Preempt the conspiracy risk
Reader comment on item: Saddam's Damn Dam [i.e., The Mosul Dam]

Submitted by Lee M. (United States), Nov 9, 2007 at 23:03

Some references show that the population of Mosul grew from 665,000 in 1987 to 1,740,000 by 2002, just 15 years later. Doing the math, that equals 69,000 more people living there each year. That would equal an additional 350,000 people there today which would bring the population to around 2.1 million. Is there any explanation of why Mosul's population went up over 300% in just 20 years?

As for conspiracy theories arising from this kind of disaster, should it happen, I think the only way to preempt such theories is to make this information a major news story. Even if some Iraqi's are aware of the danger, they could still pass the blame to the U.S. for not forewarning the greater population of a potential natural disaster likely to happen. Hence, a failure to publicize and warn others could become the key issue if we knew of the hazards beforehand. In U.S. legal terms, it implies a "duty" to warn and notify. The end result could be that even if the Iraqi government is the accepted cause of a disaster, and the dangers began decades ago, the failure to warn could become the wrongful inaction which would stick us with undue blame. If there's a way to pass the buck to us, they and their neigbors will find it.

I'd suggest we make an immediate effort to use all available media in Iraq and worldwide, including the UN, to make public this imminent disaster. It should provide all current and historical details about the dam. Let it be known that the dam was built because of their war with Iran. That their Arab neigbors, like Saudi Arabia financed it. And that German companies built it, just as they they built Saddam Hussein's 6 foot thick tunnels and bunkers. If they want to pass blame, let the Iraqi's start passing it now: Saddam Hussein, German-Italian builders, Saudi petrodollars, the Iranian threat. If they want U.S. help, let them ask first.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.