This operation is not risk free, and the ramifications of a mistake is very high. I'm not saying that we shouldn't have brought these folks here as I don't have enough information to do so. Those who don't understand the risk blindly arguing that should should bring these folks here are off base. If 100,000 people or more die, then I'm certain these folks might have a change of heart.
If things go very bade, Forkie and Chilly will pat the decision makers on the back and say "You had good intentions". Liberals are about intentions and Conservatives are about results.
Quote
Originally posted by: snidely333Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
If there is a 1/1000 chance that bringing these people to American will kill 1,000,000 people, should we do it?
Quote
Originally posted by: Chilcoot
These doctors and nurses are among the very best Americans, whatever their religion.
We have the technology and skill to help them in a way that doesn't threaten us. It would be morally depraved not to help.
No. 10^3 is not much assurance. Typically, we look at 10^6 up to 10^12 for sterility/containment assurance. The labs to deal with this stuff are already in place. I've been to visit a level 3 lab that is charged with identifying unknown suspected bio-terrorism agents. It was pretty tight security. The level 4 labs where they deal with the nastiest stuff like ebola are even tighter.
Remember back in 1990 when AIDS was predicted to kill most of Africa? Didn't happen.
Regular old flu kills lots more than West Nile but which disease do people fear more?
Don't worry. The government has it all under control.
