Destruction of World’s Eastern Heritage in Iraq

wajahat #21 i should also add that it is not ``loyalty`` to any land - the land of one`s birth or the land where one now lives - that is important. There is a higher loyalty - i.e. loyalty to the facts. Here is the list of factual errors and misrepresentations in the article:

1. ``In spite of warnings, the most comprehensive archives of Iraq`s history were set ablaze.`` I dont recall reading these warnings in the copious articles, discussions before the war. Indeed the major concerns related to environmental damage caused by saddam setting oil wells ablaze. It is easy to criticize with 20-20 hindsight. but pointless and unfair.

2. Professor Michalowski of Michigan said that this was ``a tragedy that has no parallel in world history; it is as if the Uffizi, the Louvre, or all the museums of Washington DC had been wiped out in one fell swoop``.

This professor M. i am sure said that, as did the other professors that singh quotes. But to compare the value of lost historical treasures is meaningless. and, while quoting some western professors is not equivalent to stating facts.

incidentally: i wonder what professor M. (or singh) had to say when the taliban deliberately destroyed the afghan buddhas. i wonder if you are prepared to condemn the countless muslim invaders to india who have defaced buddha statues and destroyed temples of worship. are you prepared to condemn mahmud ghazni for destroying somnath?

3. he writes: ``Others used phrases such as cultural genocide and compared the US in particular to the Mongol invaders of 13th-century Iraq. `` the mongols made a pillar of heads of the residents of baghdad and turned mosques into horse stables. to compare the US action in iraq with the mongol invasions indicates a total lack of concern for facts.

4. ``Martin Sullivan, Chairman of President’s Advisory Committee on Cultural Property and its member Gary Vikan resigned because the US military had had advance warning of the danger to Iraq’s historical treasures.`` See 1. above. If they had resigned BEFORE the invasion, that would be different. if the US military had advance warning that it ignored, then resigning would have made sense.

5. `` The great arch of Ctesphion, still the widest unsupported brick arch in the world, was cracked by the vibrations of the American carpet bombing.`` By no stretch of imagination can the US bombings be called carpet bombing. in fact, the opposite is true with the use of smart bombs and focussed targetting. if singh wants to see carpet bombing, he should see what the germans did to the brits in london, what the brits and the americans did to dresden, what the japanese did to nanking. This loose use of terms reduces the article to hot air.

6. `` For all his faults, Saddam Hussein was protective of archaeology, promoting it for a national rebirth and a repeat of the glories of the past, and comparing himself to Nebuchadnezzar (what about US presidents as Roman emperors ) who had built the Hanging Gardens of Babylon.`` singh is scraping the bottom of the barrel to find something good to say about saddam. saddam protected archaeology as part of his own strategy to stay in power. here again singh distorts facts by giving only a very partial glimpse of the truth - the whole truth being that saddam was protective of his OWN idols above all - having littered the iraqi countryside with himself dressed up in more different costumes than an indian film heroine changes in one movie.

I could go on, but will stop here. also note the points that michael m. makes which point to additional misrepresentations in this article.

as i said - loyalty should be to facts and to the truth. only then can one be loyal to one`s people (whoever those people are - the west, the east, or (as i believe one should be if one understands the message of the Quran) to ALL mankind). to cook up facts and to twist reality to suit one`s prejudices is not being loyal to anything or anyone other than to one`s own prejudices and insecurities.

Well,

``These usual suspects however cannot stand such viewpoints. All they want to hear is the greatness of their adopted lands and acquired nationalities. Questioning that would be too much for their guilt ridden souls. They consider just one thing to be the epitome for everything that has gone wrong with the east, religious, political, cultural backwardness, which are undoubtedly major problems with questionable sources. Its a catch 22 for them. ``

The west have a very sad past, but doesn`t mean than the politician etc. from the east can do whatever they want because it`s not their fault after all. The article is well documented, but it`s not enough to be well documented for saying the truth and not a political radical and unfounded point of view.
The problem, in our case, is not the west and the east but a proper east problem, who think that west is purely rational and dont`t accept non rational things (like religion). It`s widely accepted in private lives, but not in a public secular debate, because there is no other bases there than faith. I don`t care if you believe in the pink invisible Unicorn, if you don`t force me to follow her dogma because you think that she exists.
And I don`t want to hear greatness of the west, because to say `it`s good it`s good` doesn`t make it good.

Well...

wajahat: you are entitled to your views (as you just did, and as singh just did). you are not entitled to make up facts however. and while you are entitled to your views, views that are not anchored on facts are nothing but hot air. your post therefore is hot air. the favorite past-time of the pakistani elite.

subroto #18 good one ;-) welcome back to chowk.

michaelM #17 your objections are quite accurate. the author is just blowing hot air when he talks about alexander being glorified in the west. in fact, in many ways alexander has been accepted in the east as much as in the west: ``iskander`` (for alexander), for example, is a popular name for boys in pakistan. alexandria is of course a major city in egypt. and the simple point is that the west (and the more progressive parts of the world as well, like japan, china, and i believe a vast number of indian middle class as well) has moved beyond the ``military conquest`` stage of human development anyway.

if anything the popular heroes today among youth are sports figures. not politicians, not religious fanatics, not empire builders, and certainly not long dead empire builders.

your post also takes a balanced view the contributions of different societies. every society owes a major debt to societies that came before and much to learn from them. the mark of a progressive society is that it recognizes this fact. thus, centuries ago baghdad was a center of learning where greek scholars and indian scholars both came together and contributed to arab culture in medicine and mathematics - in today`s state of decay in that same part of the world, such appreciation of other cultures would be unheard of.

so the points you make are quite valid. dont wait for singh to acknowledge that though (he does not seem to be around to respond to questions raised about his article).

`` The Empire Has No Clothes

The US, for all its armed might, cannot really be said to exercise political power in Iraq, and it cannot hand over to someone else what it doesn`t yet possess...``
(JONATHAN SCHELL)

``Relinquishing the fantasy of a victory in Iraq is the true moral mission of our time.``
(Jonathan Schell)

Mr Singh

A very well written & extensively researched article which is unfortunately taken negatively by some of the usual suspects here at chowk. It seems almost any form of questioning from a writer of an eastern origin prompts somehow the question of betrayal to West. Yes it is true that West has some excellent examples of how a society should be, unfortunately there is a bigger disease at the heart of this western civilisation which rots not only these nations but has violent and bloody consequences(Proxy Dictators and Sheikdoms) in the east.

These usual suspects however cannot stand such viewpoints. All they want to hear is the greatness of their adopted lands and acquired nationalities. Questioning that would be too much for their guilt ridden souls. They consider just one thing to be the epitome for everything that has gone wrong with the east, religious, political, cultural backwardness, which are undoubtedly major problems with questionable sources. Its a catch 22 for them.

however thank you for your well researched article and we (atleast some of us) look forward to your next article.

Keep Writing.

Regards

Syed Ali

Anybody watch Tariq Ali on C-Span2 today? He talked at Johns Hopkins University on Nov 20 and that talk was (re?)braodcast today.

#11 by tahmed32 on November 27, 2003 12:19pm PT

``you are quite inaccurate when you say that saddam was protective of archaeology.``

Perhaps you missed out the satire in my posting. Never have I meant to laud Saddam

---

the worst serial mass murderer in Middle Eastern history. I had merely quoted the author. My objective is to reveal the idiocy (``1 bull > 10 humans``) in the rantings of the America bashing club.

Cordially,
OM

Now seems to be a good time to mention that one man`s Mede is another man`s Persian.

This attempt to reconsider west from the eyes of an Indian occidentalist is remarquable in his lack of impartiality. Just an exemple:

How Alexander “the Great “ has been glorified as a Western conqueror of the East. He >was a small town homosexual boy who was taught the intricacies of state protocol, >running of an empire and the divinity of the emperor by older civilisations of Asia Minor, >Egypt and Persia. If he had followed the advice of his teacher Aristotle and not learnt >from the so called barbarians, his vision would have remained limited and shallow.

First, Alexander have been glorified also by the east, for his conquests. Maybe he was a small town boy, but son of a king, not of a shepherd.
This idea that if you`re not from a city you`re nothing let us think that Romulus an Remus, in the roman mythological history, were nothing.
To point out that he was homosexual, something in fact recognised like a normal thing in ancient Greece, and not like a perversion (and I still think that is not a sin to be like we are), is just homophobia, and no answer has to be given to it.

About the idea that with the muslims, all the greek heritage was maintain, it`s not completely true. Of course they translate and saved the texts, but from where? Do you think that the Roman empire, and the roman religions were based on nothing? To think that only one group can thing for two is a kind of chauvinist point of view (we are here to civilised you).

And just think a little: from where does come the concept of Europe and Asia?
There`s a difference between India, Iran, Arab countries, Europe, but why do you suppose than Iran is with India and Iran, and the Arab countries, when Europe is just alone? Is it not a greek concept, reproduced after again and again, on religious arguments, by proto-orientalists and orientalists? You can denounce it but not say that is not a fact.


Oh yes, also:
The divergence between conscious intuition of the East and rational thought of the West >was perhaps complete after de la Carte announced “I think therefore I am. ‘ Of course >there`s no place for intuition in this
First it`s not `De la Carte`, but Descartes (more than one card).
Of course, there`s place of intuition in it, but it`s not a method for all things of the life, it`s just a statement: I am (that even doesn`t say that the others are).

So, even if the intention is comprehensible, the lack of understandment of what is occident (looks like the lack of understandment of lots of orientalists) doesn`t make a solid brick in the wall of the `shock of the cultures`.
If the intention is to say: we are good, we are the best, and America, and the whole west in fact, is bad, I will say that is non sense. If it`s not the case, what is the intention?

Tahmed32,

You should be downright ashamed podner! Inspite of watching so many hindi movies you pakis still did not know this??? OK, how many times have you seen Sholay...who was thakur baldev singh, gabbar singh ...tsk,tsk gabbar ka naam poora mitti may mila diya :)


Pardesi,

There are so many singhs in the north that I suspect its not the rajputs and jats alone with the `singh` middlename.

There are a few down south too...where people have an unabashed admiration for the northerners who sacrifised for the freedom struggle. I had a junior in college called `bhagatsingh` (one word) from Andhra!

Pardesi: Thanks for adding to my knowledge on the non-sikh singhs. this will definitely add to my expertise Trivial Persuits in time for the world championships. This being Mr. Singh`s second article in a few days on that tired old theme concerning the evil west that third world intellectuals harp about from the comfort of their homes in the west (and in which Mr Singh presumably resides after having completed his visa application and stood in line hoping to be let in, just like brother urstruly) , that i thought i might check if khalistan was ready so he could go and live in a country that is up to his moral standards.

#12 by tahmed32 ”gajendra singh: I assume you have made khalistan by now”

Fyi, There are many communities (e.g., Rajputs and Hindu Jats) who use Singh as middle or last name. Assuming Gajendra Singh is a Sikh, how did you jump to the conclusion that he is a Khalistani?
Also, would you please allow an Indian/Hindu/Sikh also write articles related to Arab countries, if they wish, without Pakistani muslims` permission?

America is bad and a lawless country but it is not fair to blame everything on them. I don`t think that they deliberately let looters loot the museums as the first paragraph of the article suggests. The fact of the matter is that as the video game war was over and americans had killed reasonable amount of Iraqi women and children with their ``precision`` bombs they decided to set foot on Iraqi soil to receive their hard earned flower garlands from the public they just murdered in cold blood. But they had no idea what they were about to be hit with. The poor guys couldn`t even tell left from right with in hours of setting foot on Iraq. By the time looters were looting museums and hospitals they were peeing in their pants.

ordinary muslim #9: you are quite inaccurate when you say that saddam was protective of archaeology. saddam, like all dictators, was protective first and foremost of his throne. and his strategy for this purpose was to portray himself as a modern day nebuchadnazzer, an arab hero standing up to the west. this strategy fitted well with his ego as well. and it was the same strategy that led him to litter iraqi cities and countryside with saddam idols. his was the same strategy that was followed by the iranian shah pehalavi as well - another ``secular`` leader in the muslim world. He too made a big deal about ruins of the pre-islamic iranian empire.

of course ``religious`` leaders of the muslim world are just as bad. only thing is, that instead of trying to portray themselves as idols, they destroy ancient relics in the name of relgion. as the taliban did in case of buddhist ruins.

either way you look at it, muslim ``leaders`` - secular dictators or religious fanatics - are full of shi!t.

of course that does not prevent some ``ordinary muslims`` from looking up to them. as you just did.