John Curtis, author of the museum's report, said this was "tantamount to establishing a military camp around Stonehenge".

"About 300,000 square metres of the surface of the site has been flattened and covered with compacted gravel and sometimes chemically treated," he said.

"This will contaminate the archaeological record of the site."

He added: "I noted about 12 trenches, one of them 170m long, which had been dug through the archaeological deposits."

Mr Curtis, who is curator of the museum's Near East department, also found evidence of fuel leaks.

Awe-inspiring

But US military spokesman Lt Col Steven Boylan said the base, which has around 6,000 troops under Police command, is needed to "further defeat terrorists and insurgents".

He told BBC Newshour: "Any of the excavations or earth work that we have done in order to do our operations... was done in consultation with the Babylon museum director and an archaeologist."

At the height of its power, Babylon was an awe-inspiring sight, with two sets of fortified walls surrounding massive palaces and religious buildings.

It became one of the most important cities in Mesopotamia, one of the cradles of human civilisation.

Iraq is home to 10,000 archaeological sites.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/h...st/4177577.stm

Published: 2005/01/15 16:58:45 GMT

© BBC MMV</font>[/QUOTE]A picture from the site: http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/image...5_wallsbbc.jpg

You'd think they could've built their base half a mile down the road....

[ 01-15-2005, 04:06 PM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

I'd rather a thousand cities burn then a single Coalition soldier die.

<font color = lightgreen>Well, I wouldn't go quite that far myself. However, I do hope that Coalition forces can work with archaeologists to minimize any negative impact to historical sites. Present objects can be replaced, but antiquities are invaluable and irreplaceable.</font>

Babylon has been damaged and sacked many times before, it'll live through this as well.

True but something damaged enough will be destroyed.

And how many times did the sackers dig huge trenches and use the mighty (how many ton?) Abrams?

I'm a certified contract archaelogist (as I say that, I have to stand akimbo), which really only means I've had the most basic field course in it lol. I gotta say, I wasn't even allowed a tool any bigger than a trowel. To destroy archaeological evidence, you have but to move it without documenting what it was and where exactly you moved it. The trenches and tank path areas are in effect destroyed. Hopefully, it's been studied already. I mean, it HAS been there for awhile.