Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
Wed Oct 8, 2014, 08:34 AM Oct 2014

Why U.S. Is Reluctant to Issue Travel Ban on Ebola-Stricken West Africa

Some prominent Obama administration critics have made that argument this week, calling for a travel ban into the U.S. from the West African nations of Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Guinea, where more than 3,400 have died of the virus and thousands more are infected. There's a growing social media chorus calling for a ban, too. (Related: As Ebola's Spread Continues, Key Questions and Answers)

And yet the Obama administration has steadfastly rejected the idea of a travel ban. Thomas Frieden, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has been asked repeatedly about a travel ban in near-daily briefings with the press over the past week. Each time, he has insisted it won't work.

Frieden, who is heading the government's Ebola response, has gone as far as to say that a travel ban could hurt Americans in the long run, by limiting the ability of relief workers and supplies to get into West Africa's Ebola zone.

"Until the disease is controlled in Africa, we can't get the disease to zero here," Frieden said at a Tuesday news conference. (Related: "Every Newly Emerging Disease Like Ebola Begins With a Mystery.&quot

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/10/141007-ebola-travel-ban-restrictions-health-world/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Social&utm_content=link_fb20141008news-ebolatravel&utm_campaign=Content&sf5100204=1






An in-depth article from National Geographic referencing good analysis.

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why U.S. Is Reluctant to Issue Travel Ban on Ebola-Stricken West Africa (Original Post) LanternWaste Oct 2014 OP
I think travel is fine for emergency relief workers, civilian or military, however, snappyturtle Oct 2014 #1
Exactly TexasMommaWithAHat Oct 2014 #3
They would just come through the open southern border Yo_Mama Oct 2014 #5
Warning - Level 3, Avoid Nonessential Travel - issued October 7, 2014 PADemD Oct 2014 #2
A couple of very important facts folks need to bear in mind pkdu Oct 2014 #4
+1 Blue_Tires Oct 2014 #6

snappyturtle

(14,656 posts)
1. I think travel is fine for emergency relief workers, civilian or military, however,
Wed Oct 8, 2014, 09:13 AM
Oct 2014

I think casual travel to and from infected countries should be halted until Ebola is under control. imho

TexasMommaWithAHat

(3,212 posts)
3. Exactly
Wed Oct 8, 2014, 09:55 AM
Oct 2014

We should be pouring in MASSIVE amounts of money and manpower to stop this awful disease from ravaging the people in the three affected west African countries. Frankly, I'm afraid this could turn into a humanitarian crisis of epic proportions if we don't get it under control soon.

And then we will need to monitor all health and needed personnel going in and out of the infected areas and possibly quarantined when they get back to the U.S.

Meanwhile, there should be a travel ban for other travelers to and from the three countries so affected. It's not that difficult; stop issuing visas. I keep reading here that we can't stop their entry because they go through other countries. That's silly. People still need passports and visas to get into the U.S from Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea.


Another recommendation - provide some freaking geography lessons to all hospital personnel! In fact, all that scare mongering on tv should include maps of the continent of Africa, highlighting the countries affected by ebola outbreaks.

Yo_Mama

(8,303 posts)
5. They would just come through the open southern border
Wed Oct 8, 2014, 10:05 AM
Oct 2014

Like fly into Mexico and come over the US border. So it's a really bad idea, because no one wants to do anything that will help this get established in, say, Mexico City. There's nothing 'casual' about a lot of this incoming traffic.

pkdu

(3,977 posts)
4. A couple of very important facts folks need to bear in mind
Wed Oct 8, 2014, 09:59 AM
Oct 2014

1. There are no direct flights to US from countries with Ebola outbreaks (Nigeria is now clear), so
2. You'd have to shut down all flights out of those countries with Ebola to stop connecting flights getting to USA. And no , direct connections arent the only ones that count. a lay over in JoBerg or Brussels can still get you to USA.

So what are we asking to be banned exactly?

Blue_Tires

(55,445 posts)
6. +1
Wed Oct 8, 2014, 10:08 AM
Oct 2014

I'm surprised how simplistic the whole "Ban all flights/visas to/from West Africa!!!11!!" outcry has been...You'd essentially have to ban all flights everywhere...

It's even dumber than the "keep all travelers in airport quarantine until they are properly screened" proposals from last week...Too many people have a fundamental lack of understanding on how the world actually works...

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why U.S. Is Reluctant to ...