Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Why the hell was anyone allowed out of the areas with Ebola - I thought that was the whole point of Quaratine? Has no one watched Disaster movies?

We should place the entire US in quarantine

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
Why are we sending soldiers to build hospitals in Africa? We have more than enough need for infrastructural reinforcement of our own country. I'm not not seeing anything in this about why on earth we should open up young men and women to infection by a disease that scares the living crap out of most of the world.

Lets revisit this after the first case of a US service person becoming infected. If it never happens then you're totally right, and I really hope that is the case.

Ebolavirus is not even close to the be-all and end-all of deadly viruses. Period.

Go back and read what I wrote a few posts ago: we are building hospitals in Africa because we are the best equipped to do it and because no one else will.

 Ouze wrote:


Way ahead of you

ROFL, well played sir.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

Go back and read what I wrote a few posts ago: we are building hospitals in Africa because we are the best equipped to do it and because no one else will.

I can see we have a fundamental disagreement on this subject.

 argonak wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
We send our troops on humanitarian missions all the time, earthquakes, typhoons, why is this different?

Because earthquakes and typhoons don't follow you home?

Earthquakes and Typhoons don't spread if you ignore them, but diseases do. Seems to me there's more threat from infected non-citizens flying in on commercial air traffic than from troops returning from a humanitarian mission, who will be getting tested and trained in avoidance. If Ebola continues to spread in africa, its only a matter of time before refugees (liekly not the legal kind) carry it to the rest of the world.

This guys post might help then.

Plus all of Ouzes posts. And by "might help" I actually mean "They clearly wont".

 Iron_Captain wrote:
We should place the entire US in quarantine

No argument from me. We've got more than enough weapons and resources to be utterly self sufficient.

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
I can see we have a fundamental disagreement on this subject.

Which boils down to your fundamental lack of understanding the subject.

You can lead a horse to water, but sometimes you gotta drown it yourself.

MOPP4 in Africa......Medical CASH and Logistical units are going to be hating freaking life there.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
I can see we have a fundamental disagreement on this subject.

Which boils down to your fundamental lack of understanding the subject.

When someone resorts to petty personal attacks, its pointless to continue the conversation.

I've played enough pandemic to feel like I'm qualified to handle this matter.

 Piston Honda wrote:
I've played enough pandemic to feel like I'm qualified to handle this matter.

Yep.

We all move to Greenland.

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
I can see we have a fundamental disagreement on this subject.

Which boils down to your fundamental lack of understanding the subject.

When someone resorts to petty personal attacks, its pointless to continue the conversation.

It's not a petty personal attack, he's pointing out something that is quite apparent from your posts. He even said it in such a way as to avoid being entirely insulting.

When someone argues from a position without knowledge of the subject, it's best to inform them of it so they can educate themselves. Sadly it's often the case they will instead deflect and claim it as a "petty personal attack" as they refuse to actually do so.

With all due respect, if someone thinks Ebola will be massively harmful to a developed nation that doesn't practice the absurd rites Ouze pointed out earlier, they are misinformed or wilfully ignorant.

 MrDwhitey wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
I can see we have a fundamental disagreement on this subject.

Which boils down to your fundamental lack of understanding the subject.

When someone resorts to petty personal attacks, its pointless to continue the conversation.

It's not a petty personal attack, he's pointing out something that is quite apparent from your posts. He even said it in such a way as to avoid being entirely insulting.

When someone argues from a position without knowledge of the subject, it's best to inform them of it so they can educate themselves. Sadly it's often the case they will instead deflect and claim it as a "petty personal attack" as they refuse to actually do so.

This is freaking DakkaDakka or have you lost your frame of reference?

I would post something insulting towards you Jihadin, but I'm tired today.

Ironically Peter is right, when one side is being wilfully ignorant, the conversation really can't continue.

 Jihadin wrote:

 MrDwhitey wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
I can see we have a fundamental disagreement on this subject.

Which boils down to your fundamental lack of understanding the subject.

When someone resorts to petty personal attacks, its pointless to continue the conversation.

It's not a petty personal attack, he's pointing out something that is quite apparent from your posts. He even said it in such a way as to avoid being entirely insulting.

When someone argues from a position without knowledge of the subject, it's best to inform them of it so they can educate themselves. Sadly it's often the case they will instead deflect and claim it as a "petty personal attack" as they refuse to actually do so.

This is freaking DakkaDakka or have you lost your frame of reference?

That's such a friggin' strawman right there, Jihadin.

 MrDwhitey wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
I can see we have a fundamental disagreement on this subject.

Which boils down to your fundamental lack of understanding the subject.

When someone resorts to petty personal attacks, its pointless to continue the conversation.

It's not a petty personal attack, he's pointing out something that is quite apparent from your posts. He even said it in such a way as to avoid being entirely insulting.

When someone argues from a position without knowledge of the subject, it's best to inform them of it so they can educate themselves. Sadly it's often the case they will instead deflect and claim it as a "petty personal attack" as they refuse to actually do so.

With all due respect, if someone thinks Ebola will be massively harmful to a developed nation that doesn't practice the absurd rites Ouze pointed out earlier, they are misinformed or wilfully ignorant.

Ignoring a legitimate and clear threat is always a horrible idea. The reason ebola is concerning is because it has something like an 80% lethality rate, a 2 - 3 week incubation period, and has symptoms that mimic other diseases. Ever thought about how many people don't wash their hands after they cough? What about how many people have unprotected sex (or didn't you think about that one)? What about those that defecate in public (Lots of those in ANY major city)? The fact that because YOU live in a nice area, with sanitary people, doesn't mean that the densely populated cities are as mentally or infrastructurally prepared for something like this. I've lived in our urban centers for 15 years and spent 5 of those working in the public health sector. There's a reason I'm saying these things.

Like I said, you guys can continue this line of thinking and get back to me in a few weeks. None of us are contagious disease experts. To act like your opinion (which is what it is in the absence of any kind of professional or academic training) is somehow more valid than mine because you can repeat the CDC twitter updates and link articles about washing your hands is not only insulting...its ridiculous in light of the actual situation. That situation IS an outbreak of a highly infectious disease, with a 2 week window of infectious exposure, in a major US city.

If that doesn't scare the living hell out of you then you're not thinking about the interconnected nature of our modern society.

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

Ignoring a legitimate and clear threat is always a horrible idea.

It's a good thing no-one has suggested that then have they? What a sad little strawman.

Jesus fething christ.

All my joking aside

I worry when cases start popping up on a daily basis.
The I really worry when cases start popping up around the US of A

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
You know they're not actually treating patients, right?

Again, you're missing my point. Why on earth are we sending our young men and women into an epidemic? Thats crazy.

You've already proven that people arrive here on international flights carrying the infection. Would you rather we wait until the thing is spead to half the. African continent threatening us more? The time to get it is now, while the number of cases are in the few thousands, rather than the hundreds of thousands.

 MrDwhitey wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

Ignoring a legitimate and clear threat is always a horrible idea.

It's a good thing no-one has suggested that then have they? What a sad little strawman.

Jesus fething christ.

Oh if others are going to start tossing out half baked logic and straw man arguments I'll certainly do the same. Negating the importance of a threat by diminishment is one step from purposefully ignoring it.

They actually setting up stations to handle the Ebola cases. They are not there to help contain it or treat it

 argonak wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
We send our troops on humanitarian missions all the time, earthquakes, typhoons, why is this different?

Because earthquakes and typhoons don't follow you home?

Earthquakes and Typhoons don't spread if you ignore them, but diseases do. Seems to me there's more threat from infected non-citizens flying in on commercial air traffic than from troops returning from a humanitarian mission, who will be getting tested and trained in avoidance. If Ebola continues to spread in africa, its only a matter of time before refugees (liekly not the legal kind) carry it to the rest of the world.

This right here.

Hold one...we have enough meds to handle and cure these people? Last I heard we're using some new drugs and the last newest drug was used like two weeks ago and takes six month to produce in a tobacco drying shed (or something like that)

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
I can see we have a fundamental disagreement on this subject.

Which boils down to your fundamental lack of understanding the subject.

When someone resorts to petty personal attacks, its pointless to continue the conversation.

That is no "personal attack" my friend, merely an observation.

You have consistently ignored the nature and reality of ebolavirus, as explained by principally by Ouze (and a little by myself and others), and instead preferred to fall back on xenophobic nonsense. Ebola (and other viral hemorrhagic fevers), by its very nature, is not a very good candidate to become a pandemic without substantial genetic mutation, which we can stem by monitoring, containing, and treating the virus where it begins (i.e.- reducing the spread of the virus by quarantining the vectors). I'm bringing this up because in case you haven't figured it out yet, that is exactly what we are doing.

The ironic thing is, what you propose (ignoring the virus and the affected regions) is the one thing that could actually make this a serious issue for all of mankind.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

You have consistently ignored the nature and reality of ebolavirus, as explained by principally by Ouze (and a little by myself and others), and instead preferred to fall back on xenophobic nonsense.

I'm done, you just want to argue bro.

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

You have consistently ignored the nature and reality of ebolavirus, as explained by principally by Ouze (and a little by myself and others), and instead preferred to fall back on xenophobic nonsense.

I'm done, you just want to argue bro.

He really doesn't, he thinks that he is right and you do not.

 Piston Honda wrote:
I've played enough pandemic to feel like I'm qualified to handle this matter.

As long as these guys have open doors, I think we're good.

 Ouze wrote:

 Piston Honda wrote:
I've played enough pandemic to feel like I'm qualified to handle this matter.

As long as these guys have open doors, I think we're good.

That'd be Pandemic 2.

Madagascar isn't even individually represented in Pandemic.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

You have consistently ignored the nature and reality of ebolavirus, as explained by principally by Ouze (and a little by myself and others), and instead preferred to fall back on xenophobic nonsense.

I'm done, you just want to argue bro.

He really doesn't, he thinks that he is right and you do not.

Isn't that the definition of an argument?

At any rate, the ignore button works wonders.