Quote:
Originally Posted by natehale1971
Tony... only helping that small of a group (one group of 3000 per region) would be a slap in the face of the project itself.
|
Nate,
Ah, no one, much less the poor Project or it's IDEALS, are getting slapped in the face! (Repeatedly, and so violent, too!) Roshambo'd in the balls, maybe.
I think the Project isn't heartless, nor should it be seen to be. Immediate aid for 30,000-100,000 people seems about right. Significantly less isn't worthwhile, significantly more requires diversion of additional Project resources and courts the danger of "mission creep". Project resources may be vast but they shouldn't be practically unlimited (if we want to keep this within the bounds of reality). Hand-waving this concern away is simply dodging the question. As has been mentioned several times, the Project can't feed all survivors, everywhere, even if all possible resources are devoted that end.
Please note, I am separating immediate food aid from the idea of a CIAB, which I otherwise like. So don't take this as a flame for your idea in general. To recapitulate, as it stands, CIAB to my understanding comprises 16x standard ISO containsers: 9 for food/seed stock alone, 7 for the other supplies and facilities. I can't see one of these per team, but one or more per region would be do-able. If I am mistaken, please clarify!
We must keep in mind the main mission is still to aid in long-term reconstruction of the USA. That is the guiding principle to keep in mind. Therefore, short term aid is acceptable as long as it's not a drain on the resources that are available for reconstruction. That said, I agree that the COT and Morrow would see the USSR's continued efforts towards civil defence and postwar reconstruction is deserving of a private-sector response (with some government backing or at least tacit acceptance).
Tony