4 ms·

Ancient Nimrud Ruins 'bulldozed' in Iraq

19 points by Libertatea 12y ago

dimillian 12y ago
I'm so revolted inside, and I can't do anything. Can I? They literally destroy history in order to bend it to their will.
- thomasatethose 12y ago
  We can work on digitally archiving everything, and distributing it to save the knowledge at least I hope. Maybe something like google books but for history.
  - United857 12y ago
    Over 15 years ago, Stanford did a project to 3D scan statues of Michelangelo. http://graphics.stanford.edu/projects/mich/ http://graphics.stanford.edu/projects/mich/ Sad to see this isn't something common nowadays given the proliferation of the 3D ecosystem in general.
swombat 12y ago
It's interesting to think about why it is that we are so much more incensed (as we are) by this wanton destruction of historical artefacts than by the destruction of human lives - beheadings, mass murders, etc. I think both actions, the murders and the destruction, are designed to sully us all, to drag us down to their level of blind hatred. The reason why the destruction of historical artefacts is more effective at achieving this is, perhaps, because while we feel some distant sympathy towards "some foreigners that I don't know" being murdered, we feel personally insulted by what we regard (rightly) as our collective, human historical heritage being destroyed. We feel this affects us personally - I know I feel I do, anyway. It feels like a much more personal and intimate insult. Ironically, the fact that this is such an effective way to get people upset (and thereby polarise them) guarantees that IS, the Taliban, and other extremist groups that depend on global polarisation will continue to destroy priceless historical artefacts everywhere they find them. They depend on the cycle of getting remote people to get emotionally enraged, getting those same people to mistreat muslims local to them, thereby causing more muslims around the world to feel disenfranchised by western society, thereby making ISIS's recruitment work easier. As one article pointed out after the Charlie Hebdo shooting, the major issue that ISIS has with the west is that the vast majority of the muslims here have zero interest in what ISIS is doing. By letting ourselves be provoked into making generalist statements about whole population (e.g. someone who reads this, gets pissed off, and then goes and votes on tougher laws against Islam in their country), we do ISIS's work. I suggest responding to this with sadness rather than anger.
- seren 12y ago
  The most puzzling aspect for me is the reason being given : to fight "Idolatry". Seriously how many people are still adoring Sumerian gods? It would makes some sense if it was still an active religion, but there it sounds absolutely irrational. I know that I am trying to find logic where this is none. This is both infuriating and disconcerting.
  - jpatte 12y ago
    It's not about what people believed in the past or what they believe now, it's about what they might believe in the future. By erasing all traces of other religions (and even all traces of other philosophical trends), they essentially make their god "The One And Only God". How could future generations believe in anything else than Allah's almighty existence when apparently everything men did or do is about Him? They are reshaping History in order to shape the future.
  - weland 12y ago
    To the fundamentalist, sure-there-is-a-God mind, "idolatry" is not only the practice, it's a "thing" that exists all by itself, by virtue of its own presence as a concept. As long as there are still idols -- images of false gods -- idolatry is still alive and well, even if no one prays to them. It's the same rationale as behind not allowing the representation of human shapes (or, for most Islam, the figure of the Prophet): to "us", it seems to be a simple case of "then don't fucking draw it", but in fact any representation is, to "them", insulting.
- tomtoise 12y ago
  I always though the reason I found this more enraging than the beheadings was because human life, at risk of sounding callous, is 'expendable' in that there are billions of us, with new humans being born every second, but these artifacts are literally irreplacable. I had a conversation with my SO with regards to the destruction without mentioning my view on why it affects us so much more and she pretty much came to the same conclusion.
  - 12y ago
shiggerino 12y ago
I guess Baghdadi doesn't just want to be the next Abu Bakr, but also the next Qin Shi Huang.
mirimir 12y ago
For context, I recommend http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/2014/11/wahhabism-isis-how-saudi-arabia-exported-main-source-global-terrorism http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/2014/11/wahhabism-...
- shiggerino 12y ago
  I fail to understand their conclusion. IS is not an atavistic return to a primitive past because it's based on Wahhabism, an atavistic return to a primitive past? I also think she is severely underestimating their support in the ummah. It's easy to superficially condemn the destruction of museum pieces, because hey, museums are pretty neat and educational. But it's very hard to condemn on a deeper level IS' fight against idolatry when the prohibition on idolatry is such a central tenet of your faith, the Shahada.
  - mirimir 12y ago
    I recommended it because it seems to cover the history well. It also seems to have less of an agenda than either <http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/> http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isi... or the Intercept's counter <https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/02/20/atlantic-defines-real-islam-says-isis/> https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/02/20/atlantic-defin.... What's modern about ISIS, she argues, is mass killing. And then there's the GTA vibe, and the glamorization of mass killing. But destruction of idols is hardly unique. I do fear that the Wahhabis have gamed the Infidels well. They used their petrodollars to proselytize the ummah. Then they incited fear and loathing through terrorist attacks. They sucked the Neocons into invading Iraq, and creating the chaos needed for expansion. Time will tell.
speakeron 12y ago
Everything ISIS do seems designed to outrage western liberal sensitivities. And, indeed, I'm outraged. When I think about it a bit more the question is: who's yanking my chain so perfectly?

19 points by Libertatea 12y ago

I'm so revolted inside, and I can't do anything. Can I? They literally destroy history in order to bend it to their will.

thomasatethose 12y ago
We can work on digitally archiving everything, and distributing it to save the knowledge at least I hope. Maybe something like google books but for history.
- United857 12y ago
  Over 15 years ago, Stanford did a project to 3D scan statues of Michelangelo. http://graphics.stanford.edu/projects/mich/ http://graphics.stanford.edu/projects/mich/ Sad to see this isn't something common nowadays given the proliferation of the 3D ecosystem in general.

swombat 12y ago

It's interesting to think about why it is that we are so much more incensed (as we are) by this wanton destruction of historical artefacts than by the destruction of human lives - beheadings, mass murders, etc. I think both actions, the murders and the destruction, are designed to sully us all, to drag us down to their level of blind hatred. The reason why the destruction of historical artefacts is more effective at achieving this is, perhaps, because while we feel some distant sympathy towards "some foreigners that I don't know" being murdered, we feel personally insulted by what we regard (rightly) as our collective, human historical heritage being destroyed. We feel this affects us personally - I know I feel I do, anyway. It feels like a much more personal and intimate insult. Ironically, the fact that this is such an effective way to get people upset (and thereby polarise them) guarantees that IS, the Taliban, and other extremist groups that depend on global polarisation will continue to destroy priceless historical artefacts everywhere they find them. They depend on the cycle of getting remote people to get emotionally enraged, getting those same people to mistreat muslims local to them, thereby causing more muslims around the world to feel disenfranchised by western society, thereby making ISIS's recruitment work easier. As one article pointed out after the Charlie Hebdo shooting, the major issue that ISIS has with the west is that the vast majority of the muslims here have zero interest in what ISIS is doing. By letting ourselves be provoked into making generalist statements about whole population (e.g. someone who reads this, gets pissed off, and then goes and votes on tougher laws against Islam in their country), we do ISIS's work. I suggest responding to this with sadness rather than anger.

seren 12y ago
The most puzzling aspect for me is the reason being given : to fight "Idolatry". Seriously how many people are still adoring Sumerian gods? It would makes some sense if it was still an active religion, but there it sounds absolutely irrational. I know that I am trying to find logic where this is none. This is both infuriating and disconcerting.
- jpatte 12y ago
  It's not about what people believed in the past or what they believe now, it's about what they might believe in the future. By erasing all traces of other religions (and even all traces of other philosophical trends), they essentially make their god "The One And Only God". How could future generations believe in anything else than Allah's almighty existence when apparently everything men did or do is about Him? They are reshaping History in order to shape the future.
- weland 12y ago
  To the fundamentalist, sure-there-is-a-God mind, "idolatry" is not only the practice, it's a "thing" that exists all by itself, by virtue of its own presence as a concept. As long as there are still idols -- images of false gods -- idolatry is still alive and well, even if no one prays to them. It's the same rationale as behind not allowing the representation of human shapes (or, for most Islam, the figure of the Prophet): to "us", it seems to be a simple case of "then don't fucking draw it", but in fact any representation is, to "them", insulting.
tomtoise 12y ago
I always though the reason I found this more enraging than the beheadings was because human life, at risk of sounding callous, is 'expendable' in that there are billions of us, with new humans being born every second, but these artifacts are literally irreplacable. I had a conversation with my SO with regards to the destruction without mentioning my view on why it affects us so much more and she pretty much came to the same conclusion.
- 12y ago

shiggerino 12y ago

I guess Baghdadi doesn't just want to be the next Abu Bakr, but also the next Qin Shi Huang.

mirimir 12y ago

For context, I recommend http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/2014/11/wahhabism-isis-how-saudi-arabia-exported-main-source-global-terrorism http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/2014/11/wahhabism-...

shiggerino 12y ago
I fail to understand their conclusion. IS is not an atavistic return to a primitive past because it's based on Wahhabism, an atavistic return to a primitive past? I also think she is severely underestimating their support in the ummah. It's easy to superficially condemn the destruction of museum pieces, because hey, museums are pretty neat and educational. But it's very hard to condemn on a deeper level IS' fight against idolatry when the prohibition on idolatry is such a central tenet of your faith, the Shahada.
- mirimir 12y ago
  I recommended it because it seems to cover the history well. It also seems to have less of an agenda than either <http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/> http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isi... or the Intercept's counter <https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/02/20/atlantic-defines-real-islam-says-isis/> https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/02/20/atlantic-defin.... What's modern about ISIS, she argues, is mass killing. And then there's the GTA vibe, and the glamorization of mass killing. But destruction of idols is hardly unique. I do fear that the Wahhabis have gamed the Infidels well. They used their petrodollars to proselytize the ummah. Then they incited fear and loathing through terrorist attacks. They sucked the Neocons into invading Iraq, and creating the chaos needed for expansion. Time will tell.

speakeron 12y ago

Everything ISIS do seems designed to outrage western liberal sensitivities. And, indeed, I'm outraged. When I think about it a bit more the question is: who's yanking my chain so perfectly?