This is just awful - IS wrecking ancient Assyrian city

Megii

Drew_fx said:

Megii said:

Drew_fx said:

Also... Greenpeace did something very similar recently. I don't see the up in arms anger over that. Shame.

What was that one @Drew_fx ?

https://news.vice.com/article/drone-footage-shows-extent-of-damage-from-greenpeace-stunt-at-nazca-lines

Sad to see, I hadn't realised how serious what they did was.

Phil_aka_Pip

wasn't that just ignorance & carelessness? surely the destruction wasn't intentional?

xSkarloey

Fucking savages.

Megii

Phil_aka_Pip said:

wasn't that just ignorance & carelessness? surely the destruction wasn't intentional?

Yep, fair point, that is true I'm sure.

Drew_TNBD

Phil_aka_Pip said:

wasn't that just ignorance & carelessness? surely the destruction wasn't intentional?

Difficult to say. When you've got an ideology driving your every action, perhaps you'll do anything to get your ideology to spread.

Maybe they just didn't give a fuck.

I don't buy the ignorance angle. Everyone knows those lines are not open to the public, and everyone knows why. The same way that old paintings in galleries are not allowed to be flash photographed, yet assholes do it anyway because they have an entitlement.

Fuck IS, and fuck Greenpeace. Basically.

Fretwired

chrisj1602 said:

It's awful.  Idiots.  There was also this... 

http://io9.com/experts-assess-the-damage-wrought-by-isis-at-the-mosul-1689361237

They were copies that's why they're smashing them - the originals are in Bahgdad. Isil sell antiquities that can raise cash for their cause.

I'm more upset by the fact they throw gay men off the top of buildings.

Reverend

http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/
This is very interesting.

ICBM

I am normally quite a pacifist and believe in keeping the moral high ground even where terrorists are concerned, but frankly it wouldn't upset me if the military forces who are going to be needed to defeat IS operate with a policy of taking no prisoners, and I probably wouldn't even complain if they just execute any captured members on the spot. The human race would simply be better off without them.

Phil_aka_Pip

ICBM said:

I am normally quite a pacifist and believe in keeping the moral high ground even where terrorists are concerned, but frankly it wouldn't upset me if the military forces who are going to be needed to defeat IS operate with a policy of taking no prisoners, and I probably wouldn't even complain if they just execute any captured members on the spot. The human race would simply be better off without them.

I'd go along with that. The only thing that would prevent me from nuking the bastards is the collateral damage, and the real possibility of seriously harming someone who is innocent.

Cirrus

I think humans tend to have quite short term perspectives, and the advent of constant, immersive 24 hour media totally washes out our ability to see things in terms of their longer term trends. As Phil AKA says, it was only 450 years ago that we were doing exactly the same stuff in the UK. Meanwhile, while the Arab world was significantly more civilised than western europe for a lot of the middle ages. Even now, the reason there is an ISIS at all can be traced back to our own involvement and ultimately destabilising effect in the area since colonial times.

Don't get me wrong, I still think the idiots are murderous fools. But we all have that in us...

imalone

Drew_fx said:

Also... Greenpeace did something very similar recently.

Only slightly similar. Very remotely similar. Trespass is a means of protest for greenpeace, not everyone knows why those lines aren't open to the public. They may not have known just how sensitive it is. The fact they used cloth banners suggests a poorly thought out attempt to make a no-impact protest. Whatever they did, they did not drive a JCB on and start digging them up. They also intended to protest against the gradual destruction of the natural world, rather than seeking to destroy heritage. There's no equivalence.

Drew_fx said:

I don't see the up in arms anger over that.

Then you're not looking very hard. Peru has been incandescent over the issue and they attracted world-wide criticism.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=greenpeace+nazca
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/dec/10/peru-press-charges-greenpeace-nazca-lines-stunt
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-30548325
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-30422994
http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/20/7858001/greenpeace-names-four-activists-who-damaged-a-peruvian-heritage-site
http://rt.com/news/216295-nazca-lines-damage-greenpeace/
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/20/greenpeace-lima-nazca-lines-protest-suspects

Drew_TNBD

imalone said:

Drew_fx said:

Also... Greenpeace did something very similar recently.

Only slightly similar. Very remotely similar. Trespass is a means of protest for greenpeace, not everyone knows why those lines aren't open to the public. They may not have known just how sensitive it is. The fact they used cloth banners suggests a poorly thought out attempt to make a no-impact protest. Whatever they did, they did not drive a JCB on and start digging them up. They also intended to protest against the gradual destruction of the natural world, rather than seeking to destroy heritage. There's no equivalence.

I disagree completely. But you seem to have your mind made up.

Drew_fx said:

I don't see the up in arms anger over that.

Then you're not looking very hard. 

Talking about this forum.

chillidoggy

What an astonishing waste of expensive earthmoving equipment, time, money and resources, particularly when Margate seafront is crying out for a good bulldozing.

Phil_aka_Pip

chillidoggy said:

What an astonishing waste of expensive earthmoving equipment, time, money and resources, particularly when Margate seafront is crying out for a good bulldozing.

I'm sure the local moslems would be all too glad to have a go at dismantling "unislamic" amusement arcades and shellfish stalls

Panama_Jack666

imalone said:

Drew_fx said:

Also... Greenpeace did something very similar recently.

Only slightly similar. Very remotely similar. Trespass is a means of protest for greenpeace, not everyone knows why those lines aren't open to the public. They may not have known just how sensitive it is. The fact they used cloth banners suggests a poorly thought out attempt to make a no-impact protest. Whatever they did, they did not drive a JCB on and start digging them up. They also intended to protest against the gradual destruction of the natural world, rather than seeking to destroy heritage. There's no equivalence.

Drew_fx said:

I don't see the up in arms anger over that.

Then you're not looking very hard. Peru has been incandescent over the issue and they attracted world-wide criticism.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=greenpeace+nazca
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/dec/10/peru-press-charges-greenpeace-nazca-lines-stunt
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-30548325
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-30422994
http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/20/7858001/greenpeace-names-four-activists-who-damaged-a-peruvian-heritage-site
http://rt.com/news/216295-nazca-lines-damage-greenpeace/
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/20/greenpeace-lima-nazca-lines-protest-suspects

I would agree with you. I was going to type something similar but you beat me to it.

Drew_TNBD

Well you're both wrong. Sorry, do not pass go, do not collect your birkenstocks and go directly to jail!

imalone

Drew_fx said:

imalone said:

Drew_fx said:

Also... Greenpeace did something very similar recently.

Only slightly similar. Very remotely similar. Trespass is a means of protest for greenpeace, not everyone knows why those lines aren't open to the public. They may not have known just how sensitive it is. The fact they used cloth banners suggests a poorly thought out attempt to make a no-impact protest. Whatever they did, they did not drive a JCB on and start digging them up. They also intended to protest against the gradual destruction of the natural world, rather than seeking to destroy heritage. There's no equivalence.

I disagree completely. But you seem to have your mind made up.

Yeah, turns out I'm capable of doing that. Who knew?
Intent - vastly different.
Means - accidental due to clumsiness and failure to plan properly versus using hardware to actively destroy.
Extent of damage. Main monument untouched, overturned rocks on the ground, paths visible and possibly outline of letter C visible. Versus? We don't really know, it's still going on they're destroying things at multiple sites, digging things up. It's much worse, orders of magnitude.
Response of the organisation concerned? Greenpeace are pretty contrite, some of them have handed themselves in. IS? They're busily posting it to Facebook.

Antique_Guitars

This has gone on throughout history people! This is humans for you, they are not the first and they won't be the last. Nothing lasts forever that's what makes history and archaeology fields of study, the need to try and gain understanding of things for which we don't not have a full set of information for.

Obviously it's a real shame but this is just history repeating itself once again. Destruction is the human races greatest legacy.

stickyfiddle

It's terribly sad but the way I see it is one less reason not to carpet bomb the lot of them. I'm pretty sure that's the way it'll end, probably coming from the joint services of several GCC air forces.

Fretwired

Henry VIII vs The Monasteries ... all trashed ..