Mosul dam engineers warn it could fail at any time, killing 1M people • Hacker News Board

Re: Mosul dam engineers warn it could fail at any time, killing 1M people

#241

Post by kwhitefoot » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 5:35 PM UTC

germanier wrote: post #37

atdt wrote: post #31

> The dam was designed by a Swiss firm of consultants and built by a German-Italian consortium in 1984. Water began seeping through in 1986, when it became apparent that the geological issues were worse than the consultants had predicted. I doubt that this was an innocent failure on their part. There was a huge financial incentive for these firms to find some way to validate this project. Successive foreign consultan…

After more than 30 years the statutes of limitations would hinder such investigations.

Really? Details please.

Re: Mosul dam engineers warn it could fail at any time, killing 1M people

#242

Post by Grishnakh » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 7:28 PM UTC

EdHominem wrote: post #225

Grishnakh wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you're a GOP voter (and not a Trump voter), then it's obvious that in 2003, Iraqis were not asking for their country to be invaded. However, since we made such a mess of it before, what makes you think we're going to do any better with another invasion and setting up another unpopular government? The people in that region don't like the government we set up because the Shias are too powerful; they want a gover…

> The people in that region don't like the government we set up [...] And they didn't like all those borders we drew for them. Ungrateful lot, I say.

Well, that goes right back to what I said about them not appreciating our methods.

Yes, a lot of this mess is due to the way the British drew the borders there in the wake of WWI. However, has there been any effort to redraw those borders? Hell no. The Kurds would certainly like to see the borders redrawn; it's obvious to anyone with a brain and some idea of the situation there that the borders are making the problems worse, but no one with power wants to change the borders. There's too many vested interests who want to keep their borders: Turkey doesn't want to cede any land to the Kurds (it has oil on it IIRC). Iraq doesn't want to cede any land to the Kurds (oil again). The Sunnis in Iraq don't want to lose control of the country because their portion has no oil. The Shias in Iraq would be happy to separate from the Sunnis because they do have oil. Saudi Arabia doesn't want the Shias to take control of the oil-rich areas and leave the Sunnis with a bunch of sand, because the Saudis are also Sunni and hate Shias. It's just a total mess, and pushing ourselves on the place yet again to try to fix it is going to be just as successful as the last time we tried. The only way to really fix it is to invade the whole region, take it ALL over (including SA and Iran and Turkey too, even though this could start a war with Europe, might as well throw in Egypt and Israel while we're at it), then redraw all the borders and set up all new governments run by dictators for a while. Obviously that's not going to happen, so the only sane alternative is to just stay out of it, except maybe for lending a little assistance here and there to deal with really awful groups like ISIS where pretty much everyone (including Russia) agrees that they need to go.

Re: Mosul dam engineers warn it could fail at any time, killing 1M people

#243

Post by s_q_b » Fri, Mar 04, 2016, 9:59 PM UTC

arcadeparade wrote: post #172

s_q_b wrote: post #47

I've had six civil engineers tell me that that dam has 6-months at maximum. The odds of collapse within that period ranged from 80-95% in estimates.

Is it because of the coming snow melt? Or just time is running out?

Unexhaustively: snow melt, fighting season, lack of maintenance.

Re: Mosul dam engineers warn it could fail at any time, killing 1M people

#244

Post by dang » Sat, Mar 05, 2016, 1:28 AM UTC

Grishnakh wrote: post #237

dang wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't get to be rude because you misunderstand someone—if that were the rule, we might as well not have it. > Nice that you don't allow different opinions Half the people who break the rules here resort to that self-flattering defense (the other half simply correct their behavior), and one needn't read much of HN to see how false it is. > All I did was point out the reality of religion. That's what every religiou…

I can't criticize religion here? Religion is sacrosanct and can't be cricitized in any way? I guess you're an ISIS supporter then, because criticizing them means you're criticizing their religion.

That's obviously not what I mean. If you keep trolling HN, we will ban you.

Re: Mosul dam engineers warn it could fail at any time, killing 1M people

#245

Post by meric » Sat, Mar 05, 2016, 12:31 PM UTC

ChuckMcM wrote: post #137

dan1234 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Judging by the Wikipedia entry[0], engineers did warn of it and propose a solution, but it would have slowed construction. > Because the dam was constructed on a foundation of soluble gypsum, the engineers recommended the implementation of a grout curtain within the foundation before the superstructure was built. Instead, to speed construction of the dam, engineers installed a grouting gallery that would allow contin…

And of course the backup solution has worked for 30 years, it is only failing now because the war has made the availability of workers and cement scarce. As I read through some of the pages on the this it seems like the "grouting gallery" would eventually have created the seal necessary. So I get that it was not the choice one would use in hindsight, I can also see how people at the time weren't thinking "Well what h…

Also, back then, Saddam Hussein was an effective leader who kept his people in control, and Iraq was one of U.S.'s staunchest allies, it would have been hard to imagine U.S. would be the invaders that would create the power vacuum for rebels launch a civil war.

"Well what happens if we get invaded?"

"Not going to happen while we're U.S.'s best buddies."

"What about a rebellion?"

"With Saddam Hussein? Impossible. Iraq is a stable country."

Re: Mosul dam engineers warn it could fail at any time, killing 1M people

#246

Post by kahirsch » Sat, Mar 05, 2016, 1:20 PM UTC

meric wrote: post #245

ChuckMcM wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And of course the backup solution has worked for 30 years, it is only failing now because the war has made the availability of workers and cement scarce. As I read through some of the pages on the this it seems like the "grouting gallery" would eventually have created the seal necessary. So I get that it was not the choice one would use in hindsight, I can also see how people at the time weren't thinking "Well what h…

Also, back then, Saddam Hussein was an effective leader who kept his people in control, and Iraq was one of U.S.'s staunchest allies, it would have been hard to imagine U.S. would be the invaders that would create the power vacuum for rebels launch a civil war. "Well what happens if we get invaded?" "Not going to happen while we're U.S.'s best buddies." "What about a rebellion?" "With Saddam Hussein? Impossible. Iraq…

> Iraq was one of U.S.'s staunches

That's quite an exaggeration. Iraq and the United States didn't even have diplomatic relations from 1967 to 1983. The U.S. did help Iraq when it looked like it was going to lose the war it started with Iran, but it was mostly intelligence aid since Congress refused to lift the arms embargo against Iraq.

Re: Mosul dam engineers warn it could fail at any time, killing 1M people

#247

Post by meric » Sat, Mar 05, 2016, 3:38 PM UTC

kahirsch wrote: post #246

meric wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, back then, Saddam Hussein was an effective leader who kept his people in control, and Iraq was one of U.S.'s staunchest allies, it would have been hard to imagine U.S. would be the invaders that would create the power vacuum for rebels launch a civil war. "Well what happens if we get invaded?" "Not going to happen while we're U.S.'s best buddies." "What about a rebellion?" "With Saddam Hussein? Impossible. Iraq…

> Iraq was one of U.S.'s staunches That's quite an exaggeration. Iraq and the United States didn't even have diplomatic relations from 1967 to 1983. The U.S. did help Iraq when it looked like it was going to lose the war it started with Iran, but it was mostly intelligence aid since Congress refused to lift the arms embargo against Iraq.

Mosul Dam wasn't completed till 1986, and 1983-1986 is the period of time where Mosul Dam was being constructed, and when U.S.-Iraq relations were at their most friendly.

Re: Mosul dam engineers warn it could fail at any time, killing 1M people

#248

Post by Grishnakh » Sun, Mar 06, 2016, 10:12 PM UTC

dang wrote: post #244

Grishnakh wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't criticize religion here? Religion is sacrosanct and can't be cricitized in any way? I guess you're an ISIS supporter then, because criticizing them means you're criticizing their religion.

That's obviously not what I mean. If you keep trolling HN, we will ban you.

I'm not trolling, you just don't like my opinions.

Re: Mosul dam engineers warn it could fail at any time, killing 1M people

#249

Post by EdHominem » Mon, Mar 07, 2016, 1:55 AM UTC

Grishnakh wrote: post #242

EdHominem wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The people in that region don't like the government we set up [...] And they didn't like all those borders we drew for them. Ungrateful lot, I say.

Well, that goes right back to what I said about them not appreciating our methods. Yes, a lot of this mess is due to the way the British drew the borders there in the wake of WWI. However, has there been any effort to redraw those borders? Hell no. The Kurds would certainly like to see the borders redrawn; it's obvious to anyone with a brain and some idea of the situation there that the borders are making the problem…

> everyone (including Russia) agrees

Russia doesn't care about ISIS - Russian soldiers shot down a commercial airliner.

> the only sane alternative is to just stay out of it

"Stay" implies that we're out and not going in. Cutting and running would be closer to the truth in this case...

Your argument is that we should just walk away from the mess we've created because it looks hard to solve. "Whups, pouring gasoline on it didn't put it out, let's take off and grab a beer."

None of these "leave the area to solve its own problems" ever include actually leaving, just continuing our meddling from a distance. It'd do a lot of good if we simply stopped backing the wrong side. We give Turkey a fair bit of assistance in keeping the kurdish areas under control, not the least of which is calling Kurdish independence movements terrorists.

> However, has there been any effort to redraw those borders? Hell no.

Well actually, yes. You know the Kurds - they've been trying to redraw them since the ink was wet. Something about genocide...

Re: Mosul dam engineers warn it could fail at any time, killing 1M people

#250

Post by TallGuyShort » Mon, Mar 07, 2016, 5:36 PM UTC

alphapapa wrote: post #234

akiselev wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my opinion, that's the point. Acknowledging that there is a dam whose collapse is capable of killing a million people is very different from actively assigning military personnel to study how to compromise the dam and flood the population for strategic gain. As the GP said, the statement "war is hell" is only made true by our own behavior during wartime, not by any universal law of the universe. This is very murky…

...What? That dam generates a lot of electricity. In war, power plants are strategic targets. It would be an obvious potential target to weaken the Iraqi military and war machine. So, the U.S. military studies the potential effects of destroying the dam. In the end, it does not destroy the dam. Fast forward a few years, and people like you are condemning the U.S. military for...what? Figuring out that doing so would…

There's a huge difference between "thinking" something and actively assigning resources to study it in depth. And I don't see anyone calling for prosecution in this entire thread. Criticizing, sure, but wouldn't you criticize me if I spent time and resources trying to figure out how to kill tons of people? And GP acknowledges the difference between studying what would happen if the dam failed and how to simply kill massive numbers of civilians. Our point is that you can't just say it's okay to kill 1M civilians because "war is hell", "war is hell" because of stuff like that.