Indeed. We need to do the same thing the Jews did back in 1947, otherwise we're finished as a people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Printable View
Indeed. We need to do the same thing the Jews did back in 1947, otherwise we're finished as a people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Look at the bright side, there is a fatwa to destroy the pyramids, that should keep them busy for a while.Quote:
Originally Posted by rvg
They must be DESTROYED because there is only one god and his name is Allah. Errrrr they are tombs, nobody worships the Farao's. Minor detail.
You just got to respect that, don't we lefties.
Er, why are you blaming the left again? I'd have thought the ultra-religious would be classed as far right, not anything to do with the left. It's the evangelistic left who were all for intervening in the middle east to bring liberal democracy to their benighted masses. If they had their way, we'd be in there right now to bomb the crap out of IS.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Well, the Pharaohs are a "false idol" to more or less exactly the same extent as the Assyrian gods. Nobody is worshipping them at all these days -- to the best of my knowledge -- but in their eras they were worshipped as gods and any memorabilia or images thereof might constitute an icon of false worship. Absent the power of belief, I think these artifacts pose no threat, but apparently some Islamic religious leaders disagree with my point of view.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Should ISIS suborn Egypt and actually wreck the pyramids, Karnak and the like, they would take a big chunk of the Egyptian economy with them. In years when Egypt is NOT engaged in civil war/infighting, tourism represents over 10% of the GDP and 14% of foreign currency transactions.
Rumor has it that many of the destroyed artifacts were actually replicas. Originals were moved to Bagdad, taken by the British years ago, or just recently sold by ISIS for cash on the black market.
mfw Fragony is doing Islamic jurisprudenceQuote:
They must be DESTROYED because there is only one god and his name is Allah. Errrrr they are tombs, nobody worships the Farao's. Minor detail.
Of course we can blame the left, as they have their own religion called 'multicultteralism'. Not allowed to fail, so always more concessions to rediculous demands. Now that we are in Egypt discussionwise, they are holding a snake to their chest, only difference is that this is a creeping poison. These small concesions always seem reasonable, but they are not when taken as a whole.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Egypt was Muslim long before the idea of multiculturalism came into being. Long before the idea of political right and left came into being, for that matter (more than a thousand years before). Or does Frag school teach a special brand of history that blames everything bad in history on lefties?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
With holding a snake to your chest I refer to Cleopatra it is just an expression.
You want a piece of land in the middle of a hostile region?Quote:
Originally Posted by rvg
Not all of them. The destroyed Winged Bull and the God of Rozhan were the original ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by drone
Probably, they were destroyed due to their enormous size, because ISIS was unable to move them, in order to sell them to a private collector.
Damn right I do.Quote:
Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-31727470
Good news. Apparently Iraqi Shia militants together with Iraqi army are encircling IS forces at Tikrit.
As soon as that Iraqi Scotsman, the Clubs King, abandoned the Calpih, ISIS began to crumble.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kagemusha
He has bizarre ideas like that, yes. Sort of like a Lamarckian inheritance approach to foreign policy where if you ram your head against a wall repeatedly, that your offspring will eventually have hard heads or something, not taking into account that the wall's offspring will be a lot more harder to knock down.Quote:
Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name
Is this making any sense?
Swedish news report that the Iraqi army is about to do a major offensive...
Swedish media also report that the US is against it, as it's to weak as is, and will most likely lead to a loss for Iraq, and a huge propaganda win for ISIS...
From what I have learnt of the Iraqi army... I wouldnt bet any money on them being able to do much...
ya bad idea, suppossed a lot of former elite troops they are up against
IS combatants are the same than the Iraqis' ones. If the Iraqis'ones got the right motivation (having family in the ISIS controlled area, or their relatives sold as slaves), they will kill them all then ISIS will just crumble.
That will be a shame for the foreign volunteers, to find out they will be abandoned to their Faith, and I am not expecting the locals to be merciful.
The Jihadi brides... will pay a high price for stupidity...
Its the same attack i posted about. US is against it, because there is a Iranian general overseeing the offensive and lot of Iranian "advisors" are operating many of the more advanced weapon systems. My concern about this is how the Shia militants will behave towards Sunni civilians. Apparently 28K people have fled the fighting already.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-31753727
So... Anyone want to bet?
I know its hard in Arab vs Arab fights, as it's hard to fully grasp the military incompetence if you come from the western world with it's mindset...
ONE of the forces will flee like rabbits and leave all their equipment for use by the other side, I am sure. I put my money on it being the Iraqi army...
So... Anyone want to play?
My bet is that the forces of "Iraqi Army", while the actual force is made mostly of Shia militants and Iranian forces is going to win the battle over Tikrit.
IS has lost its momentum and is starting to grumble, they are only making more and more enemies with their conduct and simply cant win with the odds stacked against them. Which for the best for everyone. Im not sure if IS can actually run anywhere from Tikrit, as their supply routes are being cut off and they might find themselves surrounded soon enough.
I'm not sure which scenario would be best for our interests. That the IS should get snuffed out ASAP. Or that it should maintain a slim communications corridor so that disaffected Muslims in the west can make their way there in time to get blatted. A long running war with us sitting out might do the trick.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kagemusha
Well, there is still Libya as a potential place to be for the global Djihadi elite.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Although, from my knowledge, the main problem we Europeans have with Djihadis going to Syria is not them fighting there, but returning here. After 2 years spent cutting off peoples' heads in front of cameras. Ask the French about how great it is when these people continue their business here.
Hmm, as much as I know, none of the killers had at least the guts to go for a real fight against the Peshmerga. Their "professionalism" was good enough to kill unarmed civilians and 2 poor cops equipped with handgun, this with the surprise on their side.
I think, but I have indeed no substance to really be certain, that most of the ones who will succeed to escape (in between caught and handed over), most of them will be to busy to escape Justice and responsibilities for their actions...
The fanatics are the ones who in fact never lived in the "holly" country, as they have a "dream" in their head, seeing themselves as the SS saw themselves. However, at the end, German SS melted in the crowd, burning with red poker their blood group tattooed under their arm when the Foreign SS, being French and Belgium, had no choice than to die in Berlin...
That would certainly be the best for us at least, kinda cynical. What should have been done and still hasn't been done, making sure they can't come back, or have nothing to come back to should they manage to come back anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Burn down our cities! ~;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
I was more thinking about taking out their lifelines, freezing all bank-accounts, no chance to settle anywhere, every civil-right gone. All human-rights respected but nothing more than that, no favours, total rejecfion, and assasination when it's needed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
Barbarians http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/06/wo...=WT.mc_id&_r=0
How do they justifie this, surely allah must have existed before mohammed
Well ISIS seems to have goals that can be broken, so breaking the caliphate in particular should be a priority. And crush their funding sources and propaganda network.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Some sort of demonstration of their fanatical devotion. Zealots like it big and public. After deciding this, you only need to read a passage the "original way" (that none else in power has ever done before for more than 1000 years), you you're set.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
In the case if ISIS, pissing everyone off might also be a point. Since they have this yarn to crate the final battle.
Those statues are idolatry and represent the worship of false gods, they are some kind of abomination for hardline christians as well I would think. Though most christians wouldn't really care, I just say I can see where they're coming from on this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
As the resident Christian fundie, I can say that we have no problem with such statues. We would disagree with worshipping them obviously, but our answer would not be to go on an iconoclastic rampage and destroy thousands of years or heritage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
Hahaha, like, of course Christians wouldn't do that.Quote:
our answer would not be to go on an iconoclastic rampage and destroy thousands of years or heritage.
EDIT: Also the Saudis have been destroying early Islamic heritage sites since the 19th century, so it's not really all that new. Sadly.
Maybe you're not fundie enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
All idolatry and occult like these statues is part of the devil's devious plan to distract people from god, just like TV and the internet (except the bible channel). Maybe most fundies wouldn't go and smash them but that's because they're not in their own country and they're not in the government. ISIS have them in "their country" and ISIS are the de-facto government, so they set out to destroy the occult idols that distract from the one true faith. The bible has this advice about cutting off your hand if it prevents you from serving god, why would a pagan statue/false god/demonic idol be saved?
Surily enough, the 'beeldenstorm' happened. There is a difference though, the catholic church was a political power. It's easy to shoot holes in that reasoning when only taking the fact that stuff was destroyed, but you wouldn't be considering why that happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hax
http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/th...hing-the-idols
Quote:
Originally Posted by link
Quote:
Originally Posted by link
The last paragraph says that this reason is illogical since these old statues hardly qualify as idols anymore now that noone believes in their religious symbolism anymore, but one also has to take into account that one just has to be fundie enough to think that they may still be "possessed" or something and therefore deserving of destruction. The idea that human belief alone gives an idol power is an atheist idea that does not fly for religious people who believe in an invisible world beyond the one we live in.Quote:
Originally Posted by link
My understanding is that Christian iconoclasm tends to involve icons that are actually being used in worship. There may be exceptions but that would seem to be the pattern in the Beeldenstorm. There were similar instances in Scotland and England where Protestants whitewashed over artwork in Christian churches - I would support such a measure if the church was still to be used as a place of worship (provided the congregation wanted to, of course).Quote:
Originally Posted by Hax
I'm maybe setting myself up to be proved wrong, but I don't think you will find Christians (maybe a handful of individual loons aside) arguing for the destruction of icons at historic sites, museums etc.
Iconalism comes from the good old Roman days. The period Hax refers to is more than a thousand years later, and it was politics rather than faith.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
edit: not a thousand years we will have to wait for a while
And it's called iconoclasm. It's like literally in the post you quoted.
EDIT: I was going to point out the historical destruction of Graeco-Roman sites, but whatever. It's happening in South Korea right now.
Don't know about Beeldenstorm, but the Byzantine version of iconoclasm concerned only the depiction of religious figures, like the Holy Triad and the various saints or martyrs.
It originated from the provinces of Asia Minor, which were greatly influenced by their muslim neighbors, while the opposition was stronger in Greece and Italy.
However, the reason behind it was that the public and the monks had adopted a hysterical attitude towards images.
The monks have become financially powerful, creating and selling numerous images to the christian Romans and encouraged them to use them for every problem they faced.
It has been reported that the most popular medicine was a mix between water and wood or colour from a wooden image...
I didn't do gymnasium so I can make language mistakes in Latin, it was never tought to me so bear with me. Why should it have been anyway because I don't understand some things anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hax
The day I do understand these IS manuacs you are free to shoot me because I wouldn't want to be alive anyway.
Hax,
I'm not trying to turn this into a Christianity v Islam point-scoring exercise. I don't think I should have to point out that when I give my opinion on what the Christian position is on an issue, I am not speaking for all of Christendom. I am also aware that the vast overwhelming majority of Muslims (today and throughout history) oppose the cultural destruction of Islamic State - otherwise, these artefacts would not be around for IS to destroy today, considering the area has been Muslim almost since Islam existed (afaik).
My point was simply, that as a Christian fundamentalist, I do not believe it is necessary or right to destroy artefacts from ancient cultures.
Would you display them in a cupboard in your living room or advocate sending school children to museums to look at them and learn about them?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
Please note that this is just a question, I'm just curious.
Yes I would.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
Compare with the British WWI graves being meticulously maintained under Saddam. 2003 looks more stupid the more one thinks about the aftermath.
But an entire civilization is being destroyed, no trace is being left, if you destroy ancient artifacts what to say. This is different.
There are Sumerian, Assyrian and Babylonian ruins outside the sphere of influence IS. Nimrod is not only ancient city of that area. It is just a showing the hypocrisy of IS that they are demolishing the larger statues and constructions at the site, which they cant move, while they have little problems selling everything they can move to black market. I guess money comes first even for these religious lunatics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
But those are the best arguments!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
Nah man, I hear you, and personally, I think you're actually probably right. I also really appreciate your contributions to any discussion. :bow:
Yes, you'd almost start to think that they're actually humans. :DQuote:
It is just a showing the hypocrisy of IS that they are demolishing the larger statues and constructions at the site, which they cant move, while they have little problems selling everything they can move to black market.
Well, destroying artifacts increase the price of the ones you are selling...
They know they will collapse, and make as much money they can.
All will be forgiven (general pardon) in the name of keeping unity, the surviving slaves, if lucky, will be shipped back home, and the criminals will be able to enjoys the women in bikini at Cannes' festival...
Since they are burning alive military prisoners and beheading most others... is ISIS once beaten going to have all its key members go through a Nuremburg version of trials?
Since they are not taking prisoners and have committed to total war both in their war zone and overseas... does the rest of the world have to take prisoners or is this now not considered a war crime due to the nature of the conflict that ISIS have escalated it too?
The majority of nations around the world condemned the US use of "extraordinary interrogation" (torture) against Taliban and Al Queada members despite their complicity in the terror strikes of 2001, their abduction and murder of journalists, and their "who cares about collateral damage" efforts in Iraq.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papewaio
Consistency would suggest that prisoners must be taken and where appropriate remanded to custody for trial.
So what, I got the word wrong. I am not being payed for this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hax
Things are getting rather hard for Is forces at Tikrit.:yes: Apparently the Shia militant/Iraq army/ Iranian force is pushing towards city center from all directions.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-31849794
Correction: I am not getting paid for this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/payed.html
Are you always a bad friend unless someone pays for your friendship?
So, IS used chemical weapons.
Hmm, I though only Assad had the technical capacity to use them. Well, it was what I was told...:creep:
That probably changed when Saddam's old generals started being recruited into IS.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
Al-Douri, the Scottish leader of the Iraqi Baathists, cancelled his alliance with ISIS half a year ago, under the pretext of the Crhistians in Mosul being mistreated by the jihadists, so officially the baathists are in war with the Caliphate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
On the other hand, there's a possibility that not all the Saddam's supporters followed Al-Douri's example.
Iraq declares victory at Tikrit.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-32153836
Good news and also to good to see that at the end phase of the operation US joined in and supported from air the land forces comprised of mostly Iran backed Shia militants. Apparently there are still pockets of Isis fighters in the city, but things look rather good as it is.
Let's keep these pockets intact as long as jihadi's want to go there, perfect killing room. Extra hilarity bonus if they reincartanate as a teacher of toddlers, 'hey I told you you would get 72 virgins, and you did'. In'Shallah
Those "perfect" killing zones you describe still contain any number of folks who would rather just go back to a mostly normal life. Those zones also contain a -- steadily decreasing :shame: -- number of Christians and "unacceptable" Arab groups (Druze, Yazidi, etc.). Perhaps they would prefer a change of ownership?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Reincarnation comment was cute, but reincarnation is not a doctrine of Islam. As far as I know, only Frank Herbert suggested Islam/Buddhist hybrid.
You are absolutily right, it's inherently immoral to make a killing-zone out of IS. But do you have any better ideas. As long as it exists we could as well make tbe best out of it, and I am probably not the first one who thought of that. I am just glad that nothing was ever done on my account because it's probably going to get even uglier. Arab-spring, lol@those who thought that was happening, wash your own hands if you ever believed in it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
I really do care, but I am not stupid either
The Prague Spring was in 1968 and in 1990 the iron curtain fell. Sometimes these things look like they won't work at first but in the long term they erode existing sturctures and do lead to improvements. That's not to say the Prague Spring alone led to the fall of the Soviet Union, just that these events are often indicative of a brewing unrest and longing for change in the population that doesn't just disappear due to a lack of immediate satisfaction.
Why should I care about their satisfaction, why should I be concerned about them, they are idiots who lost their camel and suddenly showed up here by accident, and are stupid enough to go back. Let them, bye.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
When I say that the movement hasn't necessarily failed it's not the same as saying you should love them and go hug them. And where does the "showed up here" come from? Do you live in North Africa now or did the arab spring thing happen in the Netherlands?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
I believe it when I see it...
As soon as air support is withdrawn I'm rather sure things will swing back again... When they have cleared the whole city AND held it steady for half a year or so, I will start to put some faith in it...
But the Iraqi army is just too... Incompetent... To handle a fight on their own.
In a way it did, because real experts who were never were inivited were right all the time. Right know they just don't want to talk about it anymore, that is normal when everybody gets it absolutily wrong. They just lose all interest in what they got wrong. That it afffects thousands of people doesn't matter, they fill their pipe and get another wine and read another book. How narcistic can you be before you understand that you are a narcist.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
What Iraqi Army? Tikrit was captured by the Shia militias and the Quds Force. The bombardment didn't offer much, it was mostly done for propagandistic purposes, to show that America is committed to the war against the Caliph.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV
IS branches appearing in Afghanistan? Interesting.
Who was it that I made the bet with?Quote:
Originally Posted by Viking
I am beginning to think that I will need to talk with either a high-end Wall Street LBO specialist or a mafia capo-regime (presuming there exists a strategic difference between the two, it may only be a tactical difference) to understand the current by-play between Al-Queada and IS. It seems to me that the two are in a "horror show" competition while competing for the same labor pool.
LOL!! Word...Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
I do understand it from a muslim perspective though... ISIS you know, IS the new caliphate (self proclaimed at least)... Any muslim against it are thus no true muslim...
Sidenote: I actually welcome this view... Let the idiots drag out all the other idiots... Way easier to kill them off when they are all bunched up in numbers and carry clear flags.
I don't LIKE it, but it's much preferable to have an enemy you KNOW.
Agreed, best to kill them just a little bit so they keep their appeal for nutjobs here. As long as they think they can win they will go there and we are rid of them. IS as a killing room, perfect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV
Not so nice for those who live there though, but everybody who is against IS is probably already dead.
Amhed Abdullah Abid Kalaf, the Governor of the Saladin Mazrpanate, who, to be sincere, has a reputation of being slightly mythomaniac, announced that Ibrahim al-Douri, the current leader of the outlawed Baathist party and the most wanted Iraqi since 2003 (he was the "King of the Clubs" in the infamous deck) was killed.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/...0N81EZ20150417
It would be a considerable success on behalf of Iran and Her Shia Militias, if they managed to get rid of the "Scotsman", as his force, the Army of the Men of the Naqshbandi Order was mainly responsible for the fall of Nineveh (Mosul), last year.
On the other hand, it has been reported that he had quarrelled with the Caliphate, when they refused to follow his advice on how they are supposed to govern the occupied lands.
http://anysoldier.com/brian/Iraq/184e.jpg
Also, a rahter informative video about the military superiority of Iran:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehbn...yer_detailpage
Al-Douri looks like he could be my grandfather. Crusader genes?
Older. Apparently, he's from a line of Arabized Assyrians. He's closer to rvg than anyone else here, probably.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
implying all people in the middle east look the same
well it's nice to see you got a degree in Islamic theologyQuote:
I do understand it from a muslim perspective though... ISIS you know, IS the new caliphate (self proclaimed at least)... Any muslim against it are thus no true muslim...
Wut?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hax
How is being surprised that a Baathist general could pass for a Scotsman implying that everybody in the Middle East looks the same?
I would be pretty surprised if a native of my neck of the woods was born looking like your average Bedouin Arab, it doesn't mean I think all white people look the same.
Your surprise at his looks shows that he does not fit the image you had of a "typical" Middle Easterner. Having a typical Middle Easterner in your head means that you think they all look the same and basically fit your stereotype. Or that's what Hax and his ultra-liberal feminazi PC-police friends would say to terrorize you with thought-control. I found your statement rather understandable and harmless. In fact I thought that guy on the picture was some crazy bavarian because of the hat, but I'm probably racist towards bavarians according to the pinko libraul thought police.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
He's probably dead:
http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/co...al-haq-forces/
WARNING: Its content might be shocking.
He was an efficient commander, even the pro-Assadists and Iran (the most bitter of his enemies) respected him as a man of particular shrewdness.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-RXvw-hkmGE...21586354_n.jpg
We have looked into your soul, Rhyfelwyr, and we know your thoughs. Allahu akbar.
I understand where it comes from, but you have to understand that Iraq is an incredibly ethnically diverse and cosmopolitan place (or used to be, until everything went to hell). For the bedouin, you'll have to go deeper into Arabia (:
Fair enough, it was a cool thing to learn.