Worst thing yet to happen in Baghdad

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Okiedoke, Iraq, cradle of civilisation and all that. Throughout the war (and before the war started) I was hoping that no bombs would fall on Baghdad Museum, where they've got the clay tablets with the Epic of Gilgamesh on them written in ur-Sumerian. Some of it hasn't been translated yet. It's the oldest mythic text in the world and some of the oldest writing of all.



The Musuem got looted and the tablets are gone.



This is a very big shame. It's like losing an autograph manuscript by Shakespeare, or Plato, or the Dead Sea Scrolls. It's actually quite upsetting.



Is there any hope of getting these things back, do you reckon?
«13456789

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 172
    I know I say "worst thing yet", and hundreds of people have been killed, which is terrible, but actually I'm not sure... if it isn't at least as bad.
  • Reply 2 of 172
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    I'm hoping they have some luck in returning some of the "civilian" items to their owners.





    Even to this day paintings and other art is coming up for sale that the Nazis stole from Europe. So ... maybe someday it will all come back to the owners. Shoot, even the UK is returning some of the stuff the "looted" from Egypt.
  • Reply 3 of 172
    newnew Posts: 3,244member
    Also Bagdad hospitals have been robbed of all medicine and equipment. Washington post link



    The US occupation force is under the Geneva Convention clearly responsible for securing civilian lives and values, including cultural treasures. A task they are currently failing miserably at.
  • Reply 4 of 172
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by New

    Also Bagdad hospitals have been robbed of all medicine and equipment. Washington post link



    The US occupation force is under the Geneva Convention clearly responsible for securing civilian lives and values, including cultural treasures. A task they are currently failing miserably at.






    AFTER the war is over they are. The war is not over. Also they are not responsible for what happens in the government buildings or "palaces" ever. The Blame America (TM) crowd is always quick on the draw. Iraqis trash their own city and the US is to blame? Now we see Iraqis protecting their own city and somehow they are doing the job that the US should be doing? I don't have Iraqis protecting my city.
  • Reply 5 of 172
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    The war is not finished in Iraq, but is finished in Baghdad. The management of the post war will be more difficult than the war itself.



    US and UK decided to not react immedialty to all this pillages, in order to not be unpopular, something i can understand. In other way, Iraqi people are asking now to do something about it. I think it's important that the coalition will make someting about it before things go heated. Wether they like it or not, the coalition is now responsible of the safety of Iraq, until they leave it.
  • Reply 6 of 172
    newnew Posts: 3,244member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Scott

    AFTER the war is over they are. The war is not over. Also they are not responsible for what happens in the government buildings or "palaces" ever.



    No, not after the war. In the areas they are occupying.

    Quote:

    The Blame America (TM) crowd is always quick on the draw.



    Yeah the ICRC and Human Rights Watch...

    Quote:

    Iraqis trash their own city and the US is to blame? Now we see Iraqis protecting their own city and somehow they are doing the job that the US should be doing? I don't have Iraqis protecting my city.



    If I removed every policeman of the streets of your city, the rise in crime wouldn't be my fault?
  • Reply 7 of 172
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    Well first off, all of that stuff is far less important than one single human life. Absolutely ridiculous to think otherwise.



    To say it's as bad as hundreds of people being killed, just ludicrous. Beyond comprehension.



    As far as this Geneva Conventions tripe, I defy any of you to point out where the occupying force is responsible if anything like that is stolen during or immediately after a battle. It says not to attack them, not to police the area at once and make sure the stuff is protected from naughty men.



    Please point it out. click



    With all these internet international law experts clicking around like judge and jury it's a wonder we even bother with international groups to do it. Just ask New.
  • Reply 8 of 172
    rashumonrashumon Posts: 453member
    Yes Hassan!!!

    I totally agree, this is really sad - that museum had some of the most important archeological finds in the world - I can't believe the US forces neglected to secure it - I just hope they had a good reason - i.e they didn't have enough men to cover it or something rather then simply not caring about it. we must not forget that some of these items are just as valuable for Iraq's future as the oil it has in its ground - tourism can be a big earner for a place like Iraq with it's immense history...

    Lets hope that the thieves will be caught a.s.a.p
  • Reply 9 of 172
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah

    It's like losing an autograph manuscript by Shakespeare, or Plato, or the Dead Sea Scrolls.





    It's worse.



    The Epic of Gilgamesh is one of the foundations of the western tradition in literature.
  • Reply 10 of 172
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    According to the geneva convention the hospital need to be protected :



    Article 18



    Civilian hospitals organized to give care to the wounded and sick, the infirm and maternity cases, may in no circumstances be the object of attack, but shall at all times be respected and protected by the Parties to the conflict.





    For the museum and private gifts i don't know. Does the gilgamesh tablets worth a life ? i don't think so, but in a cultural point of vue, they are extremely important, as important as the Rosetta stone. But like Scott i think that there is great chance to see them reappear. It will be difficult to sell them : only a crazy guy could buy them.



    Now in a general point of vue, Geneva convention or not, the coalition should make the necessary in order to make respect the law. All the (dictatorship) system of governement of Iraq has been destroyed, someone need to re-organise it now. The credibility of the coalition, will be measured at the light they managed such duties.
  • Reply 11 of 172
    newnew Posts: 3,244member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by groverat

    Well first off, all of that stuff is far less important than one single human life. Absolutely ridiculous to think otherwise.



    Yeah, the history of civilization, artifacts worth billions of dollars, are less important than one life. Comming from you, that sounds so hollow...



    Like powerdoc says, the Geneva Convention states that an occupying force has to protect hospitals and medical facilities. And ensure their operation.



    From your link, "The Hauge Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict" of 1954, as you asked for:



    Article 5. Occupation



    1. Any High Contracting Party in occupation of the whole or part of the territory of another High Contracting Party shall as far as possible support the competent national authorities of the occupied country in safeguarding and preserving its cultural property.



    2. Should it prove necessary to take measures to preserve cultural property situated in occupied territory and damaged by military operations, and should the competent national authorities be unable to take such measures, the Occupying Power shall, as far as possible, and in close co-operation with such authorities, take the most necessary measures of preservation.



    (...)



    Article 18. Application of the convention



    1. Apart from the provisions which shall take effect in time of peace, the present Convention shall apply in the event of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one or more of them.



    2. The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance.



    3. If one of the Powers in conflict is not a Party to the present Convention, the Powers which are Parties thereto shall nevertheless remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention, in relation to the said Power, if the latter has declared that it accepts the provisions thereof and so long as it applies them.




    That the US forces didn't immediately move in to secure the museum is incredible, especially as the "coalition" has stated that looting was expected, and Basra set a clear presedence...
  • Reply 12 of 172
    newnew Posts: 3,244member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by groverat

    With all these internet international law experts clicking around like judge and jury it's a wonder we even bother with international groups to do it. Just ask New.



    So its wrong to voice an opinion? to me the most important aspect of this conflict is international law. I also mentioned at a point, that the use of "human shields" was against international law.
  • Reply 13 of 172
    rashumonrashumon Posts: 453member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Powerdoc

    The credibility of the coalition, will be measured at the light they managed such duties.



    Yes of course you are right... but we should give them some time... its only been 4 days since Baghdad fell, the Americans are damn impressive and capable but they're not omnipotent
  • Reply 14 of 172
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by rashumon

    Yes of course you are right... but we should give them some time... its only been 4 days since Baghdad fell, the Americans are damn impressive and capable but they're not omnipotent



    Yes 4 days is not much, and they need some time, but time is expansive, and it's urgent to make stop this actions at least in hospitals. I do not expect them, to raise the security of Baghdad at the level of the one in Manhattan, but i expect them they started to ensure the security of hospitals at first.
  • Reply 15 of 172
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    We're already organizing a new police force, Marines turning to security patrols and Iraqi police higher-ups offering their assitance.



    click

    click



    And not to nitpick, but it's only been 3 days since Baghdad fell.
  • Reply 16 of 172
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    New:



    Quote:

    That the US forces didn't immediately move in to secure the museum is incredible, especially as the "coalition" has stated that looting was expected, and Basra set a clear presedence...



    If you really think that securing a museum should've been one of the first objectives of the armed force moving into Baghdad I am very glad you are not a military commander of any kind.



    And thanks for posting those portions, they prove you wrong.



    Quote:

    So its wrong to voice an opinion? to me the most important aspect of this conflict is international law.



    I think you should read/understand the Geneva Conventions before accusing people of breaking them.



    From the portion you posted it's quite clear the US is acting 100% within the guidelines with regard to protection of cultural treasures.
  • Reply 17 of 172
    newnew Posts: 3,244member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by groverat

    If you really think that securing a museum should've been one of the first objectives of the armed force moving into Baghdad I am very glad you are not a military commander of any kind.



    Any less important than taking showers in Saddam's golden bathrooms?



    Quote:

    And thanks for posting those portions, they prove you wrong.



    so you think the US troops have protected the cultural institutions of bagdad as far as possible. I think maybe not.



    Quote:

    I think you should read/understand the Geneva Conventions before accusing people of breaking them.



    You have your interpretation, I have mine. What makes you the more qualified?



    Quote:

    From the portion you posted it's quite clear the US is acting 100% within the guidelines with regard to protection of cultural treasures.



    as far as possible...

    You don't have much faith in the abilities of the US forces do you?



    Edit: Reports say that Troops are not interfering with the looting. The Administration is making childish jokes about "re-distribution of wealth".

    At the same time public archives containing important evidence of Saddams breaches of international law are being burned...
  • Reply 18 of 172
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by New

    Any less important then showering in sadams golden bathrooms?



    Was that one of the first objectives?



    Quote:

    so you think the US troops have protected the cultural institutions of bagdad as far as possible. I think maybe not.



    I think they have a lot more responsibilites that overshadow that. And now, on the 3rd day, they are already moving to secure the city.



    Quote:

    You have your interpretation, I have mine. What makes you more qualified?



    Not me as an authority, but history as a guide. If you're going to say this is a war crime then you had better be prepared to make quite a large list of countries that occupied a city and didn't have it under complete control in less than 3 days.
  • Reply 19 of 172
    newnew Posts: 3,244member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by groverat

    Was that one of the first objectives?



    So it seemed.

    Quote:

    I think they have a lot more responsibilites that overshadow that. And now, on the 3rd day, they are already moving to secure the city.



    But alas, the damage is done...

    Quote:

    Not me as an authority, but history as a guide. If you're going to say this is a war crime then you had better be prepared to make quite a large list of countries that occupied a city and didn't have it under complete control in less than 3 days.



    What a laughable claim. The Convention discussed is 50 years old. I can't think of a similar case of bombing a government to pieces, and then not being able to move in and fill the vacume, in an international conflict of this magintude during the last 50 years.



    Yet the Convention describes how diplomatics should be used even during wartime to ensure the fulfillment of its principles.



    To me the US obviously failed. They chunked diplomacy of all sorts out the door many weeks ago.
  • Reply 20 of 172
    The lawlessness in Baghdad, Basrah, and elsewhere, the harm it incurs to people and the damage to vital installations and yes, cultural treasures, are indeed causes for concern.

    In my opinion, a conquering army should keep a modicum of law and order in areas it controls. We've seen it implemented in the past in several places, so it's hardly too much to ask. But then there might be many factors contributing to this sorry state of affairs:

    Perhaps the fear of embarrassing photos (a looter appreheded by soldiers armed to the teeth might look to many obeservers too much like the downtrodden Third-Worlder being oppressed by the imperialist invader) published worldwide, or perhaps the occupying armies actually lacking the experience and competence required for keeping the public order after conquest.



    So I now find myself in partial agreement with the resident disciple of the ?Hashishiyun.



    This reminds me of the fall of Kabul to the Mujahidin circa 1992, after which the archaeological treasures kept there were looted by two-bit warlords, and later sold and scattered to the four corners of the earth. With hindsight it actually turned out to be for less than the worse since they'd otherwise have all probably been destroyed by the Taliban a few years later.
Sign In or Register to comment.