Baghdad Lullaby II

#55 Posted by scout on April 18, 2003 8:58:37 am

yup

#54 Posted by tahmed32 on April 17, 2003 8:50:44 pm

hmmmmmmm... just for that i shall start a chowk argument somewhere.

Any flavor you prefer? Our Argument du Jour is Iraq. Chef`s Special is US seeks World Domination. The House Specialty of Course is Kashmir. If all else fails, I can go find Jay somewhere and remind him to take his pills.

And do you want fries with it?

#53 Posted by scout on April 17, 2003 4:49:45 pm

tahmed32 #52,

t-bhai always looks cute when he`s interacting, especially when he gets agitated.....and dont` even get me started on you.......you look MAHA-cute when u interact, and when you argue, u look like WOW

happy?

#52 Posted by tahmed32 on April 17, 2003 1:50:38 pm

scout #51 And temporal?? Do you think he looks cute too when he fights??

#51 Posted by scout on April 16, 2003 4:37:56 pm

sadna,

u look adorable when u fight

#50 Posted by ferozk on April 16, 2003 10:06:29 am

Re: faisaluno # 47

Thanks!

Ciao

#49 Posted by sadna on April 15, 2003 9:41:23 pm

temporal
I see no connection between your reply and my post. Evidently we donot speak the same language either. I have no interest in interacting further, thanks.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For anyone who cares :

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/16/international/worldspecial/16MUSE.html?pagewanted=1

Experts` Pleas to Pentagon Didn`t Save Museum

The plunder last week of Iraq`s national museum, one of the Middle East`s most important archaeological repositories, occurred despite repeated requests to the Pentagon by experts and scholars that the site be protected when American troops entered Baghdad.

A senior Pentagon official said the military had never promised that the buildings would be safeguarded.

``We could never guarantee ahead of time the safety of a single building,`` said Dr. Joseph Collins, a deputy assistant secretary of defense for humanitarian and peacekeeping operations.

But experts, including McGuire Gibson, a professor at the Oriental Institute at the University of Chicago, said that they believed the military had understood the need to protect the buildings against looting as well as bombing.

``I thought we had understandings,`` Dr. Gibson said today as he prepared to leave for a meeting of antiquities experts in Paris called by Unesco to assess the damage from the museum`s destruction. ``I didn`t expect that we would stand by and let them loot the museum and burn the ministries.``

The experts met with Pentagon officials as early as January to warn that the impending war could pose grave risks to Iraq`s archaeological treasures. They renewed the warnings in e-mail messages in the days before the American attack on Baghdad began, some of the experts said today.

Representatives of the American Council for Cultural Policy, a New York-based group of museum officials and prominent art collectors, also met with Defense and State Department officials in the months before the war, and said they were encouraged by the meetings.

At the Pentagon, defense officials said that the museum had in fact been put on the American military`s no-target list in response to the scholars` warnings, and that the military had refrained from bombing it.

But in an e-mail message, Mr. Collins said that ``in no case`` had his office instructed military commanders to provide protection for the museum or library.

``We leave such decisions to commanders on the scene,`` he said.

In interviews, the experts said their warnings had addressed the dangers posed by looting as well as aerial attack.

Dr. Gibson, a leading expert on Iraqi antiquities, said he met in January with Mr. Collins, whose office was responsible for helping determine which sites could not be bombed.

But Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at a Pentagon briefing today that the protection of the museum had been assigned less importance than the combat operations that were continuing sporadically in Baghdad last Thursday and Friday while the museum was being looted.

``It`s as much as anything else a matter of priorities,`` General Myers said when asked whether the military had made a mistake in failing to defend the museum.

In other parts of Iraq, American forces followed the military`s plan to to secure oil wells, dams and other critical sites ahead of the troops` main advance, and in Baghdad they secured at least the oil ministry and kept looters at bay.

But they did not try to guard the National Museum either before or during most of the two days after Iraq`s own security apparatus collapsed, defense officials acknowledged today. In interviews in Baghdad, museum officials said American troops came only once — for a half- hour at midday on Thursday. ..``

(its a two page writeup)

#48 Posted by DRUMZ on April 15, 2003 9:10:13 pm

Yawn...

I am convinced that if they ever catch saddam, he should be forced to read an internet debate between temporal and sadna.... Like really folks, who gives a sh1t about this topic, my god.

Id rather read a dictionary then this chowk crap.

#47 Posted by faisaluno on April 15, 2003 9:08:42 pm

ferozk:

turks captured athens in 1458 and ruled over it for nearly four centuries. in between, athens was briefly captured by venetians who ruled over it for a couple of years from 1687 to 1688. during the course of the battle for capture of athens in 1687, the venetians layed a siege to the acropolis and lobbed a shell on the parthenon knowing full well that the building was being used as a gunpowder storage center by the turks. the resulting explosion damaged the building beyond repair.

i guess much like the americans, the venetians would probably have blamed the turks for the destruction because of the use of the building as a ``military asset`` by the turks. (this point is purely a conjecture on my part).

#46 Posted by temporal on April 15, 2003 8:10:30 pm

sadna #45:

oh!...so that is what it is!...you think i have included you in the `knee-jerk` (read bigots) brigade?... no i did not!...so when i deride the bigots you take it upon you to include yourself?

...have explained them before...the knee-jerkers are from both sides...unabashed bigots...who re-hash the same tune no matter what the subject...

(now, if for reasons known to yourself you consider yourself as one, it is your prerogative!)

...t

#45 Posted by sadna on April 15, 2003 5:49:14 pm

temporal
`` in replyt to specifics raised in my post there you resorted to your usual word-twisting, tunnel-visioned diatribes``

Moralizing again. I don`t want to know temporaljee, but who the heck are you to decide that what I say is `word-twisting and tunnel visioned`? I don`t share your values, your views or value judgements, so what? Thats a crime now?

Recently you have called me several things because I wouldnot agree with you, on IDRF, on Jamat Ul Fuqra, on Farzana Versey`s views. But did you even make an effort to discuss IDRF, Jamat Ul Fuqra or Farzana`s views? No. Namecalling is enough.

``...i have addressed you...sadnaji...as an individual...i do not make the error of taking you as a representative of all the indians i come across``

Not me perhaps, but then what the heck is the kneejerk brigade?