They are directly addressing some pretty critical issues--communication with family members abroad who help support the family back home by working and sending money; helping to organize and maintain massive and crucial processes like Rwanda's reconciliation/justice commissions; reducing dependence on foreign powers for the basic mechanisms of global finance--in addition to indirectly addressing the more material issues by facilitating education and business.
It's important not to create a false dichotomy between "help with the basic necessities" and "help with IT and communications issues". It's possible for the "developed" nations to do both, and we should, in my opinion.
Interestingly, you're inflating my claim in order to make rhetorical hay. I didn't say that the President "knew this would happen", but rather that he had been warned that it was likely. This is true (see text below).
Even without these specific warnings, any reasonably aware person could look at history and circumstances and reach the conclusion that the museums would be likely targets. This wasn't important, apparently, to the people making the decisions. It would have been to me.
My "hatred of Bush" is non-existent. I find many of the policies he advocates and the decisions he makes to be problematic, but admire his determination and even (yes, I admit it) his character.
--begin quoted article--
From the Washington Times (not a notably liberal or anti-Bush media outlet), April 20, 2003:
In a memo sent two weeks before the fall of Baghdad, the Pentagon office charged with rebuilding Iraq urged top commanders of U.S. ground forces to protect the Iraqi National Museum and other cultural sites from looters.
"Coalition forces must secure these facilities in order to prevent looting and the resulting irreparable loss of cultural treasures," says the March 26 memo, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Times.
The Pentagon's Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance (ORHA), led by retired Lt. Gen. Jay Garner, sent the five-page memo to senior commanders at the Coalition Forces Land Component Command (CFLCC).
Two weeks later, American forces pulled down the giant statue of Saddam Hussein in Baghdad to cheering crowds, and in the days that followed, looters pillaged Baghdad.
The museum was No. 2 on a list of 16 sites that ORHA deemed crucial to protect. Financial institutions topped the list, including the Iraqi Central Bank, which is now a burned-out shell filled with twisted metal beams from the collapse of the roof and all nine floors under it.
"We asked for just a few soldiers at each building, or if they feared snipers, then just one or two tanks," said an angry ORHA official, one of several who spoke to The Times on the condition of anonymity.
A spokesman for CFLCC, the Kuwait-based branch of Central Command that is in charge of coalition ground forces, was not familiar with the memo. He agreed to pass a request for comment up the chain of command.
U.S. officials characterized the initial days of looting, in which Iraqi government buildings were ransacked and burned, as acts of revenge against a despised regime.
A few days later, however, looters targeted the National Museum.
Much of the ORHA memo, titled "Guidance for CFLCC's Priorities for Securing Key Baghdad Institutions" is devoted to the Iraqi Ministry of Culture.
"Among other assets, it controls Iraq's museums and archeological sites, which contain many priceless art treasures and antiquities of world importance," the memo says.
The memo expresses particular concern for the National Museum located in central Baghdad:
"It contains literally thousands of priceless historical objects, many of them gold, silver, and precious stones, as well as priceless works of art.
"Its collections cover over 5,000 years of recorded history and represent the fruits of 200 years of scientific investigation by both Western and Iraqi archaeologists.
"It will be a prime target for looters," the memo says.
Did you even read the entire 3 lines or so of the post to which you're responding? "Oil fields" can certainly contribute to Iraq's economy, but the original post said... "Like guarding the Oil Ministry while letting the National Museum, Library, and more fall to looters?" The Oil Ministry. The building that once housed the bureaucrats. Not the oil fields or the refineries.
That said, the resources that would've been required to prevent or mitigate the damage to the world's cultural heritage caused by this looting would have been minimal. The President and his little friends were warned that this was likely to happen and chose to ignore it. Probably because they think as you seem to, that anything not producing immediate and obvious benefits is useless.
Origins in stamping "Paid" on a bill that is, well, paid. "Puts paid to" == finished, over with, ended. Essentially ends the argument. In this case, "discredited" works nicely. I'm a 'Murican, and I have been knon to use this phrase from time to time.
Animal Farm
The Moon is a Harsh Mistress
Oliver Twist
Yep... lousy storytelling, all of 'em.
Good storytelling has a good story. You're giving a personal requirement for "art" and claiming it as a universal prerequisite of a craft. Not to mention that a well told story, even one with a specific and timely political message, becomes an instantiation of a universal. It's not necessarily the message that makes a classic, it's the way in which the message is presented.
You also seem to be assuming that "good" is equivalent to "will last a long time". I don't see that that necessarily follows.
I tend to agree with this emotionally, but have found it difficult to support intellectually.
We certainly have cases in which we know empirically that it is a good thing(tm) to preserve certain animal or plant species--important drugs have been derived from them, ecosystems revolve around them in some way, and so on. Is there really a parallel instance in endangered languages? I can't think of a concept or "product" garnered from research in this field that has had that sort of impact on society.
I'm devil's advocating here and hoping that someone will say, "Yes there is! For example..." I do have a strong emotional tendency toward preserving the nearly lost.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems to me that Zuckerman's position isn't:
Lack of IT is a problem.
But rather:
Consistent access to IT can help solve problems.
They are directly addressing some pretty critical issues--communication with family members abroad who help support the family back home by working and sending money; helping to organize and maintain massive and crucial processes like Rwanda's reconciliation/justice commissions; reducing dependence on foreign powers for the basic mechanisms of global finance--in addition to indirectly addressing the more material issues by facilitating education and business.
It's important not to create a false dichotomy between "help with the basic necessities" and "help with IT and communications issues". It's possible for the "developed" nations to do both, and we should, in my opinion.
This exchange made me laugh out loud for the first time in days. Thank you all...
Interestingly, you're inflating my claim in order to make rhetorical hay. I didn't say that the President "knew this would happen", but rather that he had been warned that it was likely. This is true (see text below).
Even without these specific warnings, any reasonably aware person could look at history and circumstances and reach the conclusion that the museums would be likely targets. This wasn't important, apparently, to the people making the decisions. It would have been to me.
My "hatred of Bush" is non-existent. I find many of the policies he advocates and the decisions he makes to be problematic, but admire his determination and even (yes, I admit it) his character.
--begin quoted article--
From the Washington Times (not a notably liberal or anti-Bush media outlet), April 20, 2003:
In a memo sent two weeks before the fall of Baghdad, the Pentagon office charged with rebuilding Iraq urged top commanders of U.S. ground forces to protect the Iraqi National Museum and other cultural sites from looters.
"Coalition forces must secure these facilities in order to prevent looting and the resulting irreparable loss of cultural treasures," says the March 26 memo, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Times.
The Pentagon's Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance (ORHA), led by retired Lt. Gen. Jay Garner, sent the five-page memo to senior commanders at the Coalition Forces Land Component Command (CFLCC).
Two weeks later, American forces pulled down the giant statue of Saddam Hussein in Baghdad to cheering crowds, and in the days that followed, looters pillaged Baghdad.
The museum was No. 2 on a list of 16 sites that ORHA deemed crucial to protect. Financial institutions topped the list, including the Iraqi Central Bank, which is now a burned-out shell filled with twisted metal beams from the collapse of the roof and all nine floors under it.
"We asked for just a few soldiers at each building, or if they feared snipers, then just one or two tanks," said an angry ORHA official, one of several who spoke to The Times on the condition of anonymity.
A spokesman for CFLCC, the Kuwait-based branch of Central Command that is in charge of coalition ground forces, was not familiar with the memo. He agreed to pass a request for comment up the chain of command.
U.S. officials characterized the initial days of looting, in which Iraqi government buildings were ransacked and burned, as acts of revenge against a despised regime.
A few days later, however, looters targeted the National Museum.
Much of the ORHA memo, titled "Guidance for CFLCC's Priorities for Securing Key Baghdad Institutions" is devoted to the Iraqi Ministry of Culture.
"Among other assets, it controls Iraq's museums and archeological sites, which contain many priceless art treasures and antiquities of world importance," the memo says.
The memo expresses particular concern for the National Museum located in central Baghdad:
"It contains literally thousands of priceless historical objects, many of them gold, silver, and precious stones, as well as priceless works of art.
"Its collections cover over 5,000 years of recorded history and represent the fruits of 200 years of scientific investigation by both Western and Iraqi archaeologists.
"It will be a prime target for looters," the memo says.
--end quoted article--
Did you even read the entire 3 lines or so of the post to which you're responding? "Oil fields" can certainly contribute to Iraq's economy, but the original post said... "Like guarding the Oil Ministry while letting the National Museum, Library, and more fall to looters?" The Oil Ministry. The building that once housed the bureaucrats. Not the oil fields or the refineries.
That said, the resources that would've been required to prevent or mitigate the damage to the world's cultural heritage caused by this looting would have been minimal. The President and his little friends were warned that this was likely to happen and chose to ignore it. Probably because they think as you seem to, that anything not producing immediate and obvious benefits is useless.
Sad...
Origins in stamping "Paid" on a bill that is, well, paid. "Puts paid to" == finished, over with, ended. Essentially ends the argument. In this case, "discredited" works nicely. I'm a 'Murican, and I have been knon to use this phrase from time to time.
Animal Farm
The Moon is a Harsh Mistress
Oliver Twist
Yep... lousy storytelling, all of 'em.
Good storytelling has a good story. You're giving a personal requirement for "art" and claiming it as a universal prerequisite of a craft. Not to mention that a well told story, even one with a specific and timely political message, becomes an instantiation of a universal. It's not necessarily the message that makes a classic, it's the way in which the message is presented. You also seem to be assuming that "good" is equivalent to "will last a long time". I don't see that that necessarily follows.
I tend to agree with this emotionally, but have found it difficult to support intellectually.
We certainly have cases in which we know empirically that it is a good thing(tm) to preserve certain animal or plant species--important drugs have been derived from them, ecosystems revolve around them in some way, and so on. Is there really a parallel instance in endangered languages? I can't think of a concept or "product" garnered from research in this field that has had that sort of impact on society.
I'm devil's advocating here and hoping that someone will say, "Yes there is! For example..." I do have a strong emotional tendency toward preserving the nearly lost.