We really are veering off topic, but Deb, I think you are missing the point.

The looting of Government Buildings, Museums and Archives as well as private
businesses was entirely foreseeable.

It would have been (and certainly should have been) a part of any planning
by the military commanders and the Pentagon.

Ordinary infantry are easily capable of keeping the peace and policing such
situations, even without Military Police support (infantry have been
patrolling the streets in parts of the UK, with Police powers for at least
the last 30 years).

That it is only now just starting to happen, (unfortunately in the case of
the Museums, Archives and Libraries, too late) is either incompetence, or a
deliberate decision not to do so. One reason for the latter could well be
that the Coalition advanced on Baghdad in numbers far less than they really
should have (probably on the ratio of 4-5 times too small a force for what
they were potentially facing) in the hopes of winning a blitzkrieg
campaign - it was a gamble and they won. But the troops in Baghdad are too
few in number and were getting close to worn out. Only now are thy being
adequately reinforced. This left the vacuum of power and civil control on
the streets.

That may well have left Commanders feeling they did not have adequate troops
to control the streets. However, that isn't an accident, or an unforeseeable
problem. It's a result of the planning decisions made. It ultimately (and
there may well have been other deciding factors) left the Coalition unable
to meet it's responsibilities to control the streets of Baghdad and prevent
the looting and damage.

Point being that it was part of a rational decision making process, not
something that happened and no one expected it.

tim



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Museum discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
> Behalf Of Deb Fuller
> Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 8:24 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Iraq looting - Military Police v. Civilian Police
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > Having had a career as a Military Policeman I can tell you that
> you are a
> > certain degree off mark on this - they have frequently been
> used "in support
> > of the civil powers" in a full support role
>
> But how can MPs support "civil powers" if there are few to no
> civil powers to
> begin with?
>
> With all the emphasis put on differing views, and this is the
> last I'll say on
> the subject, I haven't heard anything extensive from the
> perspective of the
> troops that were there.
>
> Yes, more could have been done but we don't know the full story
> and probably
> won't until the war has been over for a while.
>
> For example:
>
> - Were troops deliberately not getting involved in stopping
> individual looters
> because they were concerned they might be resistance fighters
> trying to attack
> them?
>
> - Were they concerned that stopping the looting would lead to
> rioting and more
> civilian casualities doing more harm than good?
>
> - Did they just not care?
>
> - Were they completely overwhelmed in the situation as troops
> were spread out
> all over the city which encompasses many square miles and
> millions of people?
> (20,000 military assault vehicles v. a few million people doesn't
> sound like
> very good odds to me, especially when the troops were trying to minimize
> civilian casualities)
>
> - What other intelligence about the situation had been gathered that
> couldn't/wasn't being shared with the media?
>
> To give you an example, I work with a bunch of retired military types with
> various combat experience. Their reaction to the story about the
> journalist
> getting shot by US troops from the top of the hotel was much
> different than the
> reaction of the mainstream press which painted the situation largely as an
> innocent journalist getting vindictively shot by US troops with
> little cause.
> My co-workers' first reaction was, "From that distance and the troop's
> perspective on the ground, that camera probably looked like an
> anti-tank weapon
> (they used some technical term for it that I can't remember),
> especially with
> the glare of the sun. The tank commander probably ordered his men
> to fire on it
> before he thought he was going to be fired upon."  Quite a different
> perspective.
>
> So it's easy to point fingers but what's done is done. Hopefully
> everyone has
> learned from the situation and recovery efforts will be successful.
>
> deb
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
> http://search.yahoo.com
>
> =========================================================
> Important Subscriber Information:
>
> The Museum-L FAQ file is located at
http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed
information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message
to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help"
(without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to
[log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff
Museum-L" (without the quotes).

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).