- 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....
You must realize that the first priority is removing the threat. It is pretty hard to secure a city one building at a time when you can not tell the difference between friend or foe. except that bad guys shoot at you. Also having to worry about traps, etc.
once military threat is removed then we can secure national treasures. But I for one would be very dissapointed if men were lost in an attempt to guard such things unnessarily.
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....
yes hospitals must be protected and should not be attacked.
But when they wrote that law they meant for us not to attack our foes hospitals. Not that we had to stop the other side from attacking their own Hospitals!!!
looters bust in to the museum. searching for easy profit lumps of gold, etc.
last batch of looters through the crowd finds only clay tablets, but doesn't want to be left out of the collective five-finger discount spree, if only to have their own tales to tell of post-saddam-freebies.
so what's joe payback in baghdad planning to sell the tablets for... food?
are we assuming it wasn't Indiana Jones, scooping them for rich collector?
are we conversely assuming the looters were unaware of the value or impracticality of fencing this kind of "stones"?
given that some looters of medical warehouses were then delivering some of the stolen supplies to needy hospitals, it might also be possible that museum staff "rescued" these items and they'll resurface later... although this is an optimistic hope.
You people are ****ing idiots. Your blood boils with so much anti-Americanism that you blame the US for everything that happens in a war zone. Like the US has complete control at all times and produce the outcome you desire ipso facto.
But who stole all the stuff? IRAQIS DID! Blame the people who did the crime.
BTW that bit in the GC happens after hostilities end. They haven't ended.
yes hospitals must be protected and should not be attacked.
But when they wrote that law they meant for us not to attack our foes hospitals. Not that we had to stop the other side from attacking their own Hospitals!!!
The word preserved, refer to the fact that the occupying force should not attack it but they also use the word protected who means that they should protect it.
If it was the Saddam army or governement who will attack his own hospitals, yes the coalition wiil have nothing to do with it. But the people who attacked the hospitals where only civilians supposed to be free by the US, and thus not anymore ennemies (if they do not attack US army of course).
For the spirit of the law, i don't know if they have thinked about this case. It depends if it already happens before. My historical knowledge is not wide enough to answer to such a question.
it was a museum i had always hoped to visit one day. i've been to the egyptian museum in cairo (it's equivalent) and can't imagine IT disappearing in the span of one day. it would have been a great tourist attraction in a free iraq.
people who do live under the umbrella of freedom tend to forget about the rights of others in calamitous times, so it's not unreasonable that people who've never known it, would behave the same way.
it's a shame. on top of all the death and suffering, it's just a shame.
it's good to know all the usual ai'ers will suss out who's to bless and who's to blame with your usual grace and élan.
Comments
Originally posted by Immanuel Goldstein
the resident disciple of the Hashishiyun.
Originally posted by rashumon
Yes Hassan!!!
- 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....
You must realize that the first priority is removing the threat. It is pretty hard to secure a city one building at a time when you can not tell the difference between friend or foe. except that bad guys shoot at you. Also having to worry about traps, etc.
once military threat is removed then we can secure national treasures. But I for one would be very dissapointed if men were lost in an attempt to guard such things unnessarily.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
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....
yes hospitals must be protected and should not be attacked.
But when they wrote that law they meant for us not to attack our foes hospitals. Not that we had to stop the other side from attacking their own Hospitals!!!
looters bust in to the museum. searching for easy profit lumps of gold, etc.
last batch of looters through the crowd finds only clay tablets, but doesn't want to be left out of the collective five-finger discount spree, if only to have their own tales to tell of post-saddam-freebies.
so what's joe payback in baghdad planning to sell the tablets for... food?
are we assuming it wasn't Indiana Jones, scooping them for rich collector?
are we conversely assuming the looters were unaware of the value or impracticality of fencing this kind of "stones"?
given that some looters of medical warehouses were then delivering some of the stolen supplies to needy hospitals, it might also be possible that museum staff "rescued" these items and they'll resurface later... although this is an optimistic hope.
But who stole all the stuff? IRAQIS DID! Blame the people who did the crime.
BTW that bit in the GC happens after hostilities end. They haven't ended.
In my opinion, a conquering army should keep a modicum of law and order in areas it controls.
Like you said, ngry mobs of looters will see anybody in their way as oppressors. There's no positive way out for law enforcers here.
I can see it eBay now... "*LIKE NEW* Ancient Cuneiform Tablets NO RESERVE!!!"
I just have one thing to add.
[hears something] gah-wah-wah, gah-wah-wah, zzzzzhhh-ni-ni-ni-ni
Did anyone else just hear the "goal posts" get moved again by the anti-war coalition (as was predicted in another topic)?
Originally posted by JC
yes hospitals must be protected and should not be attacked.
But when they wrote that law they meant for us not to attack our foes hospitals. Not that we had to stop the other side from attacking their own Hospitals!!!
The word preserved, refer to the fact that the occupying force should not attack it but they also use the word protected who means that they should protect it.
If it was the Saddam army or governement who will attack his own hospitals, yes the coalition wiil have nothing to do with it. But the people who attacked the hospitals where only civilians supposed to be free by the US, and thus not anymore ennemies (if they do not attack US army of course).
For the spirit of the law, i don't know if they have thinked about this case. It depends if it already happens before. My historical knowledge is not wide enough to answer to such a question.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
yes, the word preserved, refer to the fact that the occupying force should not attack it but they also use the word protected...
Of course Iraqi hospitals should be protected. One never knows how large a cache of weapons you'll find in one of them.
Originally posted by zaphod_beeblebrox
Of course Iraqi hospitals should be protected. One never knows how large a cache of weapons you'll find in one of them.
Yea. Let's all ignore the fact that "hospital", "school" and "mosque" are iraqi for "military HQ", "weapons depot" and "fox hole".
people who do live under the umbrella of freedom tend to forget about the rights of others in calamitous times, so it's not unreasonable that people who've never known it, would behave the same way.
it's a shame. on top of all the death and suffering, it's just a shame.
it's good to know all the usual ai'ers will suss out who's to bless and who's to blame with your usual grace and élan.
you should all be so proud.
Can anyone name me a single country at war that fights in compliance of the principles of the Geneva Convention?
There isn't one, and there probably never will be.
BTW...Has any hockey team played a game and obeyed the rules throughout?
Originally posted by sammi jo
Hang on a second people....
Can anyone name me a single country at war that fights in compliance of the principles of the Geneva Convention?
There isn't one, and there probably never will be.
BTW...Has any hockey team played a game and obeyed the rules throughout?
Did you just post something perfectly reasonable?
holy shit...
Originally posted by groverat
Did you just post something perfectly reasonable?
[Ash]
It's a trick; get an ax.
[/Ash]
Originally posted by groverat
Did you just post something perfectly reasonable?
holy shit...
Originally posted by Randycat99
Mail-order haircuts are a bitch!
You get a gold star, SJO!