Posted on 04/18/2003 5:48:26 AM PDT by knuthom
Edited on 04/23/2004 12:05:30 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
We shouldn't have been surprised that, after the looting of Baghdad's antiquities museum last weekend, negligent Americans, not the looters themselves, got most of the blame. For much of the media, every bad thing since the invasion has been America's fault. So adding another charge to the indictment was an easy call.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
According to reports, our troops were taking fire from the museum, but were under orders not to respond so as not to endanger the museum's contents.
It would appear that our forces were indeed sensitive to the issue, but found themselves in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation.
"In April 1945, the heroic efforts of the 42nd Squadron of the United States Army's 2nd Cavalry were responsible for the rescue and ultimate preservation of the Lipizzans. The rescue of the horses was conducted under the orders of General George S. Patton and was carried out under the direct command of Colonel Charles H. Reed. ...
... While the stallions were sheltered at St. Martin's, the mares and foals had been separated from the stallions and were being held at the German Remount Depot in Hostau, Czechoslovakia. American forces became aware of their location through Colonel Reed. On April 26, 42nd Squadron captured a German general and his staff near Hostau. Reed and the General dined together and developed a friendship. The General showed Reed photographs of the Lipizzaner horses. When questioned further, the General confessed that the horses were being held at the German Remount Depot along with allied prisoners of war who cared for the horses. Later that day Reed contacted Patton to ask permission to attack Hostau to liberate the prisoners and horses. Permission was granted. ...
... The Americans found at Hostau a population of some 150 Lipizzans, including a few stallions, mares and their colts of two and three years of age. The first day was spent inspecting the horses. Two days later, German SS troops organized a counter attack on the 42nd Squadron as it moved eastward along the Czechoslovakian border. The Germans were driven off and a week later, the war had ended."
Apparently they made a Disney movie about this.
In recent decades, scholars of early Islamic history have realized that linguistic research can explain much of the mysteries surrounding the early development of Arab-Islamic civilization.
Christoph Luxenberg, a scholar of Semitic languages in Germany, has argued the term houri, which medieval Muslim scholars of the Quran took to mean young virginal maidens, could derive from an Aramaic word for white raisins.
Does that the martyrs who were expecting 72 virgins should have been expecting 72 raisins instead? This could reduce the number of homicide bombers considerably.
IMO, Bill-O is totally incapable of such a thing.
"The paintings were taken earlier in the week at al-Karameh border post from unidentified journalists entering Jordan from Iraq and were sent to the main Customs Department in Amman, said the officials, well-informed on the confiscated items. The paintings were being verified for authenticity but that preliminary checks led to them to believe the material had been looted from Iraq, the officials said on condition of anonymity. "
Seems we have to hear this from the India Times--guess the U.S. media is far too busy pointing the looting finger at the coalition military.
I don't think I have the finer detection skills needed to distinguish an Assyrian artifact from an Egytpian artifact if it is in my wazoo.
Yes, I've been following this quite closely.
Like, for instance, the one that said the museum had probably been looted long before the war started?
We know there was pilfering before the war started. We also know there was looting after our troops arrived. What was destroyed or removed prior to our arrival may never be known because we failed to secure the museum. Had we secured it, we would be able to quantify what was lost before we arrived.
WE did not loot the museum. The Iraqis did,...
Yes, but it was predictable (see my prior post) and preventable had we secured it.
When it comes to setting priorities, which should rank first? Guarding a museum, OR saving lives and liberating a country (including a large number of children released from Iraqi prisons)? The thing is, our troops were never meant to be museum rent-a-cops. Let them do what they were trained to do.
You are posing a false dichotomy. There is no reason we could not have done both. We secured the Oil Ministry upon our arrival in Baghdad. So, using your words, we were "rent-a-cops" when we wanted to be so.
Again, according to articles linked above and elsewhere, the U.S. knew that most of the important items were already gone, replaced by replicas--why waste manpower and lives on saving fakes?
Do you really believe an archive of over 100,000 cuneiform tablets which haven't even been photographed or translated were replaced with fakes? Of course not. Only those items of singular value would have been replaced with replicas. You are talking about a small percentage of the entire collection. It's true we don't have the overall loss quantified, so it is hard to speak in the abstract. But reports of crushed tablets littered on the floor indicate there was genuine loss from the looting that followed our arrival.
If every artifact in the museum were destroyed, it would not change the past at all. If one life was destroyed protecting them, it would change the future for at least one person. The people who want to protect the past are not putting their futures on the line. There is no choice.
Amen! There was not a damn thing in that Museum that was worth a single American Life. Of course the left wing whackos and so called right wing whackos hate our service men. They would have been happy if thousands of our service men had died protecting the so call artifacts.
Did you have anything thoughtful to say in response to my post?
If every artifact in the museum were destroyed, it would not change the past at all. If one life was destroyed protecting them, it would change the future for at least one person. The people who want to protect the past are not putting their futures on the line. There is no choice.
Just in case anyone missed it...
Philip Stanhope, Earl of Chesterfield
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.