Nashville resident I'm pretty angry with our federal government and uncaring president. Has he visited the gulf states over the spill? Has he done hardly anything for them besides blaming BP? I honestly think Obama cares next to nothing for the American people. Here are some pictures I took on my phone in and around my neighborhood of the flooding.



 
digsbe said:
Nashville has been devastated and Obama doesn't even have the decency to visit an American city that is in ruin...I honestly think Obama cares next to nothing for the American people...
Click to expand...

OK first off, it's foolish to compare a large-scale disaster like Katrina to an episode of localised flooding because the scale of destruction is far greater in the former instance.

Second (and more importantly), I don't think personal visits by politicians to disaster areas even matter that much. Where I live there was a fairly major flood a couple of years ago, accompanied by a thunderstorm that forced a coal ship onto a local beach (this even made international news). There were a few deaths related to people being sucked into stormwater drains and other such things and obviously the scale of damage was immense. In this instance, the most senior government official to show up was the State Minister for Water or something like that. Federal politicians (including the Prime Minister) offered their condolences but otherwise stayed away. The point is, no-one was bothered by this. The press left it alone and so did the public. Whether or not our Prime Minister was going to show up to shake the hands of hapless corner-shop owners was just not on peoples' minds. I'd like to think that our leaders have enough time to do what we elected them to do and that is to run our countries, regardless of whether there is a disaster occurring or not, rather than wasting time with pointless, tokenistic visits that are going to do sweet FA in terms of actually improving the situation or making any tangible difference whatsoever.
 





Flooding from Tropical Storm Allison in Houston Texas, June 2001



Bush didn't visit and his parents even live there part time.

You got a point?
 
roughdraft274 said:
Sorry, I must have misunderstood that since the title of the thread is "The Worst Disaster Since the Civil War But Not as News Worthy as an Oil Spill" :roll:
Click to expand...

I usually find it helpful to read beyond the tread title. There's usually some additional information that clarifies and expounds on it.
 
Approximately 650,000 people died in the Civil War, 6777 of them came from Tennessee.

Massive thread fail.

:roll:
 
Obama is not visiting Nashville because he hates white people.
 
Let's get it straight, folks. It's the body count that makes headlines where disasters happen whether natural or man-made. TN's body count has been very low in relation to the massive flooding that has taken place there. Even I was horrified once I saw aerial footage of the city. I'd heard about the flooding for a few days but never in my wildest imagination could I picture the scale of the flooding there. I guess you can say my lack of vision was blocked by the fact that I've travelled through Nashville so many times I simply could not imagine the city could ever flood on such a massive scale.

The overall flood damage notewithstanding, the only reason Nashville hasn't received as much attention as New Orleans in comparision is the low body count. As troubling as it might be to admit, Nashville just didn't have enough bodies floating in the flood waters. There doesn't seem to be much of a need for large scale rescue attempts needed in Nashville with this flood. Seems most people got away safely and that's a very good thing. That wasn't the case w/Katrina.

As to the President not visiting, I don't know if he has or hasn't, but if he hasn't I can't say I blame him. Not that I'm giving the man a pass just that how's he going to get into the city with all that water? Roads, bridges, airports...all underwater. Exactly where would his motorcade go? Where would AF1 land? Perhaps he could have done a flyover, but then you'd get people complaining that's all he did same as GWBush got w/Katrina. So, he's in a bad light either way. My personal take is for him to visit after the waters receed. In the meantime, let FEMA get in there and do their job...hopefully far better than they did in New Orleans.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…