RE: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
At 01:52 PM 6/11/2003 -0400 Jon Gabriel wrote: When we removed the regime in power we were in charge of law enforcement until a native police force could be reestablished. It is obvious that the museums were inadequately secured and they were our responsibility. No, this is not obvious at all. I currently have seen no evidence that the Iraqi Museum was looted - especially in light of recent relvations that most of the antiquities from the Iraqi National Museum were stored in secure locations, such as a Top Secret vault below the Iraqi National Bank. Indeed, given the above fact, it seems far more likely that those 33 missing major pieces were lost completely outside of the invasion. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
At 01:31 PM 6/11/2003 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You mean, you HOPE we will find them. I don't care either way. I'm sorry, Tom, but I think that you are lying. You did not write your two messages in this thread in a way that gives that impression that you, quote, don't care either way. In fact, I think that you care very much whether or not Iraqi WMD's are found in Iraq, since this gives you another avenue with which to criticize George W. Bush. Never mind the fact that before the war, no credible person disputed that Iraq had not fully accounted for its WMD's and that it had not complied with the relevant UN Resolutions. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
Gautam Mukunda wrote: OK, so I guess we can make the people of Iraq a deal - we can find their lost stuff, plus, just as an extra special bonus, we'll bury their children alive in mass graves. Do you think they'd take that deal? Because by God you talk like you think they would. Jeeze, Gautam, you're logic (or lack thereof) completely escapes me here. Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 09:49:16PM -0700, Gautam Mukunda wrote: On what curve exactly are you grading, Erik? I don't grade on a curve, but I guess that explains your comments, you are curving 71 up to 100. I mean, come on! -- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 11:55:36PM +1000, Ray Ludenia wrote: Yes, I know. Who am I to make these value judgements?? One of the traitor commie bastards that infests this list? :-) -- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
Erik Reuter wrote: On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 11:55:36PM +1000, Ray Ludenia wrote: Yes, I know. Who am I to make these value judgements?? One of the traitor commie bastards that infests this list? :-) :) Thank you, Erik. I think the problem with this thread is that some people are seeing everything in black-and-white, or at least in sharper contrast than others, while the others are saying, This was good and this wasn't so good, and it would have been NICE if *everything* had been good, and the sooner mistakes are owned up to and corrected, the better it will be for the Iraqi people in both the short term and the long run. Or something to that effect. And refusal to acknowledge that maybe there were a couple of things that someone dropped the ball on, or justifying the little mistakes for the big picture, is irritating the heck out of some others and they're voicing their irritation. Personally, I'm glad Saddam has been deposed, but there are a few things I'm presently not entirely happy with; I don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, but I'd like to see the bathwater acknowledged, and if it's exact volume *can* be determined, get an accurate report on that. (What bothers me on the whole museum-looting thing right now is that some things in the museum were *destroyed*. Theft which can be recovered isn't anywhere near as bad as destruction. And focusing on how many artifacts are or are not missing doesn't do a damn thing about the *destruction* that took place. Not that my opinion is going to *help* this discussion any right now, sigh.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 09:49:16PM -0700, Gautam Mukunda wrote: On what curve exactly are you grading, Erik? I don't grade on a curve, but I guess that explains your comments, you are curving 71 up to 100. I mean, come on! Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] No, I think my comments are based on a sense of historical perspective and an understanding of what is involved in building a stable democracy and society, as well as the resources available to the task. Other than some hypothetical perfection - and I'd like to see you (or anyone else) try to run something this complex at anything even vaguely approaching a similar level of success - what are you basing _your_ judgments on? = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
On 12 Jun 2003 at 8:40, Gautam Mukunda wrote: --- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 09:49:16PM -0700, Gautam Mukunda wrote: On what curve exactly are you grading, Erik? I don't grade on a curve, but I guess that explains your comments, you are curving 71 up to 100. I mean, come on! Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] No, I think my comments are based on a sense of historical perspective and an understanding of what is involved in building a stable democracy and society, What would that be? I for one would certainly argue that every democracy so far has had a definate weakness in terms of long term planning and stability Andy Dawn Falcon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
--- Andrew Crystall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What would that be? I for one would certainly argue that every democracy so far has had a definate weakness in terms of long term planning and stability Andy The oldest written Constitution in the world (the oldest single government in the world in some political science databases) is democratic (the United States). Britain has, depending on the definition you use, been a stable democracy since some time in the nineteenth century (most poli. sci. databases use the late 1860s, after some Reform Act or another - I can't at the moment recall which one). Since the Second World War, no democratic government with a per capita income (inflation adjusted) over $3000 / year has ever relapsed into dictatorship. The number may be a little low - it's been a while since I read Fareed Zakaria's work on the subject. In any case, the evidence seems to suggest that democratic governments are considerably more, not less, stable than their autocratic counterparts. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 08:40:12AM -0700, Gautam Mukunda wrote: than some hypothetical perfection - and I'd like to see you (or anyone else) try to run something this complex at anything even vaguely approaching a similar level of success - what are you basing _your_ judgments on? If I thought I could do that, then I would be pursuing a political career. I can't (or at least won't), but I live in a democracy (no semantic arguments please, you know what I mean) of almost 300M people, one which I'm sure you'd agree has some of the most capable people ever to live on Earth. I expect a great deal from those chosen to lead our country, not perfection, but constantly striving towards perfection. I just don't see that happening with the current administration. -- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
-Original Message- From: Gautam Mukunda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 09:14 PM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This arguement is beneath you. The specific complaint about looting of the museum has nothing to do with the legitimacy of the war. This is not an either or question. One can rescue Iraqi children and protect antiquites. That is precisely the point. The looting was an instance of poor planning and Rumsfeld's response an example of the callousness of the administration. No, it's not. WHAT DAMN LOOTING 32 pieces. 3,033, actually.. but who's counting? The whole looting story was a lie. Let me see if I can understand your argument. All that news footage of Iraqis carrying off artifacts, Rumsfeld and others going on about the looting, the international antiquities community freaking out, it was all a photo-op by the Baathist Americans to discredit Bush? I'm really, really puzzled at the connection. I'm amazed how eagerly you attempt to use my comment that the loss of 3,033 important artifacts would be considered the heist of the century had it happened any place else or under anyone else's watch as a springboard to go off on a rant. Lighten up, Gautam. -j- ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
-Original Message- From: Gautam Mukunda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 10:16 AM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth --- Andrew Crystall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What would that be? I for one would certainly argue that every democracy so far has had a definate weakness in terms of long term planning and stability Andy The oldest written Constitution in the world (the oldest single government in the world in some political science databases) is democratic (the United States). Britain has, depending on the definition you use, been a stable democracy since some time in the nineteenth century (most poli. sci. databases use the late 1860s, after some Reform Act or another - I can't at the moment recall which one). Since the Second World War, no democratic government with a per capita income (inflation adjusted) over $3000 / year has ever relapsed into dictatorship. The number may be a little low - it's been a while since I read Fareed Zakaria's work on the subject. In any case, the evidence seems to suggest that democratic governments are considerably more, not less, stable than their autocratic counterparts. The Economist had an article with a similar thesis recently (past 3 weeks). -j- ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
On Tuesday, June 10, 2003, at 11:41 PM, Gautam Mukunda wrote: From _The Guardian_ (that bastion of pro-Bush propaganda): http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,974193,00.html As JDG has pointed out, the number of items currently believed to have been stolen is 33 and dropping. Truly the looting must have been terrible. There were a fair number of people who said some remarkably foolish things about the so-called looting of the Iraqi museum. Odds that any of them will even admit they were wrong? I do wonder, at some point will the credibility of these people just evaporate? I mean, will people say, gee, the people of Iraq _did_ celebrate when we arrived, Saddam _was_ defeated fairly easily, the country _didn't_ collapse into civil war, the museum _wasn't_ looted, and so on - at some point will the media say (as the public already has) that empirical reality and these people's beliefs are, let's be kind, orthogonal? Sorry my friend, but you'll have to wait about 25 years for something like that to happen, and even *that* might not be enough time. Humanity's capability for self-delusion knows no bounds. john ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
On 12 Jun 2003 at 10:16, Gautam Mukunda wrote: --- Andrew Crystall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What would that be? I for one would certainly argue that every democracy so far has had a definate weakness in terms of long term planning and stability Andy The oldest written Constitution in the world (the oldest single government in the world in some political science databases) is democratic (the United States). Britain has, depending on the definition you use, been a stable democracy since some time in the nineteenth century (most poli. sci. databases use the late 1860s, after some Reform Act or another - I can't at the moment recall which one). Since the Second World War, no democratic government with a per capita income (inflation adjusted) over $3000 / year has ever relapsed into dictatorship. The number may be a little low - it's been a while since I read Fareed Zakaria's work on the subject. In any case, the evidence seems to suggest that democratic governments are considerably more, not less, stable than their autocratic counterparts. I don't necessarily view a codified constitution like the USA's as an advantage over an uncodified (it's not true to say that we don't HAVE one) like the UK. Also, until the middle of this century the UK was not really a democracy - the House of Lords could veto laws and the Monarchy had at least some power. Given the issues unresolved in a low of Democracies (Canada and Germany, by facing their issues, are perhaps IMO the closest to stability). I'n not call them stable - there is no long term continuity of policy. How this could be resolved is debateable. . Perhaps each year 1/3 or 1/4 of the MP's (or your equivalent) could be elected - that that would prevent goverments from enacting massively unpopular measures and getting away wtith it because they had several years to cover up the damage. I also, admitedly, like Germany's Partial List system. Andy Dawn Falcon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
I do wonder, at some point will the credibility of these people just evaporate? I mean, will people say, gee, the people of Iraq _did_ celebrate when we arrived, Saddam _was_ defeated fairly easily, the country _didn't_ collapse into civil war, the museum _wasn't_ looted, and so on - at some point will the media say (as the public already has) that empirical reality and these people's beliefs are, let's be kind, orthogonal? I have no problem admitting all of that. Will the Bush administration ever admit that they cannot find the WMD they swore up and down they knew exactly where they were? Tom Beck www.prydonians.org www.mercerjewishsingles.org I always knew I'd see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed I'd see the last. - Dr Jerry Pournelle ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
-Original Message- From: Gautam Mukunda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 08:42 PM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth From _The Guardian_ (that bastion of pro-Bush propaganda): http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,974193,00.html As JDG has pointed out, the number of items currently believed to have been stolen is 33 and dropping. If the Smithsonian lost 33 major items and over 3,000 minor items, you better believe it'd be called the heist of the century. -j- ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I do wonder, at some point will the credibility of these people just evaporate? I mean, will people say, gee, the people of Iraq _did_ celebrate when we arrived, Saddam _was_ defeated fairly easily, the country _didn't_ collapse into civil war, the museum _wasn't_ looted, and so on - at some point will the media say (as the public already has) that empirical reality and these people's beliefs are, let's be kind, orthogonal? I have no problem admitting all of that. Will the Bush administration ever admit that they cannot find the WMD they swore up and down they knew exactly where they were? Tom Beck You know, Tom, given your previous record on predictions in Iraq, do you think you might want to be a little more careful with statements like the above? Just a thought. I mean, if we do find them - and I still think the odds are pretty good that we will - what will you hate Bush foreign policy for then? Gautam = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
You know, Tom, given your previous record on predictions in Iraq, do you think you might want to be a little more careful with statements like the above? Just a thought. I mean, if we do find them - and I still think the odds are pretty good that we will - what will you hate Bush foreign policy for then? You mean, you HOPE we will find them. I don't care either way. I'm glad Saddam is gone, and I didn't object to getting rid of him. On the other hand, we were obviously not prepared for what comes next, either in Iraq or Afghanistan. And if we DON'T find WMD - if it turns out they really did cook the intelligence - then what? If they fooled themselves - if they sincerely believed what turns out to be very thin evidence - that does not bode all that well for the future, you know. And if they fooled us - if they knew the evidence was thin but deliberately overstated the case as a pretext for an invasion - that doesn't bode very well either. I know this won't convince any of the huffing-and-puffing Mighty America true believers who dream of an Imperial USA bossing around the rest of the world (for its own good), but the argument that, even if we never find WMD - even if the Bushies really did know beforehand there weren't any - it's okay because we got rid of the big meanie Saddam (with no real preparation for what would replace him) - I don't buy that. If that's truly the reason we invaded - WHY NOT TELL THE TRUTH? Why lie about the WMD? I'm glad Saddam is gone. I've never said otherwise. I'm glad the war itself went smoothly, although the post-war is starting to turn very very nasty. But at what point do you admit there aren't any WMD? You see, Bush/Rumsfeld/Cheney/Powell/Wolfowitz/Perle/etc. said before the invasion that they knew exactly where the WMD were and it was basically a matter of conquering the country and opening up the storage sites to prove to the world. So where are they? Tom Beck www.prydonians.org www.mercerjewishsingles.org I always knew I'd see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed I'd see the last. - Dr Jerry Pournelle ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
--- Miller, Jeffrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the Smithsonian lost 33 major items and over 3,000 minor items, you better believe it'd be called the heist of the century. -j- OK, so I guess we can make the people of Iraq a deal - we can find their lost stuff, plus, just as an extra special bonus, we'll bury their children alive in mass graves. Do you think they'd take that deal? Because by God you talk like you think they would. Gautam = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You mean, you HOPE we will find them. I don't care either way. I'm glad Saddam is gone, and I didn't object to getting rid of him. On the other hand, we were obviously not prepared for what comes next, either in Iraq or Afghanistan. Really? My information - which has done pretty well so far, hasn't it - says that we were well prepared. Things aren't great in Baghdad, but, to be blunt, only someone like you could think that we would go in and magically all these Ba'athists and Sunnis who had been benefiting from the regime would be so happy to see it gone. And if we DON'T find WMD - if it turns out they really did cook the intelligence - then what? If they fooled themselves - if they sincerely believed what turns out to be very thin evidence - that does not bode all that well for the future, you know. And if they fooled us - if they knew the evidence was thin but deliberately overstated the case as a pretext for an invasion - that doesn't bode very well either. So, Tom, all the statements by President Clinton about WMD, were those lies as well? And lots of other people, for that matter: [W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs. -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998 Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed. -- Madeline Albright, 1998 The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability. -- Robert Byrd, October 2002 What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs. -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002 The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow. -- Bill Clinton in 1998 In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security. -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002 I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out. -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003 Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people. -- Tom Daschle in 1998 I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction. -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002 Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power. -- Al Gore, 2002 We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. -- Bob Graham, December 2002 We have known for many years that Saddam
RE: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
-Original Message- From: Gautam Mukunda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 10:32 AM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: RE: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth --- Miller, Jeffrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the Smithsonian lost 33 major items and over 3,000 minor items, you better believe it'd be called the heist of the century. -j- OK, so I guess we can make the people of Iraq a deal - we can find their lost stuff, plus, just as an extra special bonus, we'll bury their children alive in mass graves. I don't understand a word of that :) Do you think they'd take that deal? Because by God you talk like you think they would. I'm merely pointing out the lack of perspective in saying that the loss of only 33 major artifacts and only 3,000 minor artifacts is nothing to be concerned with. I don't understand how that equates to burying the children of Iraq alive. :) -j- ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 10:31:41 -0700 (PDT) --- Miller, Jeffrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the Smithsonian lost 33 major items and over 3,000 minor items, you better believe it'd be called the heist of the century. -j- OK, so I guess we can make the people of Iraq a deal - we can find their lost stuff, plus, just as an extra special bonus, we'll bury their children alive in mass graves. Do you think they'd take that deal? Because by God you talk like you think they would. The point he's making is a valid one. He didn't say we shouldn't have liberated Iraq in this thread. When we removed the regime in power we were in charge of law enforcement until a native police force could be reestablished. It is obvious that the museums were inadequately secured and they were our responsibility. We definitely screwed up in allowing the museums to be looted. You know, looting and even rioting could have been easily predicted when we liberated Iraq. Quite honestly, I was surprised the changeover went so smoothly. Jon _ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
--- Miller, Jeffrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do you think they'd take that deal? Because by God you talk like you think they would. I'm merely pointing out the lack of perspective in saying that the loss of only 33 major artifacts and only 3,000 minor artifacts is nothing to be concerned with. I don't understand how that equates to burying the children of Iraq alive. :) -j- Because that's where they were a little while ago. We just dug up a mass grave with hundreds of children in it, _buried alive_ by the Hussein regime. I'm not making this stuff up. Now, I don't happen to believe that most of the losses at the Museum had _anything_ to do with the invasion. The Ba'ath regime had been plundering that country for a generation. They appointed Ba'ath party flunkies to run the museum. Why anyone was foolish enough to think that they were telling the truth - that the museum had been looted after the invasion - completely escapes me. But let's suppose it was. Let's suppose that the invasion was the trigger for looting the museum. So what? I mean, really, so what? Given the two alternatives, which one was preferable? Now we know that the museum _wasn't_ plundered. Despite the hysterical claims of many people - no few of them on this list - at most, a small amount of its collection was stolen. Something which, may I point out, I said was probably the case _as soon as reports of the thefts came out_. Compared to what the invasion stopped, so what? The only reason this is an issue at all is that people were so desperate to believe bad things of Americans in general and Bush in particular that they credulously grabbed onto this story as something they could use to diminish an astonishing achievement. Now, even that has been taken away, and what we're seeing is the remarkable extent to which the war's opponents were practicing nothing more nor less than the politics of bad faith - defending a tyrant simply for their own spite and domestic political battles. So I return to my question about credibility. All the people who talked about the looting of the Museum as a cultural catastrophe akin to destroying the Louvre or the Smithsonian or what have you - given their dismal record, when do we stop listening to them entirely? = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
--- Jon Gabriel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The point he's making is a valid one. He didn't say we shouldn't have liberated Iraq in this thread. When we removed the regime in power we were in charge of law enforcement until a native police force could be reestablished. It is obvious that the museums were inadequately secured and they were our responsibility. We definitely screwed up in allowing the museums to be looted. If they had been looted, we would have screwed up, maybe. I don't know what constraints we were operating under. But they weren't looted. _At most_ a miniscule proportion of the Museum's items were taken, certainly by insiders, and almost certainly before American soldiers ever arrived in Baghdad. What could we possibly have done to stop that? You know, looting and even rioting could have been easily predicted when we liberated Iraq. Quite honestly, I was surprised the changeover went so smoothly. Jon Me too - well, not surprised, per se, but impressed and pleased. But the Administration's opponents have seized on this damn Museum issue as a way of, first attacking the war in general, and second, attacking the reconstruction effort, when it is, in fact, going much better than a fair observer would have expected. So I'm not ashamed to take a special pleasure in pointing out that the Museum thing _didn't happen_ - it was a myth created by credulous people eager to believe the worst of the United States and the Bush Administration, and its revelation as a myth is something that should further lessen their credibility, if there was any left. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
An interesting essay, Gautam, but still doesn't explain how my pointing out that the missing artifacts are in fact one of the biggest losses in museum history (outside outright descrution) is somehow equated with burying children alive, as you claim I want to have happen: OK, so I guess we can make the people of Iraq a deal - we can find their lost stuff, plus, just as an extra special bonus, we'll bury their children alive in mass graves. Do you think they'd take that deal? Because by God you talk like you think they would. -j- -Original Message- From: Gautam Mukunda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 12:30 PM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: RE: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth --- Miller, Jeffrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do you think they'd take that deal? Because by God you talk like you think they would. I'm merely pointing out the lack of perspective in saying that the loss of only 33 major artifacts and only 3,000 minor artifacts is nothing to be concerned with. I don't understand how that equates to burying the children of Iraq alive. :) -j- Because that's where they were a little while ago. We just dug up a mass grave with hundreds of children in it, _buried alive_ by the Hussein regime. I'm not making this stuff up. Now, I don't happen to believe that most of the losses at the Museum had _anything_ to do with the invasion. The Ba'ath regime had been plundering that country for a generation. They appointed Ba'ath party flunkies to run the museum. Why anyone was foolish enough to think that they were telling the truth - that the museum had been looted after the invasion - completely escapes me. But let's suppose it was. Let's suppose that the invasion was the trigger for looting the museum. So what? I mean, really, so what? Given the two alternatives, which one was preferable? Now we know that the museum _wasn't_ plundered. Despite the hysterical claims of many people - no few of them on this list - at most, a small amount of its collection was stolen. Something which, may I point out, I said was probably the case _as soon as reports of the thefts came out_. Compared to what the invasion stopped, so what? The only reason this is an issue at all is that people were so desperate to believe bad things of Americans in general and Bush in particular that they credulously grabbed onto this story as something they could use to diminish an astonishing achievement. Now, even that has been taken away, and what we're seeing is the remarkable extent to which the war's opponents were practicing nothing more nor less than the politics of bad faith - defending a tyrant simply for their own spite and domestic political battles. So I return to my question about credibility. All the people who talked about the looting of the Museum as a cultural catastrophe akin to destroying the Louvre or the Smithsonian or what have you - given their dismal record, when do we stop listening to them entirely? = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 02:35:34PM -0700, Miller, Jeffrey wrote: An interesting essay, Gautam, but still doesn't explain how my pointing out that the missing artifacts are in fact one of the biggest losses in museum history (outside outright descrution) is somehow equated with burying children alive, as you claim I want to have happen: OK, so I guess we can make the people of Iraq a deal - we can find their lost stuff, plus, just as an extra special bonus, we'll bury their children alive in mass graves. Do you think they'd take that deal? Because by God you talk like you think they would. I believe he is operating under a false dichotomy: Gautam implies there can only be 2 possibilities: either a tyrant in charge of Iraq and the museum safe but children being killed, or the tyrant deposed/children no longer being killed and the museum not guarded well enough to prevent some major thefts. -- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 10:20:50PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This arguement is beneath you. The specific complaint about looting of the museum has nothing to do with the legitimacy of the war. This is not an either or question. One can rescue Iraqi children and protect antiquites. That is precisely the point. The looting was an instance of poor planning and Rumsfeld's response an example of the callousness of the administration. I think I first learned of this technique while reading Ender's Game. When a politician accomplishes something that most would consider worthwhile, they like to set up a false dichotomy such that the ONLY possible way the good they accomplished could have happened is the exact way they did it, no other way was possible, especially no BETTER way. You start with it worked and put the spin on it from there. The head of the flight school said something along these lines to Ender's teacher. (I might have that backwards) Since I read that years ago, I have frequently noted the technique being used by politicians. -- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This arguement is beneath you. The specific complaint about looting of the museum has nothing to do with the legitimacy of the war. This is not an either or question. One can rescue Iraqi children and protect antiquites. That is precisely the point. The looting was an instance of poor planning and Rumsfeld's response an example of the callousness of the administration. No, it's not. WHAT DAMN LOOTING 32 pieces. Most (if not all) of them probably stolen before American troops even arrived. The whole looting story was a lie. A contemptible slander made up by Ba'athist thugs and believed by people desperate to deny that - over their opposition - a great and good thing was done. Believed and spread about by people who did everything they could to protect Saddam Hussein, nothing more nor less. What this is is an example of how pathetic - how contemptible and vile - so much of the left has become. Nothing more than that. The only reason anyone is paying attention to this is as a way of attacking the liberation of Iraq. After being shown, time and time again, as credulous fools who would believe anything, anything at all, so long as it showed the United States in a bad light, we see - once again, not for the first, and not for the last time - that even here, people who trumped this up were wrong. They couldn't even scrounge up a _true_ story - they had to believe Ba'athist stooges who were covering their own tracks for inside job thefts. The only part of this argument that is beneath me is the fact that I'm wasting my time on it. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 10:20:50PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think I first learned of this technique while reading Ender's Game. When a politician accomplishes something that most would consider worthwhile, they like to set up a false dichotomy such that the ONLY possible way the good they accomplished could have happened is the exact way they did it, no other way was possible, especially no BETTER way. You start with it worked and put the spin on it from there. The head of the flight school said something along these lines to Ender's teacher. (I might have that backwards) Since I read that years ago, I have frequently noted the technique being used by politicians. -- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] No, it's about perspective. In the Second World War we blew the hell out of Monte Cassino - for no good reason at all. In the view of the people making this argument, I suppose that makes Franklin Roosevelt a barbarian who plundered the cultural heritage of Italy. Shame on everyone who spent time on this - myself included for wasting time and energy on such a trivial issue. Of all the things that happened in Baghdad for the last year, the theft (that may or may not have happened) of 33 artifacts is surely far down the list of importance. The only reason this is an issue is an attempt by the defenders of Saddam to trump up something, anything, to hide the catastrophic failure of their beliefs. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 09:16:56PM -0700, Gautam Mukunda wrote: trivial issue. Of all the things that happened in Baghdad for the last year, the theft (that may or may not have happened) of 33 artifacts is surely far down the list of importance. Agreed. There were much more important mistakes made by Americans after the war. You know I supported the war, so you can't make those claims about me that you made about some others. Just because I supported the war, however, doesn't mean that I turn a blind eye to mistakes. They can, and could have done better. As many people predicted, the resources to rebuild and govern Iraq do not flow nearly as freely as those to depose Saddam, and the plan for rebuilding was not sufficient since the Administration underestimated the problem (as many people predicted). They did great good in deposing Saddam, but they need to do better in rebuilding and governing and allocating resources to Iraq. -- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Agreed. There were much more important mistakes made by Americans after the war. You know I supported the war, so you can't make those claims about me that you made about some others. Just because I supported the war, however, doesn't mean that I turn a blind eye to mistakes. They can, and could have done better. As many people predicted, the resources to rebuild and govern Iraq do not flow nearly as freely as those to depose Saddam, and the plan for rebuilding was not sufficient since the Administration underestimated the problem (as many people predicted). They did great good in deposing Saddam, but they need to do better in rebuilding and governing and allocating resources to Iraq. Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] On what curve exactly are you grading, Erik? I mean, come on. This country was devastated by 25 years of brutal government, 12 years of shattering sanctions, and losing three major wars. Despite that, the whole place didn't collapse into civil wars, there haven't been mass famines, anarchy, anything. I am stunned by how well things are going, not how poorly. Would I prefer it if, in a perfect world, we had more troops in Iraq? Certainly. Find them for me. Go pick out which units of the American military are available to deploy to Iraq - and which committments we should abandon in order to fill that need. We are _stretched out_. We've been cutting the size of the military for 13 years now and guess what - this is why that might not have been a great idea. By any reasonable standard of reconstructing a country, this has been an extraordinary performance. Pretty much everywhere outside of Baghdad and Tikrit, things actually seem to be going pretty well. Maybe they will go south in the future - I don't know. But so far, by any standard other than some mythical perfection, things are going remarkably well. Compare Baghdad to Berlin in 1945 and tell me again how poorly the reconstruction is going. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Lost in the Baghdad Museum: The Truth
From _The Guardian_ (that bastion of pro-Bush propaganda): http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,974193,00.html As JDG has pointed out, the number of items currently believed to have been stolen is 33 and dropping. Truly the looting must have been terrible. There were a fair number of people who said some remarkably foolish things about the so-called looting of the Iraqi museum. Odds that any of them will even admit they were wrong? I do wonder, at some point will the credibility of these people just evaporate? I mean, will people say, gee, the people of Iraq _did_ celebrate when we arrived, Saddam _was_ defeated fairly easily, the country _didn't_ collapse into civil war, the museum _wasn't_ looted, and so on - at some point will the media say (as the public already has) that empirical reality and these people's beliefs are, let's be kind, orthogonal? = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
