4 ms·

I am not saying islamists did this thing but are you really saying that it doesn't make sense for them to destroy places of worship of other relgions? In Indone

by sisu2019 8y ago

I am not saying islamists did this thing but are you really saying that it doesn't make sense for them to destroy places of worship of other relgions? In Indonesia and other places they sure think differently.

mirimir 8y ago
Maybe I'm deluding myself, but Notre Dame just seems so much more than a "place of worship". But then, the Taliban did destroy monumental statues of Buddha in Afghanistan. Which were about twice as old as Notre Dame. So maybe I am deluding myself :(
- sisu2019 8y ago
  it's a well-known christian cathedral. It's a pretty big deal, sure. It's a big church so it's a place of worship. What else is it?
  - mirimir 8y ago
    It's beautiful. A marvel of engineering. Such a major, iconic part of Paris. It's survived so many wars. The Nazis could have destroyed it, as they destroyed the Winter Palace outside Leningrad. And as the Allies destroyed so many cathedrals in Germany. But it survived. And to be burned out by some idiot with an agenda would be so sad and pointless. Indeed, whatever cause the idiot was supporting. But of course, it'd also be sad if it was totally an "accident". An electrical fire. Someone who left a heater running. Or didn't fully extinguish a cigarette. Anyway, I'd be very suspicious if someone claimed responsibility. If for no other reason, because if it had been a terrorist attack, we would know by now. A key point in terrorist attacks is having them be obvious. Not looking like accidents.
- muckrakerz 8y ago
  Why would this be shocking given the recent attacks on churches and a beheading that happened in one a few years ago?
  - mirimir 8y ago
    They're all shocking. And OK, I take it back. Nothing is "too shocking" to be all that unlikely. But still, wouldn't you think that a terrorist attack on Notre Dame would involve something more like a hijacked gasoline tanker than a fire that perhaps started in the attic?
    - muckrakerz 8y ago
      No I would expect it to follow local patterns. Like what has now happened at St. Patricks in NY.

mirimir 8y ago

Maybe I'm deluding myself, but Notre Dame just seems so much more than a "place of worship". But then, the Taliban did destroy monumental statues of Buddha in Afghanistan. Which were about twice as old as Notre Dame. So maybe I am deluding myself :(

sisu2019 8y ago
it's a well-known christian cathedral. It's a pretty big deal, sure. It's a big church so it's a place of worship. What else is it?
- mirimir 8y ago
  It's beautiful. A marvel of engineering. Such a major, iconic part of Paris. It's survived so many wars. The Nazis could have destroyed it, as they destroyed the Winter Palace outside Leningrad. And as the Allies destroyed so many cathedrals in Germany. But it survived. And to be burned out by some idiot with an agenda would be so sad and pointless. Indeed, whatever cause the idiot was supporting. But of course, it'd also be sad if it was totally an "accident". An electrical fire. Someone who left a heater running. Or didn't fully extinguish a cigarette. Anyway, I'd be very suspicious if someone claimed responsibility. If for no other reason, because if it had been a terrorist attack, we would know by now. A key point in terrorist attacks is having them be obvious. Not looking like accidents.
muckrakerz 8y ago
Why would this be shocking given the recent attacks on churches and a beheading that happened in one a few years ago?
- mirimir 8y ago
  They're all shocking. And OK, I take it back. Nothing is "too shocking" to be all that unlikely. But still, wouldn't you think that a terrorist attack on Notre Dame would involve something more like a hijacked gasoline tanker than a fire that perhaps started in the attic?
  - muckrakerz 8y ago
    No I would expect it to follow local patterns. Like what has now happened at St. Patricks in NY.