I was watching the Daily Rundown on MSNBC (a political news show...left leaning but they at least try and keep it down the middle) and they, like everyone else is covering the Ebola situation.
At the end of the show they did a a quick update of the incident so far and crunched the numbers on how many beds are currently available for any new Ebola patients.
The number is 10.
We're sending 4,000 troops to the outbreak in West Africa. If you've been on deployment you know all about the idiotic, stupid, insane shit that happens even if people aren't shooting at you.
And I'm talking about a normal deployment.
Mix a deployment with Ebola, along with collapsing governments and then terrorist activity and I can almost guarantee that you will have some troops coming down with the disease.
Additionally, we only have the capability to transport one patient at a time by air.
So please tell me again how we're going to take care of our injured troops if a squad comes down with this disease?
Sidenote: Has anyone noticed that Ebola is attacking medical professionals in the US in the same way that it attacked aid workers in Africa? By that I mean that Ebola showed up and medical professionals in those countries set about killing it. Instead Ebola started killing them and then there were too few to contain it and the disease mushroomed. Take the tally. Two nurses in the hospital and another 75 medical workers at home under self observation.
At the end of the show they did a a quick update of the incident so far and crunched the numbers on how many beds are currently available for any new Ebola patients.
The number is 10.
We're sending 4,000 troops to the outbreak in West Africa. If you've been on deployment you know all about the idiotic, stupid, insane shit that happens even if people aren't shooting at you.
And I'm talking about a normal deployment.
Mix a deployment with Ebola, along with collapsing governments and then terrorist activity and I can almost guarantee that you will have some troops coming down with the disease.
Additionally, we only have the capability to transport one patient at a time by air.
So please tell me again how we're going to take care of our injured troops if a squad comes down with this disease?
Sidenote: Has anyone noticed that Ebola is attacking medical professionals in the US in the same way that it attacked aid workers in Africa? By that I mean that Ebola showed up and medical professionals in those countries set about killing it. Instead Ebola started killing them and then there were too few to contain it and the disease mushroomed. Take the tally. Two nurses in the hospital and another 75 medical workers at home under self observation.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI thought Solomon's solution to US Ebola patients was not to bring them back home, but to leave them behind in West Africa, sacrificing a few to save the whole of US population.
ReplyDeleteIn any case, there is an additional capacity in Germany and this is where US troops would be sent.
once again you illustrate your ignorance. this is different from civilians volunteering to go to the scene of an outbreak. i maintain that if you're a civilian and you knowingly go to a danger area, whether a war zone or a location suffering an epidemic then you have made your bed.
Deletethis is different because the US govt is sending these soldiers there. they have no choice but to go. its a decision being made on behalf of the public. that means that the public has a responsibility to help if they become ill.
you like to show yourself to be knowledgeable but at every turn you only show your ignorance and bias.
Quarantine on site is the wisest move, it's not a permanent containment just until symptoms/infection are under control.
DeleteThe same would be done if it were chemical weapons use.
The same if it were radiological.
The current events involving the Dallas goat screw make this method unlikely and unneeded.
I'm betting Germany will turn away any and all infected, suspected US Soldiers with Ebola.
Even to US controlled bases.
US use Spanish bases for Ebola.
DeleteUS asks to use Spanish bases for Ebola mission in Africa.
The United States has asked Spain for permission to use its military bases in Andalusia in its international operation against the Ebola virus.
Washington wants its aircraft returning from areas of risk in western Africa to be allowed to stop at the US bases in Morón de la Frontera (Seville) and Rota (Cádiz).
Spanish military health officials are negotiating “strict protocols” with the Pentagon to ensure that the 3,000 US military personnel who take part in operation Unified Assistance will not spread the virus during their stopovers in Spain, according to sources familiar with the situation.
...
In early September, the United Nations requested the use of a Spanish airport – in Las Palmas de Gran Canaria – as a stopover point for aircraft carrying medical personnel and equipment to Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea to fight Ebola. Spain has yet to issue a reply.
http://elpais.com/elpais/2014/10/15/inenglish/1413362727_279618.html
Spain today.
Three suspected Ebola cases taken to Madrid hospital in one day
Patient who was transported in same ambulance as nursing assistant with virus admitted to Carlos III with fever. Nigerian man, who complained of feeling ill on flight from Paris, and a Spanish missionary also taken in.
The Nigerian flew from Lagos (Nigeria) to Paris and from Paris to Madrid
One suspected Ebola case in Canary Islands, he arrived on October 12 from Sierra Leone where he was in contact with sick.
Want to know what will happen to Ebola infected troops?
ReplyDeleteThe same thing that happened in Iraq to troops exposed to chemical weapons there.
Classified, covered up, lied about and forgotten.
Read the NYT article on The Men who detected and suffered chemical weapons injuries and extrapolate from there.
I would not be surprised if men die from vehicle accidents, perhaps gunfire and IEDs BUT none will be listed as Ebola infected affected or suspected.
They aren't ready and neither is the government for what may happen.
CYA it's the government way.
Discovered that yesterday in a funker tactical post.
DeleteI just don't understand why they didn't reveal that.
Under Bush the answer to attacks by Chemicals was to respond in kind.
DeleteNo One was going to do that.
Or, even discuss it.
The US at that time was under fire from everyone including democrats for just being in Iraq, if they responded with a reprisal chemical attack shit would have got real fast.
The things people don't know that happens in the world would fill an encyclopedia.
And scare everyone shitless.
Wait... the US Army don't have an ABC decontamination units?
ReplyDeleteThey do, but they weren't always as plentyful as Iraqi chem munitions were.
Deletein some cases, the munitions weren't marked and soldier's handled them, thus exposing them.
Others thought it would be easier to try to destroy them with explosives on site rather than wait for ABC techs to identify, catalog and remove the chem munitions. And that ended up exposing US troops as well.
That units should take a lot of stress from civilian infrastructure right? They are trained and equipped for ABC decontamination and quarantine for whole army units in case of well... A in that case the most important B and C. Let the all soldiers go thru decontamination after missions and then whole unit before entering US mainland will be quarantine on... let's say remote island for a month. That should eliminate any danger of infected right?
Delete1. After the invasion, the emphasis was on COIN. No Chems found meant no NBC units needed.
Delete2. Not Politically correct.
3. If the units were there someone, somewhere would say they were there because the US was planning a chemical attack on Iraq.
See, WW2 US forces discard gas masks on roads leading off Normandy.
Hey Sol I put an update of whats going on here in prior Ebola post
ReplyDelete