Well, even though the question was addressed to G-man, I guess I'd finally like to make a comment about this.
It's aweful to have to think about buldozing parts of New Orleans, but I don't know that there is much of a choice. If it is economically and physically possible to rebuild the city on higher ground, then I think that's the course of action that should be taken. There is so much that needs to be rebuilt, so why not rebuild in a safer location? Other factors need to be considered before anything is rebuilt, like how to bolster the levees around the city to better protect it from future disasters. I think that before anything is rebuilt, the levee issue needs to be resolved first. It doesn't make sense to build a house without first building a solid foundation. The Levees are the foundation of New Orleans. Before the city can be rebuilt, it's foundation must be rebuilt better than it was before. I think part of the solution may be to move to higher ground, because maybe that would save money on the levees themselves. I really don't know. The city must be rebuilt, but it needs to be done right. That's all I really have to say about that.
"Well, as it happens, I wrote the damned SOP," Illescue half snarled, "and as of now, you can bar those jackals from any part of this facility until Hell's a hockey rink! Is that perfectly clear?!" - Dr. Franz Illescue - Honor Harrington: At All Costs
"I don't know what I'm do, or how I do, I just do." - Alexander Ovechkin</sub>
