You're guessing that the logical solution of disembarking in Mexico was impossible for legal reasons. I seem to recall that was also how the media portrayed it. What if the real reason lies elsewhere? Perhaps the "Mexican solution" just would have cost the company more?

I'm just totally guessing here. I don't think I'm the only uninformed person in this thread.

Maybe it was "safety reasons"? With all the drug cartel violence racking that country now, I'm not sure I'd want to abandon my smelly, but relatively safe floating cesspool for their shores. I guess it might make a difference what part of the country where you made landfall.

As Doug reported in the original post, Progreso, Mexico was the original destination for the tow. However, by the time towboats were in position, the Gulf Loop Current had carried the Triumph 100 miles north. At that point, Mobile, Alabama was just as close as Progreso, and going to Mobile wouldn't require towing the ship against the current back to Progreso.

And there are plenty of safe areas in Mexico. My friend works for the US State Dept in Mexico and has done a lot of driving around Mexico on vacation this past year with young kids and has never felt unsafe. Obviously, there are dangerous areas to stay away from, too, but it's not like every corner of the country is crawling with cartel thugs.

So, the lesser of two evils, huh ??

You got my sympathy

I think here in ETS we have got to look harder at this issue of prepper spouses and families, especially when they push you into unsafe situations.

If it was me, the wife will recieve all the money she wants, and SHE will go with her family, NOT me !!! No way.

Maybe you could suggest an alternative : a week of bushcraft and camping in some nearby area.

I doubt that we could seriously maintain that a cruise is inherently unsafe. Statistically, your chances of survival are pretty good - much like traveling by commercial airline. They get you there in one piece, but air travel just isn't as enjoyable as it used to be...

Well, that's in the back of my mind. I have the option of pushing the ejector button until soon before the trip. I have to test her to see how much she really wants me to go.

Anyway, that's a good suggestion about talking more about prepper spouses and families. Most of the prepping stuff I'm into gets dampenedd by the woman of the house. At the same time, I'm all-in with her. So, drawing hard lines all the time is not realistic. Frankly, I have to doubt the maturity of any guy whose automatic solution is to draw a hard line whenever the girlfriend/wife is not on board with 24/7 prepping.

There is a difference between a spouse who will not agree with you buying 10,000 rounds of ammo, and a spouse who will push you into a situation.

My wife made all kinds of fun of me when I bought several jars of honey or peanut butter. I was patient and understood that not everyone is lucky enough to be prepper-minded. Patience paid off, food prices climbed up and now we buy stuff by the case. Her view is "saving money" and mine is "be prepared", and it's a win-win situation.

Having said that, there is still no way that I will accept some of her views ( sometiomes illogical or unsafe ) and will try to convince her, then will let her do the stuff on herself, but not me. You know, even around you , you read about colloidal silver and what not. I really don't want to be a lab rat for all those unproven (I have read somewhere.....) type of thing.

One time she had some water with some mud which said to have some benefits (she heard somewhere). I insisted on filtering the mud or else I am not even touching it.

=====================
Yup!

Any write up or AAR from Roger about his experience?

Carnival cruises at it again.

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/03/14/travel/cruise-ship-trouble/index.html