Why? Because it's the LAW.

[Big Feet]

Make as many guess's as you want about what will happen with law suits and Carnival "T". This happened in open waters and "Maritime Law" will rule. Lets not forget the ship is registered in the BAH's. There's a reason for that.

(notice the US Coast Guard on site-- why is that--- this is a BAH ship -- many ships registered in BAH-- why don't they foot the bill?) US taxpayer footin' the bill "AGAIN". Don't want to pay US taxes by registering outside the US but certainly want to use it's Assets. Don't we have a group of US citizens claiming the same--- Wesley Snipes ---.

Laura hope this isn't controversial???

[fireofficer5]

Anyone can sue anyone for anything at any time.

[mikedoes]

According to the New York Times, Carnival paid taxes of only 1.1 percent of their $11.3 billion in profits over the last five years.

[Almost Packed]

hmmm.

[garycarla]

The OP is trying to make a number of points, but not really sure what they are.

[Kathie859]

Say what??? I'm not sure if the OP's points are the corporate tax structure or the use of the Coast Guard to assist a vessel in distress that has US citizens onboard? :confused:

[CRUZBUDS]

The OP is trying to make a number of points, but not really sure what they are.

 

I read it twice -- I have no idea what the point is :confused:

[gtalum]

The whole Mobile vs Progreso thing is still an issue, to me. They initially broke down ~150 miles from Progreso. They drifted 90 miles north before the tugs were ready to tow, meaning they were ~240 miles from Progreso. By my rough calculation, it's ~630 miles from Progreso to Mobile, meaning if they were ~240 miles from Progreso at that point, they were at least 390 miles from Mobile. This doesn't add up with Carnival's claim that triumph was "equidistant" from mobile and Progreso. Couple that with the storm front they've encountered which has slowed them down, and it looks to me that Carnival has extended this by at least a day or two vs what it would have been had they gone to Progreso.

 

Mobile is certainly simpler and cheaper from the perspective of getting the passengers home, but I hope that wasn't the driving concern.

 

Either way, that was about the worst possible place in the entire Caribbean/Gulf basin to break down.

[Legend]

gtalum Did they not already say that they were going to Mobile because it is easier to tow the ship with the current rather than against it?

Going to the USA also helps with the passport issues and there many onboard that do not have passports.

Both of these points were already stated by Carnival.

[BenjiRodney]

What about the almost 1000 that decided that didn't need a passport? So yes Mobile was the easiest way to get these US citizens back in the country. People wise up and get a passport, it will make traveling easier.

[gtalum]

The passport issue would have been a stumbling block, but I'm certain that the State Department would have worked with Carnival to make it happen as smoothly as possible. They've granted exceptions for emergencies. Meanwhile, I'm fairly certain that being on land in Mexico yesterday is better than being on the Triumph today, immigration issues or no.

 

I agree on the passport thing, though. It's inconceivable to me why so many cruise without one, or why it's allowed.

[Aquahound]

Make as many guess's as you want about what will happen with law suits and Carnival "T". This happened in open waters and "Maritime Law" will rule. Lets not forget the ship is registered in the BAH's. There's a reason for that.

(notice the US Coast Guard on site-- why is that--- this is a BAH ship -- many ships registered in BAH-- why don't they foot the bill?) US taxpayer footin' the bill "AGAIN". Don't want to pay US taxes by registering outside the US but certainly want to use it's Assets. Don't we have a group of US citizens claiming the same--- Wesley Snipes ---.

Laura hope this isn't controversial???

 

I'm pretty knowledgable in these matters because it is my field of expertise. However, I have no idea what you are saying here. What exactly is it you are questioning? :confused:

[garycarla]

Mobile vs Mexico.

 

Though an extra day onboard is a factor, and a big one to many of the folks, being in Mexico vs the United States is also a big factor.

 

No dealing with whatever buses to get to the airport - where is nearest airport? Charter planes for 3,000 people. Keep in mind there a lots of people on the ship that have never flown and will NOT fly. Ability to make cell phone calls -some hassle in Mexico, ZERO hassle in Alabama. Choices for people that do not want to travel the same day. Services such as medical, food, clothing, money, etc.The list goes on and on.

 

And, yes, this does help out Carnival as the ship is in a real shipyard now. And stateside. And....

[Cruiseaholichal]

I would guess that there are many peoples from many countries on this ship-- why do you assume all are US citizens ? Any cruise I have been on had many Canadians and also a number of Europeans. The crew members are probably 95% non US citizens.

[Big Feet]

I wasn't making a point--- I was trying to get others to think on there own.

Let me just mention this: U S Coast Guard--- first 2 letters are the key, U S.

International waters--- help should come from U S Navy!!!!!!

[Boozebabe]

What about the almost 1000 that decided that didn't need a passport? So yes Mobile was the easiest way to get these US citizens back in the country. People wise up and get a passport, it will make traveling easier.

 

Everyone is worried about the 1000 idiots who didn't have passports. What about the 2000 who DID have passports??? Again the minority gets preference. I'm not saying this was the only consideration as to where to tow the ship . Actually it should have been and I hope it was the LAST consideration. Safety should have been first. I'm just saying that there are 2000 people out there who were smart enough to part with a few bucks to get a passport. I'll bet they are pis-ed if this was the reason for going to Mobile.

 

And after looking at a map I don't understand why they didn't tow the ship back to Galveston? It sure looks closer than Mobile.

[radzer0]

The whole Mobile vs Progreso thing is still an issue, to me. They initially broke down ~150 miles from Progreso. They drifted 90 miles north before the tugs were ready to tow, meaning they were ~240 miles from Progreso. By my rough calculation, it's ~630 miles from Progreso to Mobile, meaning if they were ~240 miles from Progreso at that point, they were at least 390 miles from Mobile. This doesn't add up with Carnival's claim that triumph was "equidistant" from mobile and Progreso. Couple that with the storm front they've encountered which has slowed them down, and it looks to me that Carnival has extended this by at least a day or two vs what it would have been had they gone to Progreso.

 

Mobile is certainly simpler and cheaper from the perspective of getting the passengers home, but I hope that wasn't the driving concern.

 

Either way, that was about the worst possible place in the entire Caribbean/Gulf basin to break down.

 

 

Mobile can drydock the boat to fix it. Would cost tons to tug the boat to a drydock port from progresso.

 

Also there is the whole safety thing with people who dont have passport books. Having to bus them thru mexico would have been a hell trip.

[Harrier1961]

Will you people give the flipp'n passport issue (NON-ISSUE) a freaking rest already?

Jeeez louise.

 

Andy

:eek:

[gtalum]

Mobile can drydock the boat to fix it. Would cost tons to tug the boat to a drydock port from progresso.

 

Also there is the whole safety thing with people who don't have passport books. Having to bus them thru mexico would have been a hell trip.

 

Cost isn't a valid excuse, IMHO.

 

The state department would have worked to either grant an exception to the passport rule or quickly generate the temporary passports for those without them. There'd be no need to bus people from Progreso to Texas. Charter jets can pick them up in Merida as easily as New Orleans.

 

I'm starting to suspect that Carnival is putting costs above passenger comfort in this situation, which isn't wise.

[boaterette]

Not sure progresso has the infrastructure to deal with transporting thousands of people back to the US. And to the OP what difference does it make between the coast guard helping and the US Navy? They are both funded by the US.

[Aquahound]

I wasn't making a point--- I was trying to get others to think on there own.

Let me just mention this: U S Coast Guard--- first 2 letters are the key, U S.

International waters--- help should come from U S Navy!!!!!!

 

Gotcha. Ok. The USCG has certain statuatory capabilites not possesed by the Navy. USCG has law enforcement capabilites and authorites over that ship. International waters means nothing. The ship is intended for the U.S., so our authorites cover that ship anywhere. Second, you must be assuming the Navy was available. Near the U.S., the USCG is more available than USN because our cutters are always on patrol.

[cruiseonthebrain]

I wasn't making a point--- I was trying to get others to think on there own.

Let me just mention this: U S Coast Guard--- first 2 letters are the key, U S.

International waters--- help should come from U S Navy!!!!!!

 

 

Now I am really confused...

[gtalum]

Not sure progresso has the infrastructure to deal with transporting thousands of people back to the US.

 

Progreso is just a short bus ride from Merida, a major city. Charter planes can get to Merida as easily as New Orleans.

[Dabaras]

The USCG operates pretty much everywhere. When I was in the Navy, we worked with CG quite frequently. They even send Cutters to the Persian Gulf for patrols.

 

Also, with the closing of Naval Station Pascagoula seven or eight years ago, there are no gulf based ships.

[BeagleOne]

US taxpayer footin' the bill "AGAIN".

 

I read something along these lines in almost every emergency. I hope Aquahound will address it if he comes back to the thread, since he is USCG...the Coast Guard is on duty ANYWAY. Our taxes are paying for their services whether they are escorting the Triumph or on a regular patrol or sitting at their base onshore. They don't appear to be using any extra resources to escort this ship...maybe a bit of extra fuel? So we taxpayers aren't really paying any more for their services than we would be paying anyway.

 

And honestly, even if we were, oh well. The USCG is, IMHO, one of the most overlooked services in our country. They get nowhere near the credit they deserve for what they do. I will never, ever forget all of the work they did rescuing people after Katrina, including taking pets aboard whenever they could.