Hundreds Of Victims Sue Premier, Govt Officials Over Flood Ordeal: Thailand

[hellodolly]

The responsible are the 2 governments , The democrat for not having see the seriousness of the fact in Ayutaya as it started in july and the actual government for very little action ..specially to sacrifice the whole Bangkok north provinces to keep BKK dry . We cannot blame only the actual PM. I am not an expert but for sure something different could have been done . Lets hope that will not happen again for the next rainy season .

Yep ... the Democrats should have done something in the 2 days that they were in care-taker government when Typhoon Nok-ten started causing flooding in the North East on July 31.

Ayutthaya didn't start flooding until late August (or maybe a bit later).

Yep and that amount of water suddenly appeared over night and had nothing at all to do with the 6 months of solid rain prior .

For sure the democrats should bear a part of the blame.

The real question is how much?

This is definitely a horse of another color.

The PT through there milatent arm took up a lot of the Dem's time and resources.

Not being a old timer here I will have to guess.The Dem's have only had control of a sort for two years in the last twenty.

[WarpSpeed]

The responsible are the 2 governments , The democrat for not having see the seriousness of the fact in Ayutaya as it started in july and the actual government for very little action ..specially to sacrifice the whole Bangkok north provinces to keep BKK dry . We cannot blame only the actual PM. I am not an expert but for sure something different could have been done . Lets hope that will not happen again for the next rainy season .

Yep ... the Democrats should have done something in the 2 days that they were in care-taker government when Typhoon Nok-ten started causing flooding in the North East on July 31.

Ayutthaya didn't start flooding until late August (or maybe a bit later).

Yep and that amount of water suddenly appeared over night and had nothing at all to do with the 6 months of solid rain prior .

It was raining solidly since January?

Pedantic, I think or at least hope you understood the point, in fact your answer suggests that you clearly did so as to avoid the real issue ..

Edited December 22, 2011 by WarpSpeed

[whybother]

Yep and that amount of water suddenly appeared over night and had nothing at all to do with the 6 months of solid rain prior .

It was raining solidly since January?

Pedantic, I think or at least hope you understood the point, in fact your answer suggests that you clearly did so as to avoid the real issue ..

Pedantic? It wasn't even raining solidly for a month, let alone 6 months! What was unusual about the wet season before the first typhoon? The water did appear over night when Typhoon Nockten hit at the end of July? There was no flooding prior to that.

[alanferdi]

The lady in front....well who can blame her she was chosen for the position. Now everyone is trying to sink the boat! But facts are choosing leaders or captains of a ship are never based on whether they are rich or poor, popular, connected or cheap giver aways. Finding a captain is first in the training and exposure to the sea out there. In the times of storm that is where the capabilities of her or his education will highlight decisions of impulse or calculations. Perhaps it late for this boat....its way out at sea and its being manned from else where. But it would be good if it docked safely with its cargo of promises and recruit a captain.

[WarpSpeed]

Yep and that amount of water suddenly appeared over night and had nothing at all to do with the 6 months of solid rain prior .

It was raining solidly since January?

Pedantic, I think or at least hope you understood the point, in fact your answer suggests that you clearly did so as to avoid the real issue ..

Pedantic? It wasn't even raining solidly for a month, let alone 6 months! What was unusual about the wet season before the first typhoon? The water did appear over night when Typhoon Nockten hit at the end of July? There was no flooding prior to that.

Ok sorry my mistake I guess it's just being intentionally obtuse then ...

[whybother]

Pedantic? It wasn't even raining solidly for a month, let alone 6 months! What was unusual about the wet season before the first typhoon? The water did appear over night when Typhoon Nockten hit at the end of July? There was no flooding prior to that.

Ok sorry my mistake I guess it's just being intentionally obtuse then ...

Flooding didn't start until the end of July. What would you expect the Democrats to do given they were in care-taker mode AND handed government over to the PTP 3 days later.

[WarpSpeed]

Pedantic? It wasn't even raining solidly for a month, let alone 6 months! What was unusual about the wet season before the first typhoon? The water did appear over night when Typhoon Nockten hit at the end of July? There was no flooding prior to that.

Ok sorry my mistake I guess it's just being intentionally obtuse then ...

Flooding didn't start until the end of July. What would you expect the Democrats to do given they were in care-taker mode AND handed government over to the PTP 3 days later.

I'm not discussing this with someone who is going to intentionally play the obtuse card to avoid the obvious.. Flooding began well before July, that's just when it became unmanageable and actually required immediate attention. Floods of this magnitude and making aren't an overnight phenomena, they build over the course of several months just as this did when moving south it was a slow moving, man made train wreck that began well before the new government took office and that's the obvious part as well as who was in charge at the time.. End of...

JFYI You keep mentioning "caretaker" as if it carries no responsibility? Being a caretaker is just that, what caretaking where they doing? That's no excuse and they caused the need for a caretaker government in any case.

Edited December 23, 2011 by WarpSpeed

[Thai at Heart]

Hmmmm, suing the government for negligence, incompetence, or whatever has as much chance as a white Xmas in Bangkok.

I don't think any of the climate change bunch have predicted that will happen either.

[whybother]

Flooding didn't start until the end of July. What would you expect the Democrats to do given they were in care-taker mode AND handed government over to the PTP 3 days later.

I'm not discussing this with someone who is going to intentionally play the obtuse card to avoid the obvious.. Floods of this magnitude and making aren't an overnight phenomena, they build over the course of several months just as this did when moving south it was a slow moving, man made train wreck that began well before the new government took office and that's the obvious part as well as who was in charge at the time.. End of...

JFYI You keep mentioning "caretaker" as if it carries no responsibility? Being a caretaker is just that, what caretaking where they doing? That's no excuse and they caused the need for caretaker government in any case.

If you're talking about the cause of the floods, then blame the governments of the last 50 years and "God".

If you're talking about the management of the communications and relief efforts, then the only government to blame is the current one.

The Democrat government were in no position to do anything about managing these floods. The floods didn't start until they were out of office, and didn't get really serious until mid September when two more typhoons hit Thailand.

edit: Can you show me anything that points to flooding starting well before July?

Edited December 23, 2011 by whybother

[WarpSpeed]

Flooding didn't start until the end of July. What would you expect the Democrats to do given they were in care-taker mode AND handed government over to the PTP 3 days later.

I'm not discussing this with someone who is going to intentionally play the obtuse card to avoid the obvious.. Floods of this magnitude and making aren't an overnight phenomena, they build over the course of several months just as this did when moving south it was a slow moving, man made train wreck that began well before the new government took office and that's the obvious part as well as who was in charge at the time.. End of...

JFYI You keep mentioning "caretaker" as if it carries no responsibility? Being a caretaker is just that, what caretaking where they doing? That's no excuse and they caused the need for caretaker government in any case.

If you're talking about the cause of the floods, then blame the governments of the last 50 years and "God".

If you're talking about the management of the communications and relief efforts, then the only government to blame is the current one.

The Democrat government were in no position to do anything about managing these floods. The floods didn't start until they were out of office, and didn't get really serious until mid September when two more typhoons hit Thailand.

edit: Can you show me anything that points to flooding starting well before July?

I guess you missed this part then,

I'm not discussing this with someone who is going to intentionally play the obtuse card to avoid the obvious..

Since you're having comprehension issues I've quoted it again and in bold this time for your further consideration.

Reason for edit: I forget the period and I wouldn't want that to upset the pedants day and cause another round of rants.

Edited December 23, 2011 by WarpSpeed

[whybother]

I guess you missed this part then,

I'm not discussing this with someone who is going to intentionally play the obtuse card to avoid the obvious..

Since you're having comprehension issues I've quoted it again and in bold this time for your further consideration

I put some facts in front of you and you run away saying "I don't want to play anymore ".

[WarpSpeed]

I guess you missed this part then,

I'm not discussing this with someone who is going to intentionally play the obtuse card to avoid the obvious..

Since you're having comprehension issues I've quoted it again and in bold this time for your further consideration

I put some facts in front of you and you run away saying "I don't want to play anymore ".

Not facts, point of view and a skewed one at that..

[whybother]

I guess you missed this part then,

I'm not discussing this with someone who is going to intentionally play the obtuse card to avoid the obvious..

Since you're having comprehension issues I've quoted it again and in bold this time for your further consideration

I put some facts in front of you and you run away saying "I don't want to play anymore ".

Not facts, point of view and a skewed one at that..

So ... show me anything that says that the floods started before the end of July.

[WarpSpeed]

Are you typing with both hands? You seem to be getting off on being obtuse.

[elcent]

Hmmmm, suing the government for negligence, incompetence, or whatever has as much chance as a white Xmas in Bangkok.

I don't think any of the climate change bunch have predicted that will happen either.

... and yet it was man-made by the twisting of releasing water from the biggest dam in time.

undefined

[whybother]

Are you typing with both hands? You seem to be getting off on being obtuse.

You started this with your "6 months of solid rain prior", which is complete crap. Even one month prior is crap.

Show me anything that there was anything out of the ordinary before the end of July.

Edited December 23, 2011 by whybother

[Thai at Heart]

So ... show me anything that says that the floods started before the end of July.

Floods started in the North around July, the rain had been falling way above average in the North since early May. The tropical storms that hit were simply the icing on the cake. If the rain had stopped in July, maybe the floods could have been averted, but in a rather crazy effort to keep as much water in the dams as possible, they were largely full by August, but the rain was still falling.

It is a complete clusterf**k of incompetence and political meddling. Maybe they should not allow elections during the rainy season, because it is patently obvious that everyone was sitting on their hands for a very long time watching the rain fall and the damns fill up and NO ONE took any decisions. By the time the damns were full with that long of the rainy season remaining, the goose was well and truly cooked.

You can ask why NO ONE apparently did anything, but then TIT. Having a flood north of Bangkok is a yearly event, (bless the poor souls up there who put up with this nonsense every year or two), but this year a combination of torrential rain and utter inaction by the system for 6 months culminated in the disaster that we have just seen. They can sue all they want, but in reality, I would think the irrigation department is the most responsible.

[Thai at Heart]

Are you typing with both hands? You seem to be getting off on being obtuse.

You started this with your "6 months of solid rain prior", which is complete crap. Even one month prior is crap.

Show me anything that there was anything out of the ordinary before the end of July.

Rainfall in the North was 50% above average from May onwards, and continued into August. The figures were dug out on other threads from the meteorological department.

[whybother]

Are you typing with both hands? You seem to be getting off on being obtuse.

You started this with your "6 months of solid rain prior", which is complete crap. Even one month prior is crap.

Show me anything that there was anything out of the ordinary before the end of July.

Rainfall in the North was 50% above average from May onwards, and continued into August. The figures were dug out on other threads from the meteorological department.

Actually, according to this: (from http://asiancorrespo...he-dams-part-1/)

(edit: posting images isn't working ... http://www.flickr.com/photos/60433209@N00/6274243047/)

Rainfall wasn't that high before July, especially considering that 2010 was a dry year.

Edited December 23, 2011 by whybother

[Thai at Heart]

Actually, according to this: (from http://asiancorrespo...he-dams-part-1/)

(edit: posting images isn't working ... http://www.flickr.co...N00/6274243047/)

Rainfall wasn't that high before July, especially considering that 2010 was a dry year.

All the data I saw either for work or through discussion on here showed that in the North of the country, the rainfall was well above average (not year on year) in the North of the country. The link you have to asiacorrespondent shows that to end of September it was 46% above average. That is by September, accumulated to July was even higher if I remember.

Even anecdotally people were surprised how early the rain started to come and how sustained it was in end of April and May up North. The water had to come from somewhere, and on the basis that there isn't any snowmelt in the North of Thailand, it all came out of the sky one way or another.

They completely screwed up managing it, but then again it was a very wet year. It was only a couple of years ago they flooded the area north of Ayuttaya to save Bangkok, it is just that this year, the amount of water was xtimes bigger. Even with the best management it was likely there would have been some flooding in and around Bangkok, just not to the level they created this year. Basically, they need to consider what is an "average" year, because they patently can't even handle a slightly wet year. Get into the realms of what happened this year and there is no "plan" to save flooding huge areas of the country.

How it happened that this flood apparently happened without anyone really telling anyone it was coming is the crime. Sitting in the corner in silence hardly inspires confidence.

[Joeb]

Try this link: http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2011/10/19/thai-flood-cause-revealed-rain/

Shows heavier than normal rain in the north from March

[whybother]

Actually, according to this: (from http://asiancorrespo...he-dams-part-1/)

(edit: posting images isn't working ... http://www.flickr.co...N00/6274243047/)

Rainfall wasn't that high before July, especially considering that 2010 was a dry year.

All the data I saw either for work or through discussion on here showed that in the North of the country, the rainfall was well above average (not year on year) in the North of the country. The link you have to asiacorrespondent shows that to end of September it was 46% above average. That is by September, accumulated to July was even higher if I remember.

Even anecdotally people were surprised how early the rain started to come and how sustained it was in end of April and May up North. The water had to come from somewhere, and on the basis that there isn't any snowmelt in the North of Thailand, it all came out of the sky one way or another.

They completely screwed up managing it, but then again it was a very wet year. It was only a couple of years ago they flooded the area north of Ayuttaya to save Bangkok, it is just that this year, the amount of water was xtimes bigger. Even with the best management it was likely there would have been some flooding in and around Bangkok, just not to the level they created this year. Basically, they need to consider what is an "average" year, because they patently can't even handle a slightly wet year. Get into the realms of what happened this year and there is no "plan" to save flooding huge areas of the country.

How it happened that this flood apparently happened without anyone really telling anyone it was coming is the crime. Sitting in the corner in silence hardly inspires confidence.

From the graph above, there was a spike in March, then relatively normal for a couple of months, then the spike in July / August when Nock-Ten hit. I'm sure if September was on there, it would be nearly off the chart.

I agree - after 3 typhoons hitting, particularly 2 basically together in mid-September, there wasn't much anyone could do to stop the floods. But then we were getting "The Worst has passed" in October !! How could the government NOT know that there was still a sh!t load of water still coming down the river?

[phiphidon]

Are you typing with both hands? You seem to be getting off on being obtuse.

You started this with your "6 months of solid rain prior", which is complete crap. Even one month prior is crap.

Show me anything that there was anything out of the ordinary before the end of July.

Rainfall in the North was 50% above average from May onwards, and continued into August. The figures were dug out on other threads from the meteorological department.

Actually, according to this: (from http://asiancorrespo...he-dams-part-1/)

(edit: posting images isn't working ... http://www.flickr.co...N00/6274243047/)

Rainfall wasn't that high before July, especially considering that 2010 was a dry year.

Strange that you didn't quote Part 2 of that report - well not really, because it shows that not only did 46% per cent more rain fall on Northern Thailand from Jan 2011 to August 2011, but that it didn't just fall in the last couple of months and was extraordinarily above average in March 2011 and continued that way until August. ( Also see ThaiatHeart post)

http://asiancorrespo...2%80%93-part-2/

May 10th Abhisit heads "caretaker" Government

Yinglucks Government fully sworn in and functioning August 25th

Edited December 23, 2011 by phiphidon

[Thai at Heart]

Actually, according to this: (from http://asiancorrespo...he-dams-part-1/)

(edit: posting images isn't working ... http://www.flickr.co...N00/6274243047/)

Rainfall wasn't that high before July, especially considering that 2010 was a dry year.

All the data I saw either for work or through discussion on here showed that in the North of the country, the rainfall was well above average (not year on year) in the North of the country. The link you have to asiacorrespondent shows that to end of September it was 46% above average. That is by September, accumulated to July was even higher if I remember.

Even anecdotally people were surprised how early the rain started to come and how sustained it was in end of April and May up North. The water had to come from somewhere, and on the basis that there isn't any snowmelt in the North of Thailand, it all came out of the sky one way or another.

They completely screwed up managing it, but then again it was a very wet year. It was only a couple of years ago they flooded the area north of Ayuttaya to save Bangkok, it is just that this year, the amount of water was xtimes bigger. Even with the best management it was likely there would have been some flooding in and around Bangkok, just not to the level they created this year. Basically, they need to consider what is an "average" year, because they patently can't even handle a slightly wet year. Get into the realms of what happened this year and there is no "plan" to save flooding huge areas of the country.

How it happened that this flood apparently happened without anyone really telling anyone it was coming is the crime. Sitting in the corner in silence hardly inspires confidence.

From the graph above, there was a spike in March, then relatively normal for a couple of months, then the spike in July / August when Nock-Ten hit. I'm sure if September was on there, it would be nearly off the chart.

I agree - after 3 typhoons hitting, particularly 2 basically together in mid-September, there wasn't much anyone could do to stop the floods. But then we were getting "The Worst has passed" in October !! How could the government NOT know that there was still a sh!t load of water still coming down the river?

The following graphs, which compare the 2011 monthly totals (January to September) with the 30-year averages for those months are revealing. In Chiang Mai the nine-month total was 140 percent of the average; in Lamphun 196%; in Lampang 177%; in Uttaradit 153% and in Phitsanulok 146%. These are only a few locations (and all of them from lowland sites – rainfall is heavier at higher elevations) but they give a clear indication that 2011 has been an exceptionally wet year and that this has been widely spread across the Chao Phaya catchment.

http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2011/10/19/thai-flood-cause-revealed-rain/

Indeed, the worst has passed, was absolute <deleted>. But I really see this problem being exacerbated by a problem rather unique to Thailand, in that there was an election right at the moment when people should have been deciding what to do, and probably within the various organisations responsible for deciding how to handle this, they all kept scthum to save their ass. The civil service basically went into neutral for 3 months around and after the election. Nothing moved.

I can really see how it becomes a situation where everyone is sitting tight in the office waiting to see who gets promoted who gets demoted while the phone is ringing to say that the damns are full, what do we do. I don't absolve the politicians of blame for this, but essentially the various organisations who are directly responsible for managing this stuff, screwed it up. It isn't as though Yingluck personally told them to open or close the damns, but it is very much at issue why the damns were managed the way they were and whether this desire to maximise irrigation water contributed.

Of course, the plan to manage the damns has to be changed, but then they were built principally to store irrigation water, not to manage floods. It isn't difficult to change the management, but then TIT, since when was changing anything that simple.

[whybother]

Strange that you didn't quote Part 2 of that report - well not really, because it shows that not only did 46% per cent more rain fall on Northern Thailand from Jan 2011 to August 2011, but that it didn't just fall in the last couple of months and was extraordinarily above average in March 2011 and continued that way until August. ( Also see ThaiatHeart post)

http://asiancorrespo...2%80%93-part-2/

May 10th Abhisit heads "caretaker" Government

Yinglucks Government fully sworn in and functioning August 25th

I didn't quote part 2 because I was just trying to show the graph, and linked to where I got it from.

Considering the "46% more rainfall" includes August when Nock-ten hit, it isn't a very useful comparison. Actually, Joeb's post shows the best graphs with the 30 year averages. This shows that some areas got a dumping in March / April ... but there was no flooding then. Even Chiang Mai, that got a huge dump in May it didn't flood then.

[phiphidon]

Strange that you didn't quote Part 2 of that report - well not really, because it shows that not only did 46% per cent more rain fall on Northern Thailand from Jan 2011 to August 2011, but that it didn't just fall in the last couple of months and was extraordinarily above average in March 2011 and continued that way until August. ( Also see ThaiatHeart post)

http://asiancorrespo...2%80%93-part-2/

May 10th Abhisit heads "caretaker" Government

Yinglucks Government fully sworn in and functioning August 25th

I didn't quote part 2 because I was just trying to show the graph, and linked to where I got it from.

Considering the "46% more rainfall" includes August when Nock-ten hit, it isn't a very useful comparison. Actually, Joeb's post shows the best graphs with the 30 year averages. This shows that some areas got a dumping in March / April ... but there was no flooding then. Even Chiang Mai, that got a huge dump in May it didn't flood then.

In the month of August the "above average" rainfall was actually dropping so Nock Ten or no Nock Ten there was 46% more rainfall than normal between the months of january and august of this year. The important thing is that somebody should have noted what was going on from March onwards.The reservoirs were filling up or full. Khun Mark was in charge then. Yingluck and her government were not in a position to do anything until August 25th.

[sparebox2]

Strange that you didn't quote Part 2 of that report - well not really, because it shows that not only did 46% per cent more rain fall on Northern Thailand from Jan 2011 to August 2011, but that it didn't just fall in the last couple of months and was extraordinarily above average in March 2011 and continued that way until August. ( Also see ThaiatHeart post)

http://asiancorrespo...2%80%93-part-2/

May 10th Abhisit heads "caretaker" Government

Yinglucks Government fully sworn in and functioning August 25th

I didn't quote part 2 because I was just trying to show the graph, and linked to where I got it from.

Considering the "46% more rainfall" includes August when Nock-ten hit, it isn't a very useful comparison. Actually, Joeb's post shows the best graphs with the 30 year averages. This shows that some areas got a dumping in March / April ... but there was no flooding then. Even Chiang Mai, that got a huge dump in May it didn't flood then.

The problem is not the water. It is the management.

[WarpSpeed]

Are you typing with both hands? You seem to be getting off on being obtuse.

You started this with your "6 months of solid rain prior", which is complete crap. Even one month prior is crap.

Show me anything that there was anything out of the ordinary before the end of July.

Rainfall in the North was 50% above average from May onwards, and continued into August. The figures were dug out on other threads from the meteorological department.

Thank you Thai@heart I had no desire to re-educate or argue with the pedant who took my numbers literally instead of as an approximation as they were obviously intended, though they were certainly close enough for a thinking person such as yourself to see the relevance.

Nor was I inclined to direct him to those figures you've mentioned it's redundant and frankly tiresome to be constantly regurgitating such facts and figures like a mother bird does for it's young to every poster who chooses just to argue rather do some research of their own merit.

[WarpSpeed]

Strange that you didn't quote Part 2 of that report - well not really, because it shows that not only did 46% per cent more rain fall on Northern Thailand from Jan 2011 to August 2011, but that it didn't just fall in the last couple of months and was extraordinarily above average in March 2011 and continued that way until August. ( Also see ThaiatHeart post)

http://asiancorrespo...2%80%93-part-2/

May 10th Abhisit heads "caretaker" Government

Yinglucks Government fully sworn in and functioning August 25th

I didn't quote part 2 because I was just trying to show the graph, and linked to where I got it from.

Considering the "46% more rainfall" includes August when Nock-ten hit, it isn't a very useful comparison. Actually, Joeb's post shows the best graphs with the 30 year averages. This shows that some areas got a dumping in March / April ... but there was no flooding then. Even Chiang Mai, that got a huge dump in May it didn't flood then.

I see the problem now, you're a very literal person unable or unwilling to extrapolate between a minor exaggeration for the sake of a quick point being made and 100% accuracy. In my first post I said that the floods began well before they actually did and the meaning behind it was accurate, just not to your understanding.

Any catastrophe of any proportions be it a train wreck or car accident has a number of factors that set the events into motion well before they actually occur and in this case they began months before the actual catastrophe as has been noted now several times including by yourself.

[whybother]

Strange that you didn't quote Part 2 of that report - well not really, because it shows that not only did 46% per cent more rain fall on Northern Thailand from Jan 2011 to August 2011, but that it didn't just fall in the last couple of months and was extraordinarily above average in March 2011 and continued that way until August. ( Also see ThaiatHeart post)

http://asiancorrespo...2%80%93-part-2/

May 10th Abhisit heads "caretaker" Government

Yinglucks Government fully sworn in and functioning August 25th

I didn't quote part 2 because I was just trying to show the graph, and linked to where I got it from.

Considering the "46% more rainfall" includes August when Nock-ten hit, it isn't a very useful comparison. Actually, Joeb's post shows the best graphs with the 30 year averages. This shows that some areas got a dumping in March / April ... but there was no flooding then. Even Chiang Mai, that got a huge dump in May it didn't flood then.

I see the problem now, you're a very literal person unable or unwilling to extrapolate between a minor exaggeration for the sake of a quick point being made and 100% accuracy. In my first post I said that the floods began well before they actually did and the meaning behind it was accurate, just not to your understanding.

Any catastrophe of any proportions be it a train wreck or car accident has a number of factors that set the events into motion well before they actually occur and in this case they began months before the actual catastrophe as has been noted now several times including by yourself.

Yes. There had been more rain than usual, and that rain added to the severity of the flooding. But there wasn't any flooding until typhoon Nock-ten hit, and if it didn't hit there wouldn't have been any flooding. So what should the Democrats have done (which is where this discussion started) prior to the typhoon hitting and before there was any flooding?