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.

[optik_b]

I think we underestimated how savage these people would be when there was no law and order. These muslims looted the damn hospitals, even the animals from the zoo. We needed a larger force structure to contain these savages.

[Fifth Business]

We needed a larger force structure to contain these savages.

That's a bigger question than the museum issue, though it may be relevant. I'm sure the military's analysis following the war will include a look at that. I don't blame them for wanting to use as few troops as necessary. Consider that North Korea had been making apocalyptic statements in the months leading up to the war. If the 4th Mech Inf had been allowed through Turkey, it would have been more than ample force.

[Krodg]

Well, I think a case can be made that they have economic value.

Not quite. They have the potential to be of some economic value in a stable Iraq. The country's future depends on the oil, not some hoped for tourism.

BTW, very few people are arguing their economical worth , instead they argue their historical worth ... and that is not worth one solider's life.

[Fifth Business]

From one of my earlier posts in this thread:

There is a lot we still don't know, but it appears that there was much destruction and possibly some pilfering that took place after our troops arrived in Baghdad. Had we secured the museum, we could have prevented it.

We may never know what was taken before we arrived and what was taken after we arrived. Had we secured the museum, we would know.

[Fifth Business]

They have the potential to be of some economic value in a stable Iraq. The country's future depends on the oil, not some hoped for tourism.

Good point.

very few people are arguing their economical worth , instead they argue their historical worth....

Yes, I think you are correct. The economic argument is secondary to preserving our knowledge of the past. We disagree about whether it was deserving of protection.

[Polybius]

He was critical of someone up top who obvioulsy placed no priority on protecting these priceless artifacts. It amazes me how some of you guys cannot see how obvious a blunder this is. This is a crime against all of us not just the iraqi people. I guess some of you do not care if massive looting occurs when it could have been prevented

Was this a "he knew but did nothing" or a "he should have known" scenario?

Long ago, I recall reading, (I wish I had noted the source) about a conversation that Robert E. Lee had with a young man after the war when Lee was President of Washington College.

The young man pointed out to Lee why attacking the Union center at Pickett's Charge was a blunder and explained to Lee how flanking movements around the Union left to get between the Union Army and Washington should have been ordered by Lee instead.

Lee listened patiently and then replied in words to the effect, "Thank you for explaining that to me, Sir. Now that the battle is over and we all know what happened, even an old fool such as myself can see the wisdom of your advice."

Yes, with 20/20 hindsight, we can all see the wisdom of the ex post facto advice that a strong armored force be sent to guard the Museum as soon as American troops entered Baghdad.

However, where do we see such advice either from anyone on FreeRepublic or from anyone in the news media or even from anyone from the Universities prior to the looting of the Museum?

If such advice was given prior to the fall of Baghdad, let's find it and post it. I have yet to see it.

What I recall from the time prior to the fall of Baghdad was: "Inadequate Coalition forces for the job", "Moving too fast", "We're no longer moving so it is now officially a quagmire", "Supply lines vulnerable", "The Seige of Baghdad", "The Battle of Baghdad will be another Stalingrad", "Tens of thousands of Special Republican Guards and Fedayeen fighting house to house", "Thousands of Coalition casulaties and tens or hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilian casualties".

"Protect the Antiquities Museum from looters"?

Sorry. I don't recall that issue ever being brought up except after the fact.

[Fifth Business]

Here's just a few of the links you requested. All from March of this year.

Most in need of protection is the Iraq National Museum in Baghdad, Gibson said, plus the museum in Mosul. "Both are close to government buildings that were hit by 'smart bombs' in the Gulf War (of 1991)," and even if both escape the bombs, "fighting will render both vulnerable to looting."

http://216.239.57.100/search?q=cache:MFPGEWfbKCUC:www.newsday.com/news/health/ny-hsdig21,0,4034265.story%3Fcoll%3Dny-health-headlines+iraqi+antiquities+looting+gulf+war&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Baghdad, itself, hosts the Iraq Museum where some of the most prized collections of ancient and Islamic art are held. And ancient stone tablets known as cuneiforms are scattered throughout the region and represent the first known examples of written records. They reveal intimate details about life in ancient Mesopotamia, including marriage and divorce proceedings and tips on when to garden.

Many of these stone tablets haven't even been translated.

"We just haven't gotten to them yet," said Stone. "Only a handful of people can read them."

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/World/iraq_antiquities030310.html


The larger danger, scholars believe, is from looting. This has been a feature of war in this part of the world since long before the seventh century B.C., when a frieze in one of the palaces at Nineveh depicted an event described thusly in Michael Roaf’s “Cultural Atlas of Mesopotamia”: “An Assyrian soldier brings in a severed head to be counted with the rest of the booty after a battle in Babylonia.” In 1991, with Baghdad’s iron control over the country shattered, “nine of 13 regional museums were completely looted,” says Richard Zettler, associate curator at the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/885467.asp

[Krodg]

The economic argument is secondary to preserving our knowledge of the past. We disagree about whether it was deserving of protection.

People can study and argue over artifacts until the end of time, but it will not change the past. Just as finding out that we got one point wrong in previous studies, will not change the future.

It really doesn't matter whether we agree or not since we are not the ones putting our lives at risk. Perhaps our soliders should be asked how they feel about giving up their futures, so others may study the past.

[PhilDragoo]

Aunt Ina

In your 71 you perfectly define the forest comprised of all the trees:

The important concept is that the 25 million people of Iraq are freed from the reign of terror of Saddam Hussein by their armed liberation by the coalition.

Yet one or two bleaters perform a Greek chorus of wailing and gnashing of teeth over shards.

It is the mark of the true conservative to value life over dust.

Welcome to Free Republic.

Long may you wave.

[PhilDragoo]

People can study and argue over artifacts until the end of time, but it will not change the past.

And nothing but armed liberation will change the present.

And nothing less than that armed liberation will save the 25 million Iraqis from the monstrous Ba'athist regime.

As for the soldiers, they took fire from the museum and did not return it.

Thus they deprived the shrieking fairies of the New York Times and CNN from graphic descriptions of the coalition's destruction of "priceless antiquities".

To paraphrase the darling devil of the Left, "No cuneiform tablet ever fed a hungry child."

Saddam retained warehouses full of food while the Iraqi children starved--and the NYT and CNN and bleaters blamed Bush for the draconian sanctions.

Sanctions which did not curtail the regime's palace building and weapons procurement.

Those claiming to value the knowledge of the past display disdain for the Biblical-scale suffering and death of the present.

Not the mark of a true conservative to bewail the loss of stick-writing while eschewing any mention of the end of mass murder, torture, rape and maiming.

Iraq is free and with its oil will build a free future.

Thanks to the courage of the coalition forces and leadership.

[Grampa Dave]

Phil what a great on target Reply this is:

People can study and argue over artifacts until the end of time, but it will not change the past.
And nothing but armed liberation will change the present.

And nothing less than that armed liberation will save the 25 million Iraqis from the monstrous Ba'athist regime.

As for the soldiers, they took fire from the museum and did not return it.

Thus they deprived the shrieking fairies of the New York Times and CNN from graphic descriptions of the coalition's destruction of "priceless antiquities".

To paraphrase the darling devil of the Left, "No cuneiform tablet ever fed a hungry child."

Saddam retained warehouses full of food while the Iraqi children starved--and the NYT and CNN and bleaters blamed Bush for the draconian sanctions.

Sanctions which did not curtail the regime's palace building and weapons procurement.

Those claiming to value the knowledge of the past display disdain for the Biblical-scale suffering and death of the present.

Not the mark of a true conservative to bewail the loss of stick-writing while eschewing any mention of the end of mass murder, torture, rape and maiming.

Iraq is free and with its oil will build a free future.

Thanks to the courage of the coalition forces and leadership.

[Grampa Dave]

Welcome to Free Republic, Aunt Ina!

After this great reply you posted, I'm looking forward to your posts/replies.

This ping is to the other trouble makers on Free Repulic. You might want to read Aunt Ina's reply and welcome her.

She sounds like a great conservative lady!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

You all are purit-t-dam cool!

And so are you!!

Welcome!

Be sure and see this -- posted a few days ago:

Andrew Sullivan: America sets the agenda for wars of the future

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Thanks for the ping to an interesting discuission!

I agree with this statement by Krodg in post #70!

It really doesn't matter whether we agree or not since we are not the ones putting our lives at risk. Perhaps our soliders should be asked how they feel about giving up their futures, so others may study the past.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Great discussion here!

This needs to be on one of the list topics!

We'll start with the "War_list"!

OFFICIAL BUMP(TOPIC)LIST

[Grampa Dave]

Krodg posted, "It really doesn't matter whether we agree or not since we are not the ones putting our lives at risk. Perhaps our soliders should be asked how they feel about giving up their futures, so others may study the past."


I would pay good money to drag all of the posters on Free Republic who are moaning about the loss of the artifacts into a bar close to a Marine Base when this is over.

Then let them explain why some POS Iraqi Trinket is worth more than a Marine's or Soldiers life.

Krodg posted, "It really doesn't matter whether we agree or not since we are not the ones putting our lives at risk. Perhaps our soliders should be asked how they feel about giving up their futures, so others may study the past."

[Grampa Dave]

Excellent Phil:

Not the mark of a true conservative to bewail the loss of stick-writing while eschewing any mention of the end of mass murder, torture, rape and maiming.