Iraqi National Museum Plundered

  • News
  • Thread starter Entropia
  • Start date
In summary: I'm not sure what to make of it all.Originally posted by N_QuireIn summary, the Americans were supposed to protect the museum, but they failed. The anarchy is the biggest failure in our war plan, and the looting will only continue if the military does not step in and bring order. The British are doing a better job than the Americans in Basra, and the problem is not just with the Americans, but with the whole command structure.
  • #1
1,474
1
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=540&e=8&u=/ap/20030412/ap_on_re_mi_ea/war_plundered_treasures_7 [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Yeah, I just saw the same story at BBC News.

"The Americans were supposed to protect the museum. If they had just one tank and two soldiers nothing like this would have happened."

It's too bad... all that history will be lost to the rest of the world because of a few greedy individuals.

eNtRopY
 
  • #3
Well, sh*t happens in a war.
Mind you, stuff like the museums etc should have been evacuated beforehand. I worry more about the attacks on hospitals at the moment.
 
  • #4
The anarchy is the biggest failure in our war plan IMO - they should have sent 10,000 mp's into Baghdad 2 days after it was taken.
 
  • #5
If people want to destroy their own history in the euphoria following the downfall of a dictator, let them. It's not the marines job to guard museums. No one put a gun to any Iraqi's head and said "Plunder the museum and smash some pottery".
 
  • #6
But the fear is that the "euphoria" at the end of an dictatorship is becoming something else, an addiction to anarchy and a cynical tendency to derive profit out of chaos. Suppose tommorrow the government of the US falls apart. People would still be taking advantage of the confusion, whether they are in euphoria or not. The problem is that by encouraging the looting in the beginning, the US and UK armies have accentuated the problem when now they try to bring stability.
 
  • #7
FZ, I agree and I would even go so far as to say that the British in Basra are doing a far better job than the Americans in Baghdad and elsewhere. I don't know whether this is because of the British military's experience from Northern Ireland or whether the British are more restrained and a bit more cerebral than the US Marines, etc. (In other words, the British are more sophisticated colonizers.)

The Americans do seem much more gung-ho and insensitive than the British: draping the American flag over Saddam's head was a daft thing to do, even if the soldier was temporarily elated and in high spirits.
 
  • #8
It's not the marines job to guard museums.
It ought to be. They're the invading/occupying army. Who else is going to guard the museums -- the police? The Marines killed all the police!

Also, it's not just Iraqi history; it's world history. I remember where I first heard of the Tigris and the Euphrates...
 
  • #9
Damgo, that's what marines are trained to do: kill people. You can't expect frontline combat troops suddenly to become a police force. As we're seeing, the Marines are pretty trigger happy. If it doesn't stop, they shoot it.

Policing is an entirely different skill from that required of commando soldiers. Bring in the military police or regular police. Perhaps this should have been part of the plan from the outset.
 
  • #10
I know; I don't fault them for killing people. I do expect them to become a police force -- not necessarily a good one, but a police force. It's not really that hard: the military did a pretty good job of securing the oil wells and the Ministry of Oil building in Baghdad. They could have done the same thing they did there --send a squad or platoon to hold people off and shoot them if they ignored this.

Of course I don't blame the individual Marines/GI's on the ground... I blame their officer corps, and ultimately the higher leadership for not putting in a small effort to protect these sites.
 
  • #11
Originally posted by N_Quire
If people want to destroy their own history in the euphoria following the downfall of a dictator, let them. It's not the marines job to guard museums. No one put a gun to any Iraqi's head and said "Plunder the museum and smash some pottery".
My comment RE 10,000 M.P.'s was aimed more generally at the anarcy in the entire city.
 
  • #12
Originally posted by N_Quire
If people want to destroy their own history in the euphoria following the downfall of a dictator, let them. It's not the marines job to guard museums. No one put a gun to any Iraqi's head and said "Plunder the museum and smash some pottery".


I don't think its all about "the euphoria following the downfall of a dictator" as much as it is a response to their own poverty.
 
  • #13
They didn't just loot their own archaeological artifacts, but basically robbed and destroyed the heirlooms of world heritage.

How ironic that among the booty was Hammaurabbi's code, millenia old code of laws.

40,000 years of the history of civilization. What shame that our country was in charge of the city during this.
 
  • #14
Originally posted by N_Quire
If people want to destroy their own history in the euphoria following the downfall of a dictator, let them.

Is it really the people who are destroying their own history? I believe it only takes a greedy few souls to loot and destroy thousands of years worth of history. Besides, it's not just a loss for the Iraqi people. It's a loss for all of humanity. Those lost artifacts represent knowledge that has been lost to humanity forever.

We, as humans, should strive to protect this legacy for the simple sake of preserving knowledge for those who wish to learn.

eNtRopY
 
  • #15
Originally posted by russ_watters
The anarchy is the biggest failure in our war plan IMO - they should have sent 10,000 mp's into Baghdad 2 days after it was taken.

See, us war protesters were right! There did need to be more planning! There needed to be international planning of a post-war plan, like many of us were saying...of course, we were shouted down as appeasers every time.
 
  • #16
WRONG!

You war protestors were always against any kind of war and you were, and probably, will always be appeasers because that is your nature.

We predicted that you would jump on the imperfections of the conflict. But seriously, is that all you've got? A little post war anarchy for a country that's been bottled up and oppressed for 25+ years.

Do you really think anything less than 24,000,000 MPs could have quelled all of the 'anarchy'? Don't be foolish.
 
  • #17
Originally posted by Alias
WRONG!

You war protestors were always against any kind of war and you were, and probably, will always be appeasers because that is your nature.

We predicted that you would jump on the imperfections of the conflict. But seriously, is that all you've got? A little post war anarchy for a country that's been bottled up and oppressed for 25+ years.

Do you really think anything less than 24,000,000 MPs could have quelled all of the 'anarchy'? Don't be foolish.

See, instead of reality, you resort to spin. You refuse to see what anyone says, and simply fill in whatever fascist right-wing propaganda allows you to not have to think to hard. I guess that the awards on my wall from my military service are proof of my appeasing nature, huh?
 
  • #18
Originally posted by Zero
See, us war protesters were right! There did need to be more planning! There needed to be international planning of a post-war plan, like many of us were saying...of course, we were shouted down as appeasers every time.
Oh please. Right about more planning? Rule # 1 of warfare: no well constructed plan survives contact with the enemy. That has been stated over and over (before the war even started. And since you didn't want the war fought in the first place, you CANNOT claim to have had any prior recommendation as to how it should be fought, much less what should happen in the aftermath. Its only AFTER the war started that the hippies started to discuss what should come after.
 
  • #19
Originally posted by russ_watters
Oh please. Right about more planning? Rule # 1 of warfare: no well constructed plan survives contact with the enemy. That has been stated over and over (before the war even started. And since you didn't want the war fought in the first place, you CANNOT claim to have had any prior recommendation as to how it should be fought, much less what should happen in the aftermath. Its only AFTER the war started that the hippies started to discuss what should come after.

Look, continue to lie to yourself if it turns you on...I stated over and over again that I disagreed with the war AS IT WAS PLANNED...and you kept ignoring it. Your blinders are on tight, huh?
 
  • #20
Originally posted by Zero
Look, continue to lie to yourself if it turns you on...I stated over and over again that I disagreed with the war AS IT WAS PLANNED...and you kept ignoring it. Your blinders are on tight, huh?
If you provide a link to a statement of yours, I'll retract that. And just to clarify, are you saying you AGREED that we should fight the war or that you disagreed with BOTH going to war and the way we fought?
 
Last edited:
  • #21
We secured billion dollar oil fields and lost priceless artifacts
 
  • #22
OK, guys, can we chill with the insults and name calling? Accusations like "you're a fool / deluding yourself / a dirty hippie appeaser / a fascist right-wing pig" don't accomplish anything except to piss each other off and help to make intelligent discussion impossible.

Can't we all just along? :smile:

Also, I think it's important to work to avoid the tempation of simplistic "us vs. them" thinking. There are many different positions, arguments, reasons, and issues related to the war in Iraq, not just two 'sides'. Let's not lump everyone who disagrees with us on one question into a stereotypical straw-man "anti-war position" or "pro-war position", or automatically assume we know their reasons for thinking something before they've told us.

And remember that old saw about honey catching more flies than vinegar...
 
  • #23
Originally posted by schwarzchildradius
We secured billion dollar oil fields and lost priceless artifacts
Oh quit your crying! We're spending more of my hard earned tax dollars, as we speak, trying to recover all of your precious clay pots. Like you've ever seen them.
 
  • #24
How ironic that among the booty was Hammaurabbi's code, millenia old code of laws.

I didn't know that was among the items plundered. Whew; a new height in irony. :frown:
 
Last edited:
  • #25
Originally posted by russ_watters
If you provide a link to a statement of yours, I'll retract that. And just to clarify, are you saying you AGREED that we should fight the war or that you disagreed with BOTH going to war and the way we fought?

I disagreed with this war, in this instance. I don't disagree with war in general, or else I wouldn't have enlisted in the first place, see? I was FOR the removal of Saddam Hussien, and stated numerous times that his removal was a positive thing.
 
  • #26
'Oh quit your crying! We're spending more of my hard earned tax dollars, as we speak, trying to recover all of your precious clay pots. Like you've ever seen them.'

They are yours too, and they are worth way more than those worthless oil fields.
 
  • #27
Originally posted by damgo
OK, guys, can we chill with the insults and name calling? Accusations like "you're a fool / deluding yourself / a dirty hippie appeaser / a fascist right-wing pig" don't accomplish anything except to piss each other off and help to make intelligent discussion impossible.
For the record, damgo, you won't find any of those phrases or words in my posts. I made one non-specific comment about "the hippies"
 
  • #28
no kidding, that was a good chunk of the history of humanity and we just let thieving art dealers scam a bunch of poor Iraqi's into ripping it all off for pennies so that they could sell it of to others for fortunes to invest in even more repressible behavior. i bet all those people that died in the crossfire of us supposably "makeing the world a better place" are rolling over in the graves right now.
 

What is the Iraqi National Museum?

The Iraqi National Museum is the largest museum in Iraq, located in the capital city of Baghdad. It contains artifacts and relics from ancient Mesopotamia, as well as other civilizations that have influenced the region.

What happened to the Iraqi National Museum?

In 2003, during the invasion of Iraq by the United States, the Iraqi National Museum was looted and many of its artifacts were stolen or destroyed. The looting lasted for several days and resulted in the loss of thousands of artifacts.

Who was responsible for the plundering of the Iraqi National Museum?

The looting of the Iraqi National Museum was primarily carried out by Iraqi civilians and looters, taking advantage of the chaos and lack of security during the invasion. It has also been reported that some looters were organized gangs with connections to the black market.

Were any artifacts from the Iraqi National Museum recovered?

Yes, many artifacts have been recovered since the looting. Some were found in the possession of looters, while others were returned by concerned citizens or discovered during raids. However, many artifacts are still missing and have likely been sold on the black market.

What steps have been taken to protect the Iraqi National Museum and its artifacts?

Since the looting in 2003, the Iraqi government has taken steps to improve security at the Iraqi National Museum and other cultural heritage sites. This includes implementing stricter security measures and working with international organizations to recover stolen artifacts. However, ongoing conflicts and political instability in the region continue to pose a threat to the preservation of Iraq's cultural heritage.

Suggested for: Iraqi National Museum Plundered

Replies
0
Views
257
Replies
1
Views
555
Replies
8
Views
134
Replies
2
Views
968
Replies
29
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
916
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Back
Top