Post-war Iraq

How come we managed to secure the oil fields and not the museums, hospitals, and government offices?

Does anyone else think there are people at the CIA cringing when they see Iraqis carrying off computer equipment from the regime's remaining offices?

I hate to bring bad news, but historical artifacts ... treasures ... the world's seventh largest museum ... it makes me gasp! I can politically protest this and that about the war, but suddenly I would gladly give my LIFE to save THESE items!

A civilization, a people, history, our history, cultural genocide, ... for oil? For oil?? Because we didn't feel like being diplomatic? Because we got tired of trying? Sorry if I'm incoherent... sorry, I... sorry...


------------ News Bites ------------

"The world's first written words may have been lost forever. After surviving for more than 5,000 years, distinctive clay tablets that are recognised as the root of all mankind's written communication have either been destroyed or stolen in yesterday's looting of the Iraqi national museum."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,935838,00.html , also
http://www.boston.com/dailynews/102/world/Some_of_Iraq_National_Museum_s:.shtml


"Sensing its treasures could be in peril, museum curators secretly removed antiquities from their display cases before the war and placed them in storage vaults - but to no avail. The doors of the vaults were opened or smashed, and everything was taken, museum workers said."
...
"The looters are "people trying to feed themselves," said Paley, who has spent years tracking Assyrian reliefs previously looted from Nimrud in Northern Iraq. "When they find there's no market, they'll throw them away. If there is a market, they'll go into the market."
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/04/13/1050172464695.html


Surveying the smashed display cases at the museum last night, Nabhal Amin, the deputy director, struggled to hold back the tears. "They have looted or destroyed 170,000 items of antiquity dating back thousands of years," she said. "They were worth billions of dollars." ... Ms Amin said: "The Americans were supposed to protect the museum. If they had just one tank and two soldiers nothing like this would have happened. I hold the American troops responsible." She added: "They know that this is a museum. They protect oil ministries but not the cultural heritage."
http://www.dailytelegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/04/13/wirq13.xml


"Some Iraqis, however, question the allocation of U.S. forces around the capital. They note a whole company of Marines, along with at least a half-dozen amphibious assault vehicles, has been assigned to guard the Oil Ministry, while many other ministries -- including trade, information, planning, health and education -- remain unprotected. "Why just the oil ministry?" Jaf asked. "Is it because they just want our oil?"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15136-2003Apr12.html
(Describes lots of looting everywhere).


"Why should you care? Because the dusty battleground you see on television is also a priceless cradle of human history."
http://www.freep.com/news/nw/iraq/land8_20030408.htm
(A couple dozen national features are listed).

RummyCo

CodeBorg, I have the very same sentiment as you; those treasures are priceless human history artifacts. It saddens me a great deal, because I enjoy ancient artifacts, and I have visited the British Museum, Amman, and Egypt to see those still available for us to see. It does something to us to view those old man-made artifacts; it connects us with our ancestors. Those treasures do not belong to any one person; they belong to all humans. That anyone would trash and destroy those shows how ignorant people are. It's really a crying shame. Even in Afghanistan, the Taliban destroyed the ancient Buddhist sculptures carved into mountains. They are gone forever. I am speechless. c.i.

One of my open units at university (equiv of a 'minor' subject) is archaeology. We're doing a LOT on mesopotamia as it's a profoundly important part of human progression and histpry of civilisation. Mesopotamia is the Mecca of archaeologists. Trouble is, Mesopotamia is known in the modern world as Iraq.

Basically it seems to be that the invasion force really hadn't thoroughly prepard for the aftermath of this war. Sure they won, but then the US alone has a hundred times more troops and military budget.

In my opinion, the Iraq people probably woke up and cursed the oil every day for decades as it's brought them nothing but bombing and killing. I wonder if the US would provide policing in exchange for a few barrels...

Iraq's National Library -- History in flames
Above, I posted about the Iraqi National Museum being looted.
Days later, still no U.S. guards, and now it's Iraq's National Library and the Religious Affairs Ministry.

How many objects can we recover after they are burned?
Do you really want our beautiful country to have the same reputation as Genghis Khan?
Good lord!


------ News Bites ------

The three-story, tan brick National Library building, dating to 1977, housed all books published in Iraq, including copies of all doctoral theses. It preserved rare old books on Baghdad and the region, historically important books on Arabic linguistics, and antique manuscripts in Arabic that teacher Aziz said were gradually being transformed into printed versions.

"They had manuscripts from the Ottoman and Abbasid periods," Aziz said, referring to dynasties dating back a millennium. "All of them were precious, famous. I feel such grief."
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20030415_1974.html


Then the library of Korans at the Ministry of Religious Endowment [containing the oldest and rarest editions of the Koran] was set ablaze.
...
For almost a thousand years, Baghdad was the cultural capital of the Arab world, the most literate population in the Middle East. Genghis Khan's grandson burnt the city in the 13th century and, so it was said, the Tigris river ran black with the ink of books. On Monday, the black ashes of thousands of ancient documents filled the skies of Iraq. Why?
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_16-4-2003_pg4_20


Amid the ashes of hundreds of years of Iraqi history, I found just one file blowing in the wind outside: pages and pages of handwritten letters between the court of Sheriff Hussein of Mecca - who started the Arab revolt against the Turks for Lawrence of Arabia - and the Ottoman rulers of Baghdad.

When I caught sight of the library burning - there were flames 30 metres high bursting from the windows - I raced to the offices of the US Marines civil affairs bureau for help. An officer shouted to a colleague that "this guy says some Biblical (sic) library is on fire".

I gave the map location, the precise name - in Arabic and English - of the buildings and said it would take only five minutes to drive there.
http://www.iol.co.za


Nearby, the library of the Religious Affairs Ministry, home to invaluable religious texts, also was looted and gutted by fire.
...
UNESCO's Matsuura urged American and British forces to take immediate measures to guard Iraq's archaeological sites and cultural institutions.
He also called on several groups - countries bordering Iraq, customs officials, police and art dealers - to do all they could to block the trading of stolen antiquities.
http://www.boston.com



Despite pleas from residents terrified by lootings and robberies, American forces in Baghdad have held back from exercising police duties out of concern such a move would send the wrong message.
icnorthernireland.icnetwork.co.uk


Rumsfeld announced that "where [US troops] see looting, they're stopping it." Reuters reported from the scene and quoted a marine as saying "Hell, it ain't my job to stop them. Goddam Iraqis will steal anything if you let them." Rumsfeld is a liar.

Then Rumsfeld whined that "I picked up a newspaper today and I couldn't believe it. I read eight headlines. And it [sic] talked about chaos, violence, unrest.... I've never seen anything like it."
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_16-4-2003_pg3_2


Before the 1990-91 gulf war, the Iraq Museum was one of the largest museums in the world. Built as a state-of-the-art facility in 1967 and added to during the 1970s, it is comparable in size to the Louvre in Paris.

"During the 1990-91 war, the staff took many of the most important pieces to the regional museum in Dohuk ... But after the war, the Dohuk museum was occupied by soldiers and many objects were damaged," he said. "Also, the museum was looted in the aftermath of the war."

Lots of history at ... www.sunspot.net




[I'm shortening links, so this webpage won't overextend sideways --CodeBorg]

An expert antiquarian-- American -- said the other day that this is the worst loss since the Alexandria fire. One can't help but think that the unwillingness to prevent this tragedy is entirely deliberate. Now it's a matter of finding out why.

Those were some really great links, and powerful to read.
A little out of character of me to say something in Rumsfield's defence, but I think one part of the article at http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_16-4-2003_pg3_2 is wrong. It says:
"...shoot looters if the law of the country permits looter shooting. But Rumsfeld and his cringing subordinates could not take such a bad PR decision."
If the alleged motive of the war is for regime change, then resuming the laws from the old regime is counter-intuative.

It does however raise ethical issues - would you impose your own law (arrest looters), the old Iraq law (shoot them), or stand around scratching your arse?

I really don't understand why this happened. Even during WWII, the allies were told not to bomb Kyoto, because it held so much of Japan's history and culture. Being the superpower of the world entails other responsibilities. If they can't handle it, they shouldn't attempt it. That's criminal to all humans. c.i.

Here here.
I cannot understand how the nukes of WW2 failed to be recorded as one of the world's greatest attrocities and war crimes. Those bombs were targetted directly AT civilians and killed and mamed Millions. I don't think anyone can begin to comprehend the scale of that kind of massacre. It's hideous that man could have done that.

A few weeks ago i was listening to a couple of friends talking politics (both female, and both American, but both with extremely conflicting outlooks). At one point Christina said something I've not been able to forget since:
".....well noone has actually used a weapon of mass destruction against other human beings yet." pause "...well, not really".

Still shudder when I think about that.

Note that during martial law, as when the National Guard is called to stop rioting in a state of emergency, it is legal to shoot looters on sight. And as our government is so fond of claiming "This is War. You have to expect unfortunate things will happen".

The Op-Ed piece by Brian Cloughley is full of vitriol and not much new information, so I hesitated to include it. But I thought it was a good example of where our reputation (and more and more press) is going.

It is a very difficult situation for Rumsfeld, and if I had his job I would certainly go insane. But protecting these incredible museums and libraries would have been SO easy! It would be so little strain to place just a handful of troops at the doorsteps. Even half as many troops as were involved in pulling down the statue of Saddam Hussein, could have saved an incredible, priceless museum.

Is photographing one statue of Saddam worth more than saving the National Museum?

Empirically, based on our actions, yes. Why were a few guards not deployed, even after "surprise looting" has been reported? Are we letting the oldest copies of the Koran burn, TRYING to foment anger among the countries that follow the Koran? Are we TRYING to get them to attack us?

(Then we can innocently defend ourselves by invading them).
I don't know what's going on behind the scenes. I don't understand. But it's definitely Not Good.

I agree. A stint into philosphy has left the perminent question in my head: "What is right and wrong?". Whenever I hear a topic shift into morality or ethics or law even, I always stop and ask myself that.

Also, the ease of setting up troops and preventing so much looter-caused destruction - I can't agree more. It's such a foolish thing not to have installed those men, that it's hard to believe it was done without some hidden agenda. But I fail to believe the war-councel is anti-Islam, or wants to provoke future attacks. But to be honest, i'm dumfounded. What the heck are they doing?

What is more confusing is the fact that when Pvt Lynch was being rescued, the US used all it's prowess to get her out safely. Not to denegrate this one life, but if our military can expend all that manpower to save one soldier, I'm sure it's not asking too much to save the world's antiqities, some of which are over 5000 years old, should be preserved for human history. They could have done both. It's not a matter of saving one over the other. God, it makes me so mad. c.i.

Who's Next?
DafDaf -- "Right" or "wrong" in government simply amounts to whatever you can get away with.

c.i. and Tartarin -- WW2 was not about expanding influence in the world, but preserving the U.S. from threats. Letting other cultures fall apart and rot does not contribute to defense, but it DOES to offense. The U.S. is on a mission now!


Post-War Iraq:
IMO, invading Iraq had little to do with oil, WMD, overthrowing a regime, saving a pretty female soldier, or liberating Iraq from torture/murder/gossip du jour. We don't care about what's actually in Iraq. We invaded because we could. In government as in business, people do whatever the world lets them, whatever they can get away with. So here we are.

Post-War Iraq is about consolidating power, and then looking at "You're Next"! It was just a stepping stone.

Any idea when the next shoe may drop? What do you suppose the gov't will do to drum up support for the next invasion? Do you think the terrorism excuse has been milked to death by now?

My prediction: Whatever they do, they must do it fast, before people can think and organize against it.



----- News ------

State Department sources tell The Observer Israel is integral to plans to attack Syria. They say a guarantee to remove Hizbollah and its sponsorship is a secret ingredient to the Middle East 'road map', agreed between Washington and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

'But there is one problem,' says Akins. 'Whatever makes them think free elections in Syria or Saudi Arabia will produce pro-Western governments wanting peace with Israel? They would produce anti-Western governments committed to the destruction of Israel.'

Fareed Zakaria, former editor of Foreign Affairs, believes the administration is 'wrong, if it believes a successful war will make the world snap out of a deep and widening distrust and resentment of American policy. What worries people around the world above all else is a world shaped and dominated by one country - the United States'.
http://www.observer.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12239,935808,00.html

OK, of course, if it was possible, the government elected by Iraqis themselves would be the best solution. But this is hardly possible, taking into consideration the strategic aims and priorities of the USA in the area (let us not reduce everything to oil, please, the problem encompasses much more than mere access to the natural resources of Iraq).
Granted, 60 percent of the Iraqi population are Shiites, and the latter were oppressed by the Saddam's regime and regarded Iran as their natural ally, probability of establishment of the fundamentalist pro-Iranian regime by means of free elections seems too much probable for being overlooked. And we have to admit that establishment of such a regime is not exactly the aim that justified toppling of Saddam (in some aspects, the latter leader would seem even preferrable to ayatollahs guided from Tehran and supporting terroristic jihad against the First World).
Therefore, the transitional period is needed, while Iraq is to be ruled by the temporary administration directly appointed by the U.S. government. The latter should include both American officials and pro-Western Iraqi politicians. Transition to representative democracy should be gradual and slow, no timelines should be defined in advance; proceeding from one stage to another should be dependent on the situation and not to abstract obligations having no connection to reality. Such a process may take years, but its implementation will serve the vital interest of the Allies in the area. Of course, interests of other coalition members, like UK and Australia, should be seriously taken into consideration while building up the temporary administration and defining its political priorities.

I see no reasons to worry: such a world will be more fair, predictable, expedient, reasonable, sensible and just than the existing one. Finally, everyone will only gain if the world is really dominated by the USA.

Even the communists said that once upon a time about themselves

Well, Communists erred, not too many people wanted to live even inside their countries (more than a billion actually lived, but they had no choice); at the same time, the USA is the desired destination of millions of people in the world that want to leave the Third World for pursuing better destiny. Therefore, the world tailored according to the American design may be a very attractive place to live in.

Well, Communists erred, not too many people wanted to live even inside their countries (more than a billion actually lived, but they had no choice); at the same time, the USA is the desired destination of millions of people in the world that want to leave the Third World for pursuing better destiny. Therefore, the world tailored according to the American design may be a very attractive place to live in.