>>>>This is what you're concerned about? Paving stones?
>>>
>>>It's the civilisation. The Iraqis, whatever we may think of them, kept the history intact, through all the previous wars, dictatorships etc.
>>
>>I read the reports. The damage is minimal. They didn't have tanks in the previous wars. I'm not sure that camels weigh as much, but I'm thinking not.
>
>Now it's only about cobblestones. Nice. Metin mentioned archaeological material used for sandbags, and I remember the news about US military units looking the other way while the national museum was ransacked in the days immediately after the occupation of Baghdad. That's the cultural heritage of the world we're talking about, a lot of it being at least a dozen or two dozen centuries old. It's the Messopotamia. Why would you care? These artifacts have survived all that time, and are gone within a week of US presence in the city. And you say "This is what you're concerned about?". Well you should be concerned. Future generations of historians will encounter thousands of museum records where it will say "it was kept in the Baghdad museum, but has vanished when US troops took over the city". US will be so remembered.

Like this hasn't happened in all wars. I think even back to the crusades, entire cities were destroyed and burned. It is just about cobblestones. And archaeological material for sandbags. And for whatever else is needed to do what needs to be done. It's war, not a friggin tea social.

>
>>>I'm not trying to explain it to you.
>>
>>Have no idea what this means.
>
>I don't see a point of explaining, if you are able to dismiss the whole matter of world's cultural heritage as "This is what you're concerned about? Paving stones?" - just had to react for the sake of lurkers out there.

Why don't you react for your own sake and let the lurkers comment if they want to?