Flooding the South of Iraq

bug

Looking at this map do you think that fighting at Karbala, which the allied forces haven't taken yet according to reports. could be in order to secure the Dam which supports the lakes on this map.

map of Iraq

Do you think that it would be possible for Sadams forces to blow this dam? Do you think that it wouldn't be viable for them to do so? Perhaps it might stop the forces in the South from the Iraqi military perspective. I think it could be possible, using nature as a WMD. Any thoughts?

Lennoxschips

Saddam is no fool, he knows if he did that the world would be up in arms (literally).

Although, I wouldn't put it beyond him.

I remember reading a book (fiction) a number of years ago, whereby an american president blew this dam, in order to bring Iraq to its knees.

I dunno. I'd assume, that Saddam won't do it, purely for economic reasons. At the moment he's not getting much from the Oil, anyway, so setting them on fire, was an acceptable option. The Dam on the other hand is still of use to his regime.

On the other hand, personally, i think its a good idea. It would do wonders to take out a few mech divisions...

bug

I wouldn't put it beyond him either, I think that if he is trapped and feels like he's losing Bagdad anything is possible. If you can gas a load of Kurds, you could drown alot of people too. I actually though that some plan regarding the Dam was going to happen last week, because of the movement of Iraqi troops away from the flood plane, they seem to be defending Najaf and Karbala pretty hard.

dathi1

I think its one of the most open best kept secrets in the US and British AF. If cutting the snake to pieces gets harder splitting the country in half would be the best option. It’s more than probable that this WMD could put the whole Anglo/US invasion in jeopardy.

bonkey

Saddam will not commit any mass-scale atrocity such as use of WMD (assuming he has some), destruction of this damn, or whatever nasty tricks he has up his sleeve (I could think of plenty, so he must have more).

More correctly...he will not commit any until he abandons hope of winning this war "by proxy" - i.e. that the international community and/or populace of the invading nations will cause hostilities to come to an end.

The US have a history of leaving wars if they get too messy, and in recent years, it would show that "too messy" appears to be becoming a lower and lower threshold. Saddam is hoping that the same will happen here, and until that option is gone, he will not do anything of such a large scale which would have the world's populace baying for his blood.

jc

Manach

Blowing up such structures has historical precedence, as the Dutch did something similar in WWII to try and halt the German advance.

Yes but saddam knows that public opinion is against him. In WW2 the world was against Hitler, now its changed completely. The world is undecided abt this war. He has alot of support, against this war, which he would loose should he use a WMD, or by causing serious casualties at one time. Look at sept 11. It was one terrorist attack, but claimed thousands, and the world is still in anger/fear as a result. If there were 40 terrorist attacks, amounting to the same casualties, over the space of two years, nobody would have bat an eyelid. He can't afford to make the same mistake here.

dathi1

Whose opinion is he more concerned about...world opinion or Arab opinion? The great flood mark 2 would only be relevant to an Arab populace seething at a second crusade.

not quite. At the moment there is some world pressure on the US for this war. Should casualties rise on both sides, Iraq could see aid coming to them, in unexpected ways. Saddam, knows that nations can no longer operate without some good world opinion.

As for the other arab nations, they'd probably jump at the chance.