- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Taking in foreign Ebola patients...
Posted on 10/29/14 at 3:45 pm to CptBengal
Posted on 10/29/14 at 3:45 pm to CptBengal
quote:
what reason, under the guidelines of the Constitution, does the US have to spend money to treat foreign nationals with a deadly infectious disease.
tia.
Easy. National Security.
Did you actually read the Memo? Because if you didn't, you're showing your hackness. If you did, you're showing your inability to understand the English language. Let's review:
"Issue.... The greatest impediment to persuading other countries to send medical teams to the Ebola-afflicted countries in West Africa has been the lack of assured medical evacuation and treatment for responders who may be infected with Ebola virus."
So what that means is, other countries are hesitant to send health care professionals to West Africa without assurances that they will have proper medical evacuation and treatment should they become infected. They're not talking about people from West Africa being medical evacuated... they're talking about doctors and nurses sent there to help. Okk... you follow? Good...
"Germany is so far the only country to accept non-citizens for Ebola treatment; Norway has offered to accept EU citizens in addition to its own.... Since it is several hours closer to West Africa by air, Europe is also a preferable treatment destination for medical reasons. We are exploring other destinations as well, and establishment of the Monrovia.. Unit and Sierra Leone facility by the UK."
That part is self-explanatory.
Then it discusses "cases where the United States will be the logical treatment destination for non-citizens... employees and contractors of US agencies and programs, NGOs and private firms based in the US, UN staff permanently employed at the UN..."
That means non-citizens working for NGOs like the American Red Cross, Catholic Relief Services, Care USA, Doctors of the World, Episcopal Relief non-governmental organizations who send their people to help victims of Ebola.
The reasoning being we need to stop the spread of Ebola in West Africa and prevent it from spreading. The way to do that is send people there to build hospitals and care for them, teach them, hopefully cure them. If we cannot guarantee these organizations that their people will get evacuation and medical treatment, then fewer will go, more will get sick, more will die and more will be spread.
The memo doesn't discuss bringing in random sick people from Africa. I concerns getting evacuation and help to people who go there to help so that more will go.
National Security.
Very simple.
See.. that's not hard was it?
2
Posted on 10/29/14 at 3:52 pm to Vegas Bengal
quote:
The greatest impediment to persuading other countries to send medical teams to the Ebola-afflicted countries in West Africa has been the lack of assured medical evacuation and treatment for responders who may be infected with Ebola virus."
why is it an issue if other countries take action or not?
quote:
other countries are hesitant to send health care professionals to West Africa without assurances that they will have proper medical evacuation and treatment should they become infected.
again, who cares?
quote:
That part is self-explanatory.
again, they can choose to do whatever they want. can you point me to the part in the CONSTITUTION where the actions or inactions of other countries in rendering aid to treat foreign nationals has any bearing on a US response?
tia.
quote:
cases where the United States will be the logical treatment destination for non-citizens... employees and contractors of US agencies and programs, NGOs and private firms based in the US, UN staff permanently employed at the UN..."
Why would be the logical treatment place for non US citizens? how is that even fricking reasonable?
Posted on 10/30/14 at 9:01 am to Vegas Bengal
quote:
National Security.
One must distort and stretch the meaning of the phrase "national security" to provide any coherence into your argument.
I submit that under no common or traditional understanding of the phrase "national security" does your argument have merit.
In fact, "INTER-national security" is a better phrase for you to use, because, the sovereign will of We the People of the USA is being subverted by this consideration of doing this.
The people of the USA would prefer that the assistance in battling this disease should be done on-site of the outbreak. We believe that the USA should not expose itself any more than absolutely necessary, so, do the treatment on-site over there.
I read the memo carefully and the "holding" of the memo that the USA "needs" to do something in order to try to persuade foreign doctors and nursed to travel to Liberia is totally conclusory and utterly without evidentiary support. It's not a legal document, nor is it in any way a legal argument establishing a "national security" reason to do this.
The Obama Administration seems to operate on the "ipse dixit" principle of legal authority -- i.e. If Obama says it, it must be so. Obama's minions are totally cool with this Dictatorial and Authoritarian Leftist method of governance.
This post was edited on 10/30/14 at 9:14 am
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News