Thank you, that was the case in Baton Rouge as well. I'm really surprised at how well we handled this.

Serious question.....3-6 inches of ice without snow? Like an ice skating rink?

Serious question......3-6 inches of ice, with no snow on it? Similar to an ice skating rink?

This. This is what most aren't understanding about this. We really don't get snow here....more like sleet that barely accumulates. Most of the roads and almost all the bridges had 2-inch thick sheets of ice on them with hardly any snow (can't speak for Atlanta).

I've driven in place that have 6-inches of snow or more, and it was definitely easier than driving to go through what we got the past few days.

As stated in my post and earlier in this thread, it was "every 5 years at the most". There are some 8-9 year intervals in there.

"every 5 years at the MOST"

FTFY.

I sure hope things turned OK for your' family in the end.

Here in Baton Rouge, LA schools were closed Tuesday and Wednesday, and the interstate on-ramps for I-12 and I-55 were closed starting Monday morning. We didn't play the same gamble here. Seems like ATL could have looked a few states over and decided to close everything on Tuesday.

The comments sections on quite a few sites were filled with degrading comments for us "sutherns" freakin' out about 2 inches of snow. There are a few things I'd like to point out before this thread fills with the same stuff:

1) I'm in Louisiana. I can count the times it's snowed like this on one hand in my 36 years here. We don't get much of a chance to practice winter driving.

2) We're simply not equipped to deal with the snow. We don't have snow plows or salting/sanding machines. Yes, I still feel that purchasing this type of equipment is a waste of taxpayer money to prepare for an event that happens maybe for one day every 5 years at the most. Do you see Rhode Island spending money on earthquake proof buildings for example?

3) It was more of a problem with ice than snow. The roads had started to form a pretty thick layer of ice on Monday morning (I know because I had to drive through it).

That said, here in Louisiana roads and schools were closed starting on Monday afternoon. I'm not sure what Atlanta was thinking to wait until Tuesday to do this, but like the article says, there could have been uproar if they cried wolf.

So you're suggesting that anti-ship missiles have improved but the defensive systems haven't?

Not trying to keep harping on the Falklands', but the Argentinians did fire their last Exocet at HMS Invincible on May 30, 1982. The Argentinians claim the missile hit it's mark; the British deny this, and Invincible didn't show any signs of damage after returning to the U.K.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...

These are all valid arguments. There are too many factors to consider in a potential conflict, such as the stockpile of anti-ship missiles, the type used, range, defensive measures, and tactical considerations, that you just can't rule out carriers as an obsolete relic from the 20th century.

Quite a few people on here lately have been talking about how vulnerable aircraft carriers are to anti-ship missiles, and I think that threat is somewhat overstated. Sure anti-ship missiles such as the Exocet racked up an impressive tally in the Falklands War, but they didn't sink the carriers. Why? Because naval commanders realize the risk posed by anti-ship missiles and are willing to risk the destroyer screen to protect the valuable carriers (same techniques were applied against kamikaze). If the Argentinians were able to sink both of the British carriers (or maybe just one), the chances of the British being able to retake the Falklands would have pretty much ended.

The Iraqis also fired two Silkworm missiles at the USS Missouri during the first Gulf War and one was intercepted by a British Sea Dart missile (the other one missed). For all of the talk about the dangers posed against carriers from anti-ship missiles, not a single carrier has been sunk or damages from one, despite numerous opportunities. Naval commanders understand the risk, and have developed the necessary tactics and defenses to protect the carriers from this threat.