Why a Museum?

Wall Street Journal ^ | April 18, 2003 | ERIC GIBSON

[knuthom]

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.

[MizSterious]

I had said it earlier; apparently you missed it. Your argument, compared to Krodg's, is weak. How many of our troops are you willing to sacrifice for those tablets--if, indeed, they were genuine?

[GeorgiaYankee]

Has anyone compiled a comprehensive list of all the places the US military has been accused of not protecting from looting?

Here's mine:

Museums, libraries, businesses, the Health Ministry, everybody's houses.

How about the landfills, and the sewage plants?

Complaint to US: You must bring Iraq under control, but you must not take control of Iraq!!

[Fifth Business]

How many of our troops are you willing to sacrifice for those tablets...?

How many of our troops are you willing to sacrifice for the Oil Ministry?

[MizSterious]

Also, from the link in #29, imagine the outcry if we'd have "protected" the museum while the media was busy looting it? The headlines then would have claimed we were deliberately targeting the media.

And, since people were firing on the troops from inside the museum--had we returned fire, think of the damage that would have been done then. People here just aren't thinking. All they can do is repeat the "it's our fault the museum got looted" mantra.

[aristeides]

We learn from Yaroslav Trofimov in the Wall Street Journal a couple of days ago that Lt. Col. Schwartz's troops were taking fire from people inside the museum, fire to which they did not respond. How much of the looting occurred before that hostile fire ended, and how much occurred after?

[mewzilla]

It's hard to appreciate one's culture when one is starving.

[mewzilla]

And just out of curiosity, how do you feel about the repatriation of any Iraqis artifacts acquired by non-Iraqis during Saddamn's regime?

[MizSterious]

Oh, it's the old liberal cry of "no blood for oil" again? Please. Oil is their future, FB. The artifacts (however many were actually real) were the past.

Let's see, if we get to choose...future, or past? I would choose future. Maybe you wouldn't, but our war planners did. In any event, I'm willing to bet that the losses are going to turn out to be far less than the hype.

[Fifth Business]

We learn from Yaroslav Trofimov in the Wall Street Journal a couple of days ago that Lt. Col. Schwartz's troops were taking fire from people inside the museum, fire to which they did not respond. How much of the looting occurred before that hostile fire ended, and how much occurred after?

Good point. I am hoping more will come out about this incident in the near future. Here is what I posted on that topic further up in the thread:

Apparently, one of the commanding officers in Baghdad said we were taking fire from the museum grounds and that's why it couldn't be secured. But Central Command and DOD are not saying that we even tried to. Rumsfeld was very dismissive of the issue. Did we try or didn't we? The statement also contradicts a report that we did in fact secure the building for a half hour with a tank and then left. The statement about "taking fire" doesn't really tell us much. If we avoided every place we were "taking fire" from, we wouldn't be in Iraq right now. Does he mean that the Iraqi's chased us off because we had insufficient force? Then had we allocated sufficient force to secure the museum, we could have stopped the looting that transpired and killed some bad guys too.

[aristeides]

Seems to me it's very likely our troops were under orders not to attack militarily a place like the museum of antiquities.

[Fifth Business]

And just out of curiosity, how do you feel about the repatriation of any Iraqis artifacts acquired by non-Iraqis during Saddamn's regime?

It's the right thing to do. The 1970 UNESCO resolutions on cultural property prevent museums from holding on to anything removed from Iraq post 1960s. But private collectors ignore those resolutions.

[Krodg]

How many of our troops are you willing to sacrifice for those tablets...?

How many of our troops are you willing to sacrifice for the Oil Ministry?

You seem to be missing the point that the artifacts belong to the past, which cannot be changed. Protecting the oil will change the future for the people of Iraq.

I don't understand people who would sacrifice another persons future for artifacts that are only important to people who live their lives looking to the past.

Our soliders lives are valuable....the artifacts are merely interesting.

[Fifth Business]

Please. Oil is their future....

I agree. I never said I was against the Oil Ministry being secured.

...future, or past?

Why did we have to make that choice? I think both should have been secured.

[Fifth Business]

Seems to me it's very likely our troops were under orders not to attack militarily a place like the museum of antiquities.

I look forward to hearing more about this. Thanks.

[DensaMensa]

}Bill O'Reilly said that it would have taken one armoured tank to stop the looting

...and he would have done it, but only if it improved his ratings. Don't confuse crass with integrity.

[Fifth Business]

....the artifacts are merely interesting.

Well, I think a case can be made that they have economic value. In tandem with the archaeological sites, they would draw tourists, same as in Egypt. Freeper Physicist did an economic analysis on one of these threads.

[aristeides]

I think both should have been secured.

And if the result of our militarily securing the museum had been to severely damage it, or to destroy it in whole or in part, what would you be saying then?

[Fifth Business]

And if the result of our militarily securing the museum had been to severely damage it, or to destroy it in whole or in part, what would you be saying then?

I wouldn't be happy about that either! But if that were the dilemma, why aren't they saying that? It would go a long way toward explaining why the museum wasn't secured. But they are not even saying it was part of their plan to secure it.

[ladyjane]

I can't believe how naive some people are about this museum scam. The good stuff was already gone. The 'looting' was a coverup. What is so complex about that?