Why Did ISIS Destroy Ancient Relics in Mosul?

  • Thread starter Thread starter wolram
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the destruction of ancient relics by ISIS in Mosul, exploring the motivations behind such actions and the implications for cultural heritage. Participants express a range of views on the ideological, historical, and ethical dimensions of the destruction, as well as its impact on society and culture.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express outrage over the destruction of priceless artefacts, emphasizing the cultural loss involved.
  • Others suggest that the destruction aligns with ISIS's ideological stance against idol worship, viewing it as a continuation of their broader agenda.
  • A participant reflects on the hypocrisy of ISIS's actions, noting their aversion to idol worship while engaging in violence.
  • There are discussions about the theological justifications that ISIS may use for their actions, with some participants drawing parallels to historical events such as the Crusades.
  • One participant attempts to clarify that while they condemn the violence, they see a distinction between ideologically motivated destruction and other forms of violence.
  • Another participant raises concerns about the broader implications of such ideologically driven actions, questioning the morality of the group's beliefs.
  • Some participants express a desire for a peaceful dialogue and a neutral stance in the discussion, while others challenge the framing of the arguments presented.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus; multiple competing views remain regarding the motivations behind ISIS's actions and the ethical implications of their ideology. The discussion reflects a range of perspectives on the relationship between ideology and violence.

Contextual Notes

Participants express various assumptions about the motivations of ISIS and the nature of their beliefs, which may not be universally accepted. The discussion also touches on sensitive historical contexts and the complexities of interpreting ideological motivations.

wolram
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
4,411
Reaction score
551
What do you think about this wanton destruction of priceless relics

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...s-destroy-ancient-artefacts-mosul-museum-iraq

Islamic State militants ransacked Mosul’s central museum, destroying priceless artefacts that are thousands of years old, in the group’s latest rampage which threatens to upend millennia of coexistence in the Middle East.

The destruction of statues and artefacts that date from the Assyrian and Akkadian empires, revealed in a video published by Isis on Thursday, drew ire from the international community and condemnation by activists and minorities that have been attacked by the group.
 
Science news on Phys.org
What is there to say? It's not like this will change anyone's opinion about the organization.

What it does, apart from making us all culturally poorer, is give Sam Harris another 'I told you so' argument for his debates, while allowing Brits to once more feel good about looting half the region and moving it to their museums back when the world map was still half-pink.
 
Well, it's a little hard not to expect, seen as though pagan and Islamic bonds have never been huge, let alone earlier empires... so kind of a terrorist organization destroying statues/idols from pagan empires doesn't surprise me.

Mahmoud.

P.S. Still puzzled by this ISIS. As a member of the Muslim faith, their actions both intrigue and disgust me. Please do not take this as a red flag saying that I pity them. I do not. Pity is not a word on my lips.
 
They sure do follow a path of hypocrisy.

On the one hand they dislike idol worship, but they sure do seem to worship the gun.
 
256bits said:
They sure do follow a path of hypocrisy.

On the one hand they dislike idol worship, but they sure do seem to worship the gun.

Well, it must be said that they do believe what they are doing is for God. Gun worship, while I'm sure is amusing to you, strikes me as a little off the mark.

Must not forget that the Crusades were believed to be holy wars.

One shouldn't descend from the facts to unnecessary remarks at thei theology.

Please, fault me if I'm wrong.

Mahmoud.
 
SpanishOmelette said:
Well, it must be said that they do believe what they are doing is for God.
That's quite a god that they believe in who tells them to burn people alive. Christians are also guilty of this (although mostly not recently) and I condemn them equally.
 
phinds said:
That's quite a god that they believe in who tells them to burn people alive. Christians are also guilty of this (although mostly not recently) and I condemn them equally.

Not quite what I intended. What I am saying is that they do generally believe what they are doing is essential to "salvation", where the goal is to establish an Islamic State. I do not believe in condemning a single race.
 
SpanishOmelette said:
Not quite what I intended. What I am saying is that they do generally believe what they are doing is essential to "salvation", where the goal is to establish an Islamic State. I do not believe in condemning a single race.
So you think it's OK for them to burn people alive and behead those they don't like?
 
Not at all. You are attempting to find fault in what I am saying. I was originally attempting to say this; that at least this destruction of artifacts fits into their theology, and when a post with a twinge of sarcasm came in, I simply was trying to prevent a conflict.

At this point, I am neutral in many conflicts. To use a less religiously bound argument, think Vietnam and napalm. That got a fair few, including children, into hospital covered in cheesecloth, for both air and pressure was unbearable.

I think that counts as burning people alive, don't you?
 
  • #10
@SpanishOmelette your posts appear to say that destruction motivated by ideology is better than wanton destruction.
 
  • #11
Not quite.

I appear to not be getting my points cross. This always happens on the subject of politics, no?

All I am saying is that there is a difference between going out and shooting 11 men and all the kids in a classroom then shooting yourself is worse than taking a sledgehammer to to some idols that are against your beliefs.

I'm sure you would have to agree.
 
  • #12
Sure. Sadly, the organisation in question has both bases covered.
 
  • #13
Sadly yes. It is the most volatile organization in world, in my eyes. Unpredictable.Hence the recent study of terrorism.
 
  • #14
SpanishOmelette said:
Not at all. You are attempting to find fault in what I am saying. I was originally attempting to say this; that at least this destruction of artifacts fits into their theology, and when a post with a twinge of sarcasm came in, I simply was trying to prevent a conflict.

At this point, I am neutral in many conflicts. To use a less religiously bound argument, think Vietnam and napalm. That got a fair few, including children, into hospital covered in cheesecloth, for both air and pressure was unbearable.

I think that counts as burning people alive, don't you?
I replied but have deleted it as it was trending towards being against the forum rules. As I have already said, I condemn Christian as well as Muslims for this sort of behavior.
 
  • #15
Phinds, my point has been made. I believe it would not contribute to talk on this subject. I wish for a peaceful forum, no conflixct.

Mahmoud.
 
  • #16
SpanishOmelette said:
Phinds, my point has been made. I believe it would not contribute to talk on this subject. I wish for a peaceful forum, no conflixct.

Mahmoud.
agreed
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: SpanishOmelette