CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Was Iraq's Museum really looted?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Was Iraq's Museum really looted?

post #1 of 29
5/6/03 at 12:35pm
Thread Starter 
<a href="http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/SciTech/baghdadmuseum030419.html" target="_blank">looting claim</a>

<a href="http://www.nypost.com/avantgo/avantnews/57276.htm" target="_blank">only 25 items looted</a>

The first deals with the assumption that everything in the museum was looted. The latter claims only 25 pieces were stolen.
I had recently heard on TV that the Baghdad Museum looting wasn't what we first believed. If anyone has a better article on just 25 items being stolen please link it.
What I always found as odd was though the museum workers said the museum was looted it was also known that they could secure the valuable artifacts in 24 hours in another secure location. The war was raging for over 3 weeks before we hit Baghdad and the looting started. They had time to secure the museum and apparently didn't. But with news coming out that only 25 items were stolen I'm wondering what there bitching was about.

The U.S. were hammered for not stopping the museum looting. Now it appears the only things taken by the public were a few artifacts and fixtures. Now the big question is where's the stuff now?
Reply
post #2 of 29
5/6/03 at 1:09pm
There was a piece on Special Report w/ Brit Hume last night that said a lot of the stuff wasn't looted in the traditional "smash and grab" way, but by unlocking the cases and carefully taking the pieces they wanted. The major in charge of the museum thinks it was an inside job.
Reply
post #3 of 29
5/6/03 at 1:36pm
I find this to be of little value since

A) A good part of the looting was staright-up DESTRUCTION or vandalism of these artifacts, rather than theft, and....

B) US Soldiers and journalists have already been connected with some of the thievery, so the extent to which this crime was carried out will probably be indeterminable for some time.

Regardless, if JUST ONE piece was looted, much less 25, we should be blamed because when you invade and "liberate" a people, it is IMMEDIATELY your LEGAL responsibility to establish law and order, and to KNOWINGLY refuse to do in the name of "letting people be free" is immoral, illegal, and disgusting.

The extent to which we did this will always be of some matter of debate, but nonetheless, we made a huge mistake in allowing it to happen.
Reply
post #4 of 29
5/6/03 at 2:00pm
(HUMOR POST BEGIN)

I heard one of the items missing was the Necronomicon.

Soon, Dread Cthulhu will rise!

(HUMOR POST ENDS)

Okay, I got nothing.
Reply
post #5 of 29
5/6/03 at 3:07pm
Thread Starter 
To the U.S. defense they didn't have enough soldiers to establish total law and order plus they were still fighting in small pockets.
Besides there are reports some of the artifacts are fakes because Saddam sold or used the materials in his Palaces.
The Iraqi curators could have saved the stuff if they wanted too.
Reply
post #6 of 29
5/6/03 at 3:32pm
Quote:
Anyawatcher:
To the U.S. defense they didn't have enough soldiers to establish total law and order plus they were still fighting in small pockets.
Besides there are reports some of the artifacts are fakes because Saddam sold or used the materials in his Palaces.
The Iraqi curators could have saved the stuff if they wanted too.
They didn't have enough soldiers to totally re-inforce all the battlefield positions, but they didn't stop bombing and conducting sorties for even a nanosecond because that is WHAT THEY WERE THERE TO DO, and they adjusted accordingly.

Likewise, enforcing law and order should've been an immediate priority, but they didn't even TRY. Rumsfeld shrugged it off, and soldiers who weren't otherwise deployed sat and WATCHED.

I don't care about the shortcomings of the Iraqi curators any more than I care about the Iraqi clerics who went above and beyond the call of duty by forming law and order committees to stop looting, return stolen medical equipment, and to feed hungry people with whatever food they had on hand.

None of that makes the US any less guilty of shirking our responsibilities, which we did to our everlasting shame.

And as long as we're discussing exposes on looting, here's one that makes us look even WORSE by suggesting we EGGED ON THE LOOTING, which we won't even deny.

<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3003393.stm" target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3003393.stm</a>

Quote:
Baying crowd

Dr Majeed, a community health lecturer at the college, was at the institute on the day when hundreds of baying looters gathered outside.

There was upheaval in Nasiriya at the time. Water and electricity supplies had stopped, the police force had scattered and thieves had emptied many properties.

The date was Tuesday, 8 April, although Dr Majeed can only remember it as the day before Baghdad fell.

"[The crowd] had their faces covered, carried knives and Kalashnikovs. They were shouting, saying 'We need everything from this college'," says Dr Majeed, standing at the spot where the crowds had massed.


Dr Khalid Majeed saw armed looters
The college had its own guard of about seven people, who were behind the low wall on the south side of the campus. About three of them were armed, says Dr Majeed.

He realised these guards were no match for the crowds.

"I went to an American checkpoint at the college of science and said we needed help, people wanted to steal from our institute. They said they couldn't help because their job was only to serve the checkpoint.

"So I walked to the bridge and asked the Americans there for help. But they couldn't help."

Meanwhile, says Dr Majeed, a colleague had roused some Americans based near the local fire station.

They arrived in five vehicles, but refused to ward off the looters. Instead, the soldiers fired several dozen rounds at the college's south wall, says Dr Majeed.

'Green light' to looters

"It was a green light to the looters. It told them 'We are not going to do anything to stop you.'"

Within five minutes the Americans had gone, and the looters had moved in.

An engineering lecturer at the college, Najah Rustin, was across the road when the trouble began. He dashed to the scene, where he found his father remonstrating with the soldiers.


US troops 'refused to protect' the college, says Ali Thowani
"Someone had told the Americans that maybe the [college] guards were Baathists. My father speaks English and he said 'No, they are not Baathists, they are lecturers,'" says Mr Rustin.

Mr Rustin's father backs up his son's account. "I told them the institute must be saved from the thieves, but they said 'We are soldiers. This isn't our work. Our work is only to fight.'"

Ali Thowani, 27, a pharmacist and former student of the institute, also tried reasoning with the Americans in English.

"I spoke to the Americans and they refused to protect the institution. 'We're not police and that's not our job,' they said."

More worrying still are the accounts of two eyewitnesses who claim to have seen the Americans encouraging the looters.

Troops 'waved' looters on

Rasool Abdul-Husayn , an unemployed school teacher, says he saw one American signalling the crowd to move in, with a repeated wave of the arm. Another eyewitness, Kareem Khattar, who works in a bread shop across the road from the college, saw the same thing.

"I saw with my own eyes the Americans signal the people to move in and the looters started clapping," says Mr Khattar.


Air conditioners proved popular with looters
"The Americans waved bye-bye and the looters were clapping. They started looting quickly and when one man came out with an air conditioner an American said to him 'Good, very good'."

Before the war, Nasiriya's technical institute had 2,500 students and taught community health, mechanical and electrical engineering and computing, among other subjects.

Every bit of hard work that went into building up the college, which opened in the early 1980s, was swiftly destroyed. About 100 air conditioning units and 100 computers were stolen. Rooms were torched; the science laboratories wrecked; the main lecture hall looks like a hurricane has passed through it.
Reply
post #7 of 29
5/6/03 at 3:36pm
Well, let's see.

[/sarcasm ON]

"Ok, you've been bad. In a few months, we are going to invade you."

"Ok, you haven't listened, in a month or so, we are going to invade you."

"Ok, you've got 48 hours, and we are going to invade you."

Since they certainly had no warning, and no time to safely remove and store the artifacts, it sure was a shame they were looted.

[/sarcasm OFF]
Reply
post #8 of 29
5/6/03 at 3:42pm
Quote:
Grifter:
Well, let's see.

[/sarcasm ON]

"Ok, you've been bad. In a few months, we are going to invade you."

"Ok, you haven't listened, in a month or so, we are going to invade you."

"Ok, you've got 48 hours, and we are going to invade you."

Since they certainly had no warning, and no time to safely remove and store the artifacts, it sure was a shame they were looted.

[/sarcasm OFF]
To be fair, those were warnings of invasion, directed at Saddam Hussein. It's expecting a bit much of a museum curator to assume that this means "We will invade you and then, after the conflict, allow your museum to be looted".
Reply
post #9 of 29
5/6/03 at 3:45pm
Quote:
Grifter:
Well, let's see.

[/sarcasm ON]

"Ok, you've been bad. In a few months, we are going to invade you."

"Ok, you haven't listened, in a month or so, we are going to invade you."

"Ok, you've got 48 hours, and we are going to invade you."

Since they certainly had no warning, and no time to safely remove and store the artifacts, it sure was a shame they were looted.

[/sarcasm OFF]
Ok...I guess it was those dumb civilians' fault that they got hit by our shells because they didn't have the sense to generate enough money from their impoverished existences to leave Iraq and force their way into neighboring countries with armed guards at the border to stop refugees.

For that matter, we got warnings from Al-Queda months before 9/11, and should've known that they'd be launching an unprecedented assault on American soil. So it's the fault of the people who got taken out that they weren't smart enough to keep up with these vague warnings from terrorists and to hide themselves away safely until the 9/11 attacks had concluded.

Makes lots of sense.
Reply
post #10 of 29
5/6/03 at 3:46pm
Quote:
Dan Whitehead:
Quote:
Grifter:
Well, let's see.

[/sarcasm ON]

"Ok, you've been bad. In a few months, we are going to invade you."

"Ok, you haven't listened, in a month or so, we are going to invade you."

"Ok, you've got 48 hours, and we are going to invade you."

Since they certainly had no warning, and no time to safely remove and store the artifacts, it sure was a shame they were looted.

[/sarcasm OFF]
To be fair, those were warnings of invasion, directed at Saddam Hussein. It's expecting a bit much of a museum curator to assume that this means "We will invade you and then, after the conflict, allow your museum to be looted".
Right, because we are not going to invade the country and roll through the streets. We are only going to invade Saddam's houses, and offices. If he's not there, we'll just wait.
Reply
post #11 of 29
5/6/03 at 3:50pm
What does that have to do with allowing looting to carry on unchecked?
Reply
post #12 of 29
5/6/03 at 3:53pm
Quote:
Dan Whitehead:
What does that have to do with allowing looting to carry on unchecked?
They should've been smart enough to know that we would just stand there - armed and available - while they pleaded for us to help restore law and order.
Reply
post #13 of 29
5/6/03 at 3:53pm
Quote:
For that matter, we got warnings from Al-Queda months before 9/11, and should've known that they'd be launching an unprecedented assault on American soil. So it's the fault of the people who got taken out that they weren't smart enough to keep up with these vague warnings from terrorists and to hide themselves away safely until the 9/11 attacks had concluded.
Since Al-Queda was polite enough to fly over the country for WEEKS and drop leaflets explaining how things will go, and what to expect, just like we did in Iraq, you're right.

All those vague "Do not show aggression" leaflets/radio broadcasts etc.. were hard for the average person to follow.
Reply
post #14 of 29
5/6/03 at 3:57pm
Quote:
mikah912:
Quote:
Dan Whitehead:
What does that have to do with allowing looting to carry on unchecked?
They should've been smart enough to know that we would just stand there - armed and available - while they pleaded for us to help restore law and order.
They should have been smart enough to know that when you topple a government, and are getting fired at by enemy troops, perhaps the "occupying force" will be a little to busy, for a few days, to referee your own personal "Jerry Springer Show", and maybe YOU should take some basic precautions.
Reply
post #15 of 29
5/6/03 at 3:58pm
Quote:
Grifter:
Quote:
For that matter, we got warnings from Al-Queda months before 9/11, and should've known that they'd be launching an unprecedented assault on American soil. So it's the fault of the people who got taken out that they weren't smart enough to keep up with these vague warnings from terrorists and to hide themselves away safely until the 9/11 attacks had concluded.
Since Al-Queda was polite enough to fly over the country for WEEKS and drop leaflets explaining how things will go, and what to expect, just like we did in Iraq, you're right.

All those vague "Do not show aggression" leaflets/radio broadcasts etc.. were hard for the average person to follow.
Again, how does this prove that the curators of the Iraqi museum should have known they would be looted? This wasn't damage caused by the war, this was damage we allowed to happen after the city had been taken. Why would any sane person expect that to happen?
Reply
post #16 of 29
5/6/03 at 3:59pm
Quote:
Grifter:
Since Al-Queda was polite enough to fly over the country for WEEKS and drop leaflets explaining how things will go, and what to expect, just like we did in Iraq, you're right.

All those vague "Do not show aggression" leaflets/radio broadcasts etc.. were hard for the average person to follow.
You show me a leaflet detailing what happens AFTER we finish bombing, wherein we depict Iraqi people looting and us standing there cheering them on as people died and homes and buildings were destroyed - and THEN you may have something resembling a point.

If a country is coming to "liberate" my people, I'd assume they'd want to help take care of us after they bombed us back into the Stone Age (no water, electricty, services of any type), and I'd assume that help would include protecting us from criminal looters since the US had more than enough soldiers to deploy to protect EVERY oil well and the Oil Ministry building - which, incidentally, was the only Government ministry building not targeted by the bombs.
Reply
post #17 of 29
5/6/03 at 4:02pm
Quote:
Grifter:
They should have been smart enough to know that when you topple a government, and are getting fired at by enemy troops, perhaps the "occupying force" will be a little to busy, for a few days, to referee your own personal "Jerry Springer Show", and maybe YOU should take some basic precautions.
Boy, were we busy. All of those troops standing there all armed and available, free of any mission deployment whatsoever and under orders from their commanding officers to do nothing, even though "doing something" would've consisted mostly of standing in front of these buildings armed and available, while free of any other mission deployment...

I guess they must've been working on getting their taxes done before the April 15th deadline?
Reply
post #18 of 29
5/6/03 at 4:10pm
Quote:
You show me a leaflet detailing what happens AFTER we finish bombing, wherein we depict Iraqi people looting and us standing there cheering them on as people died and homes and buildings were destroyed - and THEN you may have something resembling a point.
No available leaflet Mikah, but I'll be happy to point you some Rodney King looting videos. Or NCAA tourney looting video. Or maybe some Stanley cup playoff looting footage.

When anything happens that allows mobs to be in large groups, unchecked, they WILL freak and loot stuff.
Reply
post #19 of 29
5/6/03 at 4:25pm
Quote:
Grifter:
No available leaflet Mikah, but I'll be happy to point you some Rodney King looting videos. Or NCAA tourney looting video. Or maybe some Stanley cup playoff looting footage.

When anything happens that allows mobs to be in large groups, unchecked, they WILL freak and loot stuff.
Then, your point about the leaflets is baseless and irrelevant. Ok, let's move from there...

Your second paragraph about the large mobs is based on an assumption that MOBS will actually form in the face of any such devestation, which is also wrong.

Here in America, we had looting after 9/11, but it was done on a very individual level mostly by rescue workers who had immediate access to all of the merchandise lying around in the wreckage. There were no mobs, and nobody faulted shopkeepers for not being prescient enough to safeguard their merchandise and stores from assault from an errant JET LINER.

Finally, Iraqi museum curators DID put many smaller, portable items away for safekeeping and even a good many of the larger items are currently in some sort of storage - where their condition is unknown.

Read it here for yourself:

<a href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=535&ncid=535&e=5&u=/ap/20030506/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_looted_art_14" target="_blank">http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=535&ncid=535&e=5&u=/ap/20030506/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_looted_art_14</a>

Quote:
A British Museum official who recently returned from Iraq estimated on Monday that 30 to 40 antiquities were missing from the National Museum in Baghdad — fewer than initially feared.

But John Edward Curtis also stressed that no one knows the status of 100,000 to 200,000 antiquities kept in storage, as well as an untold number of smaller, portable items that museum officials removed for safekeeping months before the war.
Reply
post #20 of 29
5/6/03 at 4:42pm
Actually Mikah, I owe you an apology.

My sarcasm is in no way directed toward you, or your views. Just lashing out from a buried day at work.

You've got some great points, and your right, the stuff should have been protected. I just don't think it should have been immediatly protected by us.

I should have stated that in a more diplomatic way.
Reply
post #21 of 29
5/6/03 at 4:46pm
Quote:
Grifter:
Actually Mikah, I owe you an apology.

My sarcasm is in no way directed toward you, or your views. Just lashing out from a buried day at work.

You've got some great points, and your right, the stuff should have been protected. I just don't think it should have been immediatly protected by us.

I should have stated that in a more diplomatic way.
No prob. I just disregarded it. Most of the stuff said "sarcastically" or "jovially" on these boards is filled with serious truth, so I treat a lot of it as such.
Reply
post #22 of 29
5/6/03 at 5:48pm
Quote:
Anyawatcher:
The Iraqi curators could have saved the stuff if they wanted too.
Are you saying that they didn't mind having their museums looted?
Reply
post #23 of 29
5/6/03 at 6:03pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
raoul duke:
Quote:
Anyawatcher:
The Iraqi curators could have saved the stuff if they wanted too.
Are you saying that they didn't mind having their museums looted?
no I'm saying when that 48 hour deadline hit or the first bombs dropped they should have evacuated the museum like ther were trained to do. I'm also saying it's very possible Saddam looted many of the valuables already in the past years and that some of the employees of the museum may have stolen some artifacts as well.
Reply
post #24 of 29
5/11/03 at 3:38pm
"Again, how does this prove that the curators of the Iraqi museum should have known they would be looted? This wasn't damage caused by the war, this was damage we allowed to happen after the city had been taken. Why would any sane person expect that to happen?"

Dan, in all fairness, they should have done something to protect the artifacts pre-invasion, because if you're protecting treasures like that, you'll want to take every precaution against anything going wrong...including the possibility of a stray shell. WHY this wasn't done is debatable, because we don't know the facts...the alternate safe location may not have been all that safe when it comes to a full-scale invasion, or he might have been under pressure by the government to appear normal, because closing down & packing up would show that they were worried.
If you're a caretaker, part of the job is to be paranoid of anything happening to the things you're taking care of. Looting wasn't the only thing they had to worry about.
Should our troops have stood around? Hell, no. There's no one side right vrs one side wrong issue here...we have highly questionable actions on both sides. What sane person would automatically assume, when entrusted with the care of treasures, that he had nothing to worry about in an invasion? In times of peace, don't people take extreme steps to protect rare & valuable items?
Reply
post #25 of 29
5/11/03 at 4:44pm
Quote:
Coyote has a Bathtub full of JAM:
Dan, in all fairness, they should have done something to protect the artifacts pre-invasion, because if you're protecting treasures like that, you'll want to take every precaution against anything going wrong...including the possibility of a stray shell. WHY this wasn't done is debatable, because we don't know the facts...the alternate safe location may not have been all that safe when it comes to a full-scale invasion, or he might have been under pressure by the government to appear normal, because closing down & packing up would show that they were worried.
If you're a caretaker, part of the job is to be paranoid of anything happening to the things you're taking care of. Looting wasn't the only thing they had to worry about.
Should our troops have stood around? Hell, no. There's no one side right vrs one side wrong issue here...we have highly questionable actions on both sides. What sane person would automatically assume, when entrusted with the care of treasures, that he had nothing to worry about in an invasion? In times of peace, don't people take extreme steps to protect rare & valuable items?
Actually, they DID store away a number of items in anticipation.

<a href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=535&ncid=535&e=5&u=/ap/20030506/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_looted_art_14" target="_blank">http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=535&ncid=535&e=5&u=/ap/20030506/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_looted_art_14</a>

Quote:
A British Museum official who recently returned from Iraq estimated on Monday that 30 to 40 antiquities were missing from the National Museum in Baghdad — fewer than initially feared.

But John Edward Curtis also stressed that no one knows the status of 100,000 to 200,000 antiquities kept in storage, as well as an untold number of smaller, portable items that museum officials removed for safekeeping months before the war.
I imagine they had to keep some on display simply to stay open, and we should've helped them protect those items.

We failed miserably on that accord, and in fact, US soldiers have been implicated in the theft of some of these items.
Reply
post #26 of 29
5/11/03 at 9:36pm
Quote:
Papa Trouter:
Still a far better situation then 2 weeks ago when it was said that 'thousands' of artifacts had gone missing. On the news that I've seen, that number is something more akin to 15 - 50. Yesss, American Soldiers were in on some of that, but I am getting the impression that a lot of it was internal theft (cases unlocked, etc)
</strong>

I wasn't aware the severity of the theft was up for debate, or even relevant for that matter.

FACT: We have no proof of an inside job YET.
FACT: We DO have proof American soldiers were part of the looting thus far.

And even if the inside job accusation turns out to be true, how does that lessen our culpability or guilt in the matter? Looters DID burglarize/destroy at least SOME of the museum stock. Our military DID assist with the theft of some items. Period.

Quote:
But how it is, exactly, that you expect us to stop an internal job? Yes, we have the responsibility of law and order. However, for such things here in the states we have a team of detectives, because God knows theft occurs whether or not there is an invasion. Museum theft is a fairly hefty thing, it happens quite a bit (especially art and artifacts). It seems to me that this museum job didn't require a google of armed soldiers, it will require 15 MP's with detection equipment and training in criminal apprehension techniques.

Armed soldiers are no good at protecting artifacts that walk out the doors in the pockets of museum employees at the dead of night.
The problem is they were no good at protecting the artifacts destroyed by people blatantly breaking in, either.

In fact, they also seemed ineffectual at protecting the artifacts that they themselves were attempting to take out of the country as well.

Odd, that.
Reply
post #27 of 29
5/12/03 at 2:39am
Quote:
Papa Trouter:
You do seem bent on the American Soldiers end of the deal, nevermnd the fact that those soldiers have been brought up on charges and the artifacts returned (that have been found).

Odd, that.
</strong>

This week on Trite, Unoriginal Comebacks, Papa Trouter pulls out the ole' "Repeat someone's words at them without actually saying anything of substance" routine.

Quote:
One would think if we truly didn't give a shit, that we would have let the soldiers have whatever mementos they wanted.
</strong>

When they screw up art embezzling as badly as they did, you don't have a lot of choice in prosecuting such an obvious crime.

Quote:
Your perfect world in which everyone acts honorable and we never need worry about evil or greedy motivation, no one innocent dies, and everything is just hunky-dory just doesn't exist. If you find such a Utopia, let me know, Ill be one of the first to immigrate.

In the mean time, pull yourself back to the real world.. The one filled with accidents, greedy little bastards on all sides that love making a fast buck in any way possible, and with unsavory types that will kill others just because they were looked at funny or have a headache.

If you truly expect all the American soldiers to be Angels, the American commanders to be God-like with their intelligence reports and troop displacement orders (meaning, everything gets covered at all times) and every single soldier of every origin there to be warrior-poets, letting themselves get killed lest a single hair be harmed on the head of a child... Then you live in a dream world.
</strong>

Speaking of dreams, in what one of yours did I say that I expect a perfect world or mention anything about poets or say that we must cover every inch of Iraq at all times?

Quote:
Shit happens, it happens a lot, it will continue to happen. Saying that we are just complete fuckups and WAAAAY in the 'wrong' because we are not perfect in the execution of our plans and/or because a few of our soldiers haul off and steal something strikes me as sad. Amusing, but sad.
</strong>

Again...I never said that.

The execution of the war plans: Remarkably effective.
The execution of our post-war plans: Bad start, sketchy continuation, and lots of room for improvement.

There...now you don't have to respond to imaginary points I make. There's a couple of real ones for you to play with.

Quote:
I don't suppose it matters a bit to you that it was only a handful of soldiers amidst a wave of thousands, does it?
I would venture a guess that the crime rate in Baghdad is equal or lower to what it is in the states, at this moment.
</strong>

Well, since I'm not indicting the entirety of the US military in my criticism, no, it doesn't matter. When I say "they" or "our military," I'm referring specifically to the soldiers who did this. It can't possibly refer to every soldier.

As for the Bagdad crime rate, A post-war Middle Eastern country is NOT comparable to a rich, industrialized Superpower nation and we don't have any stats on this subject, so why even venture a guess or a comparison?

Quote:
Whoopee, maybe we should put the US under armed guard, you seem to think we can do it in Iraq with Trained Combat Soldiers, when we can't even do it in our own damned country with a well trained and well paid police force on constant guard.
So why do we have police, anyway? They can't cover every crime, nor can they be everywhere at once. Under your sarcastic rationale, we shouldn't even bother with cops since they can't achieve a 100 percent success rate.

So why are they there? Oh, yeah...because laws need enforcing and they serve as a deterrent to a lot of crime even at a less-then-100 percent success rate.

Reply
post #28 of 29
5/12/03 at 10:54am
Quote:
Papa Trouter:
Shit happens, it happens a lot, it will continue to happen. Saying that we are just complete fuckups and WAAAAY in the 'wrong' because we are not perfect in the execution of our plans and/or because a few of our soldiers haul off and steal something strikes me as sad. Amusing, but sad.
Be that as it may, that Ministry of Oil building was kept pretty damn secure, not a paperclip unaccounted-for by all reports. So it's not really "shit happens", let's be frank about it: our priorities are elsewhere.
Reply
post #29 of 29
5/12/03 at 12:26pm
Quote:
Be that as it may, that Ministry of Oil building was kept pretty damn secure, not a paperclip unaccounted-for by all reports. So it's not really "shit happens", let's be frank about it: our priorities are elsewhere.
Englebert, you say that like it's a bad thing.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Was Iraq's Museum really looted?