There's something I'd like to add to Andrea's excellent summation of the looting of the Baghdad museum. To summarize her message: at best, a few dozen items went missing from that museum. Not tens of thousands. A few dozen. Some of which have already been recovered. The thousands of years of Iraqi and Mesopotamian cultural heritage are only very moderately worse for the wear. It was not "destroyed," as some of the hysterics have been saying.
Here are a couple of extra points:
We know that Rumsfeld and the commanders met to discuss this before the shooting started. We know that protecting the museum was determined to be a high priority. We know they made it to Baghdad at breakneck speed. We also know that even though our boys got there like whirlwinds, the Baghdad museum was already held by hostiles, who fired on any coalition forces trying to approach the building. Being under strict orders to protect the museum, they did the right thing and refused to return fire. They simply took cover and watched the place instead.
We also have every reason to believe that the looting (if you can call a few dozen items from a collection of over 170,000 "looting") was an inside job that occurred before our troops were even halfway to Baghdad.
So. Will there be a retraction from those who burst into tears, claimed it was all America's fault, and that our fine people in the field were unable to do their duty as assigned? I'd really like to see that.
Instead, I suspect that ten years from now, I'll still be having conversations where I wearily explain that no, America did not allow it, that we made every effort to stop it, that we had the resources to take care of it but it was not humanly possible to get there soon enough. Then I'll have to put up with those who roll their eyes and tell me I'm naive and/or a "Bush apologist." But what can you do?
Foolish humans!
<sarcasm>Punch them in the throat!</sarcasm>
This is another fine example of how desperate the "Bush haters" are to find something...anything, to criticize in order to temper the national enthusiasm for him and by extension, "his war". They have siezed on every little negative morsel that they can find in order to try to discredit the administration and the military for the way they have conducted themselves in this war. Yet, at every turn they are shown to be hysterical morons, as their complaints are either answered, or shown to be fabricated or overblown. You have to give them credit for their perseverence though. No matter how many times they are shown to be fools, they keep coming back for more, and are simply able to ignore their previous mistakes about the war, Bush, the military, etc.
I'm pleased to hear that the damage is much less than "feared" (i.e. hysterically fabricated). Those awful comments on Making Light about this represented the most comprehensive example of self-righteousness I have ever come across -- ever. How's this for hypocricy: The same blog a few days ago included this -
I want to put up ads all over America showing Rumsfeld’s and Bush’s grinning faces. Underneath them, it would say:
“Hi! I’m Donald Rumsfeld!”
“And I’m George Bush!”
“We hold you in complete contempt! We think you’ll believe anything!“
From the self-appointed guardian of the Baghdad Museum this is rich - but who does it insult more, President Bush and Mr Rumsfeld, or the people of the USA?
Er... The "wild Iraqi savages smashing every pot under watchful yet indifferent American eyes" meme never seemed quite right. Now we have reports of a coupla dozen thingies gone missing, that's all.
What of the credible accusations of insiders cleaning out some basement vaults? What of the pictures of smashed display cases littering exhibit halls? What about all the other looting from other public buildings?
Prediction: the damage and looting will turn out to be very serious, though not as bad as originally reported. Some employees will turn out to have been skunks; others will have temporarily misplaced artifacts to obscure warehouses for safekeeping.
http://www.msnbc.com/news/902102.asp
http://www.azdailysun.com/non_sec/nav_includes/story.cfm?storyID=63734
http://www.metimes.com/2K3/issue2003-16/cultent/looters_destroy_treasures.htm
http://de.news.yahoo.com/030413/12/3e9mt.html
http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,6281650%255E25777,00.html
http://www.bouldernews.com/bdc/editorials/article/0,1713,BDC_2489_1916148,00.html
(I counted that kid carrying 8 books by himself)
http://photo.worldnews.com/PhotoArchive//uploaded/uploaded-25222_large.jpg
(Hell, they're walking over more than a "few dozen" in this one pic)
http://cgi.wn.com/?t=worldphotos/viewphoto.txt&action=display&article=20361553
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/story/79370p-72991c.html
Try not to be quite so gullible, people.
Barney, have you ever considered taking your own advice?
Barney lacks the common sense and good manners of a 6 year old. He would be welcome here for his viewpoints if he were not such a jerk.
I've asked him once, politely, to either stop this or go away. Now I'm afraid I'll have to be more blunt on the matter.
I generally don't get this specific, but Barney is an idiot.
I checked out those links. I suppose Mr. Gumble thinks multiple examples of "journalists"
spouting the same urban myth counts as proof.
If you examine the photos, you'll see that there isn't much in the way of evidence. You'll see some stuff knocked around, a storeroom in disarray, a very close-in shot of the head of a sculpture (so you can't see the rest of the room), and what looks to be a secretarie's office that got trashed. That last photo prompted his crack "(Hell, they're walking over more than a "few dozen" in this one pic)" If you look closely all you'll see are papers all over the floor. I wasn't aware that paperwork was a priceless historical artifact. :)
But that's ok, Barnster, if that's what gets your rocks off. Don't worry, the black helicopters will be coming for you very soon... Heh.
Man, I gotta get me one of them black helicopters. Maybe I could join the Trilateral Whatchamacallits...
i'm worried that the number of items is what attracts your attentions. it often seems though, that, were just the Mona Lisa, or just David, taken or beheaded, rather inconsistantly you all might find irreconciable contempt against the attending curator or whomever sub-public interest deems responsible. i think your sarcasm is appalling. What about the burnt papyri of the library, the shatterred site facades across Iraq, or those many items lacking adequate provenance or transfer records from other museums, which had been transfered to Baghdad? Is your objective here to sound authoritatively anti-media, or to find a legitimate perspective?