Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

I've rarely seen a more tortured piece of flimsy rationalization.

Part of the frigging POINT of invading Iraq was so that matters of heritage -- whether economic, cultural, or personal -- would be preserved from the effects of being looted. (One of several reasons, shifting with the winds of responding to the media, but we won't get into that now.)

Standing by while these museums were looted, whether by plan or by opportunism, was irresponsible. Rumsfeld had far more soldiers and Marines guarding the glitz of presidential palaces. He also doesn't read the text of the Geneva Conventions that he and Bush were oh, so furious about Al-Jazeera supposedly flouting, for those same treaties obligate us under international law to prevent "pillage," described as early as 1907 as a crime against humanity.

And if the repositories of irreplaceable -- unlike oil -- artifacts and historical records are cleaned out, what kind of physical heritage will the Iraqis be able to offer when they are re-integrated with the rest of peaceable civilization?

Steyn is a swinish philistine. He's no different, in effect, from the caliph who said, before he ordered the torching of the library at Alexandria over a thousand years ago: "If these books say what is said in the Holy Qu'ran, they are superfluous. If they say what is not said in the Holy Qu'ran, they are pernicious." The caliph would have been right at home in an office next to Steyn at the National Post.

5 posted on 04/29/2003 6:38:04 AM PDT by Greybird ("War is the health of the State." -- Randolph Bourne)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Greybird
I can't help but believe that you don't understand what Steyn is saying. Basically he is slamming those who are critical of the U.S. for not giving the past priority over the present.  I can't help but agree.  Also, your Caliph example is somewhat suspect.  The legend that the volumes from the library took six months to burn is incredible.  Also, the evidence that there even was a library in the Serapeum are sketchy at best. More especially since the Serapeum had already been destroyed and rebuilt some centuries earlier - and the evidence of a library being there at that time was sketchy at best.

The best evidence we have for the destruction of the library is given to us by Livas, Florus and Seneca. They assert that it was common knowledge that Julias Caesar inadvertantly destroyed a warehouse containing some 400,000 volumes which was either on the docks or nearby.  This happened when Caesar set fire to an enemy's fleet to protect himself from a desperate situation.  However, it is now known if these volumes were being made ready for shipping or if were part of one of the actual libraries of Alexandria.
6 posted on 04/29/2003 7:55:19 AM PDT by Frumious Bandersnatch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Greybird
Do you really believe that the museum's truly valuable artifacts were still in the museum when the coalition troops entered Baghdad?

They were long long gone by then.

9 posted on 04/29/2003 8:22:02 AM PDT by dead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Greybird
I would imagine that the Geneva Conventions prevent "pillag[ing]" by advancing or retreating military forces. I'd love to be shown otherwise. Until then, I would say that your comment is as far off-the-mark as your legal analysis.
11 posted on 04/29/2003 8:40:51 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Greybird
"...not Florida, but Paris. Quelle surprise!"

Yes, how philistine of him to speak bluntly. Swinish, even.
12 posted on 04/29/2003 8:45:07 AM PDT by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Greybird
>>>>>>>>Part of the frigging POINT of invading Iraq was so that matters of heritage -- whether economic, cultural, or personal -- would be preserved from the effects of being looted. (One of several reasons, shifting with the winds of responding to the media, but we won't get into that now.)<<<<<<<

Where was I when Bush and Powell described that as a reason for going into "frigging" Iraq? I don't remember Tony Blair mentioning that we were going to attack Iraq because we needed to save the antiquity!!!

Stop the frigging presses, you mean we weren't after weapons of mass destruction or to unseat a despicable dictator? Gosh, we need to make sure we tell the 3rd Infantry Division, the Marines, the 82nd and 101st Airborne and the air force that they were there for all the wrong reasons! I bet they never knew they were there to save the artifacts from Sumeria! (/sarcasm) Good Grief!

14 posted on 04/29/2003 8:58:08 AM PDT by irish guard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Greybird
Part of the frigging POINT of invading Iraq was so that matters of heritage -- whether economic, cultural, or personal -- would be preserved from the effects of being looted.

Could you point to where an administration official said we are going into Iraq to save their museum pieces?

17 posted on 04/29/2003 9:33:01 AM PDT by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Greybird
I see that others have already responded to your ersatz history and your equally fake rationale for the war.

I have been bemused by the recent descriptions of the “treasures” claimed to have previously resided in the museum in Baghdad. I have heard of the Louvre and the British Museum. I have heard of the antiquities preserved in Athens, Cairo and Rome. But until now, the treasures of Baghdad have somehow never made it into the headlines, and the Baghdad museum never made it into the Grand Tour of the treasures of antiquity.

But since the museum was looted – apparently by insiders – we are suddenly hearing about the tremendous treasures once found there. Well, forgive me for being skeptical, but I have also heard about the invincible Republican Guard, the implacable hostility of the Arab Street, the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis slaughtered in this war, the bombing of hospitals, and all the other extravagant claims made by those who opposed this war. So put me down as “undecided” about the “incredible treasures” that are “forever lost.”

And, by the way, “frigging” is rather juvenile.

18 posted on 04/29/2003 9:45:01 AM PDT by moneyrunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Greybird
Here's a token; the Clue bus is on the way.

Have you stopped for one minute to contemplate the value of FREEDOM? I estimate freedom to be more precious than any artifacts from antiquity. Their society has gone from an oppressive brutal regime to a potential of a much better life for all the inhabitants of Iraq. Would they be better off with their antiquities if they had to keep the prisons and torture chambers as well?

I looked at your home page. Obviously you consider the U.S. actions in Iraq to be a case of empire building. Try digging up some history along with those precious antiquities and you will get a better perspective on the current situation.
26 posted on 04/29/2003 12:57:42 PM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Greybird
"And if the repositories of irreplaceable -- unlike oil -- artifacts and historical records are cleaned out, what kind of physical heritage will the Iraqis be able to offer when they are re-integrated with the rest of peaceable civilization?"

Pity, Pity. Steyn is perfectly right and you are ridiculous. When you get over your hissy fit, you might find the time to realize that museum pieces are just material objects. They do not carry the meaning of a civilization. Only human minds and spirits do that. At the time of the looting, the US forces were protecting the lives and material property that were valuable for the future of our country and Iraq. There were value judgments made as to what is important. Not all things can be done at all times, especially in war, and especially in the closing days of a war. Only silly dilletants would try to argue that, having to make a choice, the US command made the wrong choice.

Your deep angst only betrays another agenda. Oh my, you did not like this war even before this particular event, did you. Beware of your perception of events that convince you of your original premise.

30 posted on 04/29/2003 6:37:25 PM PDT by ontos-on
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Greybird
I didn't know that part of the reason for invading Iraq was to keep the artifacts safe. I was under the impression that we invaded to remove a dictator and a risk to the security of the people of the world from his mad plans.
I feel silly now, I guess I had the wrong impression of the war on terrorism. It is to keep the 'things" of the world safe, not the people is it?
32 posted on 04/29/2003 7:04:29 PM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Greybird
The Germans looted Europe. I guess we're responsible for that too.

http://www.english.upenn.edu/~afilreis/Holocaust/stolen-art.html

The looters won't destroy their booty. They will just try too unload it. It will all come out in the wash.
35 posted on 04/29/2003 8:18:34 PM PDT by CaptainK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Greybird
I'm not sure the US expected the Iraqis to loot their own museums. Also, at the time of the museum lootings the US did not have full control of that section of the city, as I recall. Just don't think the situation is as clearcut and preventable as you seem to indicate.

It is a shame that it happened. I don't believe anyone in our government or military intended it to happen. If nothing else, they would know it would look very bad to the rest of the world. And I do believe that we will work with the Iraqis to recover their treasures.

38 posted on 04/29/2003 9:19:55 PM PDT by Calpublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Greybird
You are wrong on all counts!

Preserving museum artifacts wasn't even on the top 50 list of reasons to invade Iraq.

The US did not 'stand by' while the looting occurred. The troops weren't there vacationing.

Those artifacts aren't irreplacable. With a real economy and real ties with the civilized world, surely much more treasure will be dug up from the sand than under an impoverished, backwards psycho-state. Please consider all sides of the story.

You accuse Steyn of being the equivalent of a library burner....fortunately Steyn is doing more advancing civilization with his writings than you are dragging it down with yours.

39 posted on 04/29/2003 9:20:33 PM PDT by Monti Cello
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Greybird
He also doesn't read the text of the Geneva Conventions that he and Bush were oh, so furious about Al-Jazeera supposedly flouting, for those same treaties obligate us under international law to prevent "pillage," described as early as 1907 as a crime against humanity.

Pillage:
1. To rob of goods by force, especially in time of war; plunder.
2. To take as spoils.

The American military is not pillaging.

The Iraqi people (by definition) are incapable of pillaging.

We have no obligation under the geneva convention to prevent the Iraqi people from stealing their own items.
We are only required to make sure that our troops do not pillage.

They aren't.

You're wrong. Buh-Bye!

44 posted on 05/02/2003 4:03:52 PM PDT by Isle of sanity in CA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson