Wretchard the Cat links to a Diplomad piece to which he adds his usual in depth analysis.
I for one am offended that the sheer size of the sealift effort is being glossed over by those who count the U.S.A. as stingy. I actually heard on the radiotoday some asshat commentator explaining that the battlegroup is utterly unsuited for relief operations and cannot possibly do any good.
A few things: the utter distruction of the infrastructure nesecitates helicopter delivery of supplies. The carriers and amphib ships have good helicopter facilities. Also, the amphibious ships have HUGE hospitals. Additionally naval vessels have good desalination plants, especially the nuke-powered vessels (which likely explains the inclusion of US subs in the relief effort) .
Some years ago, I read that using a nuclear submarine as a powerplant for hospitals and such in a coastal town is actually a contingincy plan in some southern states for hurricane situations.
Australia, India, Japan and the UK have smaller navies but they are quite well equiped, professional, and are also doing a lot to save lives. The catastrophy is near unimaginable but many lives have been saved by the above mentioned navies.
Considerably more than have been saved by the pompus pronouncements, handwringing and coordination comittiees of the UN and other orginizations that are so quick to criticize us for a slow initial financial response....as opposed to our swift practical actions.