Uruk and the 2003 invasion: a hypothesis

The hypothesis that the burial at Uruk was among the reasons for the 2003 invasion.

In plain words

A hypothesis, labelled speculation and asked rather than dismissed: that the unopened structure at Uruk, read as Gilgamesh's burial, was among the reasons for the 2003 invasion. For it, the detection came first, the stated cause was false by the state's own later reports, and the museum looting had a professional component; against it, no released document names Uruk and the site was never dug. A document, or signs of digging at the site, would move it.

The mechanism

ASKED, NOT DISMISSED — what the record holds FOR: the detection (2001–02) pre-dates the invasion; the stated cause was false by the state's own Duelfer Report (2004) and the Downing Street memo of 23 July 2002 (the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy); the museum looting of 10–12 April 2003 had a professional, targeted component with keys to the basement store (Bogdanos, the official USMC investigation) while the Oil Ministry was guarded and the museum was not. AGAINST: no released document names Uruk, Warka, or the burial; the anomaly was not excavated in eight years of coalition control, and the German institute's work resumed in 2016 with the Iraqi board and the structure still unopened; the surveyor calls the identification speculative. WHAT WOULD MOVE IT: a document referencing Warka in any released file, or ground disturbance at the anomaly between 2003 and 2011, which satellite imagery can check. Until then it is open — and the counterfeit is the only thing that would not let it be asked

How it was checked

• EvidenceT1 LABELLED SPECULATION; Status: LABELLED SPECULATION
• Letter eraTHE RAIL YOU ARE ON 2001 to 2026
• SourcesLABELLED SPECULATION over PRIMARY DOCUMENTS — Duelfer 2004; the memo; Bogdanos's report; the DAI 2016–18 preliminary report