-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
IS destroys iconic al-Nuri mosque in Mosul
- Thread starter Oersted
- Start date
Autodidact
Banned
As shameful as when they destroyed the Roman amphitheater in Palmyra.
Frozenprince
Banned
Your daily reminder that the "Islamic caliphate" is really just a tribal army comprised of egotistical whackjobs on the top and brainwashed teenagers as their cannon fodder.
Don't worry they conveniently blamed it on a US coalition airstrike and didn't blow it up as the coalition got near in hopes of taking some of them with them.
water_wendi
Water is not wet!
Why would they blow up that?
Oppo
Member
would you say The Crusades were just some whack jobs and not representative of Christianity? it's not a trap, i'm genuinely curious.
Skellig Gra
Member
Most Christians back then had absolutely no clue about global politics. They barely knew anything outside their own town.
Iraqi money not ISIS money
water_wendi
Water is not wet!
Ah i see.
Yeah, pretty much.
theechrisfox
Member
Wow, she is really brave. I can't even imagine.
That's not theirs, but yes. I think there were reports from a few years back saying they were minting their own gold currency.
Here we are:
https://news.vice.com/article/islam...coins-in-effort-to-drive-us-to-financial-ruin
chicken_pasta
Banned
Iraq's currency.
Charles Brandon
Member
The Crusaders were explicitly the representatives of Christianity and acknowledged as such by all of Christendom. What does that have to do with the price of fish?
so much history lost because of these bastards
Oppo
Member
well... "global politics" in the 1100s, ok, but not sure what you are getting at?
because of the Pope? is that the difference?Jazzy Geoff said:
Yes they were but that was a long time ago. The world now is not what it was back then information is vastly more available and people are more free then ever to make up their own minds about stuff. Heretics/Infidels aren't burned at the cross or beheaded most places anymore etc etc. All the religions have moderated over time and most sects are more about convincing you to join them rather then killing you if you don't.
AcademicSaucer
Member
Just for context,
ISIS says US jets blew the thing, The Pentagon denies it and says it was ISIS.
ISIS says US jets blew the thing, The Pentagon denies it and says it was ISIS.
Charles Brandon
Member
What are you talking about? State your argument, clearly and concisely please.
Pentagon would have to take there usual stupid and ramp it up to 10 times as stupid to actually blow the thing up especially knowing there are god knows how many reporters and cameras watching these days.
Another day, another action that enrages muslims, wiping cherished history and culture. Palmyra was too painful for me, and now they've done it again. If it were up to them they'd bulldoze Hagia Sophia, the Blue Mosque, Alhambra in Spain, Al Aqsa in Jerusalem, the Pyramids, Nankana Sahib in Lahore, Prambanan of Indonesia, they even carried out bombing outside the Prophets mosque in Saudi Arabia. They care very little for current religion and its people, rather they want to establish their new religion.
There isnt a group of humans i detest more. Fuck these pieces of shits.
There isnt a group of humans i detest more. Fuck these pieces of shits.
The crusaders took to torturing the Byzantine prelate in Jerusalem to find the True Cross. That said, the aristocracy of the crusades was fairly well educated in comparison to Peter the Hermit's People's Crusade.
BlackLagoon
Member
It's a bit more than that. They're also obsessed with back to basics "original" Islam, and view a lot of what came after the life of the prophet as impure, as idolatry. It's similar to how early protestants would destroy catholic art during the reformation. Of course them using this mosque as a set-piece in their caliphate announcement and only destroying it now is more than a little hypocritical.
Joe Condor
Banned
Not sure if I'd call them whack jobs, they were responding to the military expansion of Muslims that had conquered parts of Portugal, Spain and Italy and launched attacks on Rome in 846 and 849.
The Frankish forces stopped invading Muslim armies from expanding further into Europe in the Battle of Tours, France in 732.
Pope John the 10th lead Christian forces that destroyed the last Arab strongholds in southern Italy in 1091, 4 before the first Crusade was called by Pope Urban the 2nd.
Im not so sure of that, they continuously blaspheme based on Islamic rules, they're following their own rules, where muslims, women and children are fair game. They don't believe in cohabiting with 'people of the book' Its ISIS religion or no religion for them.
BlackLagoon
Member
Oh, like all proper fundamentalists they pick and choose what they want from the scriptures to twist the message into something that suits them. I was just pointing out the basic mentality behind this - establishment Islam has been corrupted by man and must be purged, we're going back to the source, we're the true and pure. It doesn't matter that it's inaccurate, as long as they can sell it to their followers.
They know hence why they blamed the USA. But it's not gonna work.
Frozenprince
Banned
Which one? The first crusade was a power grab by Urban II and the Church by seeing the writing on the wall, the Muslim world was being pushed out of mainland Europe and the church, being the "wests" most dominant central power, saw this and attacked the Caliphate to secure it's own position. Lords went along with it out of both piety and self interest, in order for them to unify their people under a divine mandate. While religion was the justification of the conflict, it wasn't the driving force behind it's major actors.
The second was simply a counter offensive by the European powers to drive back the Turks from Edessa. It failed, but powers on the mainland used it to consolidate Ibera (Portugal began it's rise as a European power from it).
The third was another defensive against Saladin.
The fourth, well, that was just an excuse to conquer Byzantium.
Christianity formed the spine they used to justify the wars, but it was never actually about "retaking the holy land", in fact more gains were made in the crusades in Europe proper than ever were by crusader kingdoms.
The situations are different because ISIS/ISIL is a purely modern middle eastern creation, a radicalized Wahhabi army comprised of various tribes that banded together through extremism but, in actuality, the fighting is mostly sectarian, as it's all against other tribes in the regions even if they are adherents.
Christianity at the time was either the eastern Orthodoxy (which two of the crusades were de facto waged against) or Roman Catholicism, the Catholic west banded together as a means of convenience, less so than any sort of grand piety. As he had been for hundreds of years, the Pope was more used as a symbol of legitimacy of rule, less so as a purely divine religious analogue or figure. The Crusades were never really a holy war except to the poor farmers and levies that were raised by various lords. But blaming them or saying that their zeal is vlaidation that it was a religious conflict is like saying the brainwashed kids from Madrassa know what they are doing.
Most of the time they had no idea where they were even going.
ISIS started their shit by destroying the Mosque of Yunus. It's amusing to me that people are still shocked when ISIS destroys things that are Islamic. The guys who stated they'd destroy the Ka'aba if they took Mecca aren't representatives of mainstream Islam? I am shocked!
Arkage
Banned
Claiming a modern liberal interpretation of scriptures is more "accurate" isn't really a good talking point when these scriptures (OT/Koran alike) were the product of openly misogynistic, violent tribalists. And I don't mean misogynistic as in "women should be quiet" I mean it in terms of "how many cows is your daughter worth" or "how big a stick is legal to beat your backtalking wife with" types.
Ancient scripture is inevitably trapped inside unethical, violent, bad ideas, unless you're going to claim no moral progress has been made in the past 1500-4000 years. Isis thinks secular humanism is garbage because it isn't true to the original intent of these tribalistic, violent authors, and they're largely right. It's just that Judaism and Christianity had a reformation that slowly convinced people to symbolize the blatantly unethical verses away over 100s of years, eventually turning those verses into meaninglessness as they continuously played catch up with newer ethical norms. People expect Islam to play catch up in short order, but that's a really big ask.
It also doesn't help that the entire Koran is supposed to be the literal word of Allah, which makes the symbolization/reformation aspect all the more difficult to embrace even for non-Islamist Muslims. Imagine if most Americans believed the constitution was literally written by God himself. You'd have a lot more constitutional literalists today than there currently are. There would be no amendments. It's hard to make a "intent of the words should be shaped by the time we live in" argument even if it's just the word of important humans, let alone God.
Also, anyone claiming Isis has little or no religious motivation is explicitly denying Isis own argument for its existence. I believe most people who don't believe Isis is filled with true believers and scriptural scholars, even at the top, doesn't really understand how a religious person thinks in the first place.
From Dabiq, Isis' now closed propaganda magazine:
victreeb3l
Member
So many irreplaceable things lost because of these shitstains. Fucking assholes.
Joe Condor
Banned
The Byzantine Empire sent repeated request for military aid since they were fighting for survival of their homelands, the Muslims had conquered 3 of the 5 Christian centers and were attacking the 4th(Constantinople), reports of desecration of holy sites and harsh treatment of surviving Christians under Muslim rule.
Wealth and land was likely a part in the decision to start the 1st Crusade but it was not simply a power grab IMO.
NoFaceNico
Member
They only partially destroyed it and it can be restored.
Sorry if it's already been asked, but why would they destroy a mosque? Is it just a scorched earth thing so they deprive us of being able to raise a flag on a site that was once important to them?
Joe Condor
Banned
They only partially destroyed it and it can be restored.
Sorry if it's already been asked, but why would they destroy a mosque? Is it just a scorched earth thing so they deprive us of being able to raise a flag on a site that was once important to them?
Propaganda tool or that Mosque is a representation of Islam they disagree with, heresy which justifies destroying it.