1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

NYTimes ISIS Editorial

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by YankeeFan, Aug 26, 2015.

  1. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    For some reason, the destruction of archaeological sites seems to upset some in the West more than murder, systematic rape, enslavement, etc., and so, in light of the destruction of the Roman temple in Palmyra, we have a Times editorial about ISIS:

    Yet it is impossible to read Sunday’s reports of the demolition of one of the best-preserved and grandest relics in the ancient ruins of Palmyra, the Temple of Baalshamin, and not feel anguish at the loss of another irreplaceable monument of our shared past. True, the temple stood near a Roman amphitheater where ISIS is reported to have executed 25 prisoners last month. But to grieve at the loss of a great work of art does not diminish the horror at the loss of human lives, and in tandem they amount to a unified and barbaric attempt to erase not only whole peoples but also their religions, cultures and histories.

    As The Times’s Anne Barnard reported on Monday, the destruction of antiquities in Syria and Iraq “has reached staggering levels,” causing an irreversible loss to world heritage and scholarship and filling curators, archaeologists, other experts and lovers of antiquity with dismay. To ISIS, the destruction of the Palmyra temple, like the destruction of ancient statues and monuments in Nimrud, Hatra and other regions under its control, is of a part with the destruction of “apostates,” the decimation of communities like the Assyrian and Yazidi religious minorities, or the enslaving of women, or the beheading of Western hostages: It is an ethnic, religious and cultural cleansing of anything the zealots deem alien to the pure Islamic state.


    And, of course the Times is sure to point out that ISIS is not unique in history, hearkening all the way back to the Mongols for a comparison:

    Such a totalitarian vision is not unique to ISIS. The Mongols led by Hulagu Khan did much the same when they sacked Baghdad in 1258, and in modern times the Nazis and Bolsheviks wreaked enormous havoc on lives and cultures that stood in the way of their ideological goals. But the Islamic State has launched its all-out assault on civilization in our time, and in a region where local authority has been damaged by civil war, and outside powers, notably the United States, have intervened without success.

    But, it's the call for continued military action that most interests me. As the Times points out our interventions have not been successful, yet it's call to action is for us to simply not "relent" saying that ISIS can and must be stopped:

    However daunting the struggles of the Middle East, ISIS stands out in the threat it poses to humanity. But for all its well-publicized atrocities, it is neither all powerful nor immune to military and economic pressures from the West. It can and must be stopped, and the United States and its allies cannot relent in their efforts toward that end.

    But, if out current actions haven't worked, and ISIS must be stopped, isn't it patently obvious that something more than not "relenting" in our current course of action isn't required? Wouldn't the current military intervention need to be increased if we are going to defeat ISIS?

    And, so doesn't the Times editorial wimp out? It's like they're afraid to advocate for what their own editorial makes clear must be done to achieve the goals they set out.
  2. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    The Iraqis aren't interested in stopping ISIS in their own country. Why should we?
  3. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    That's not the question.

    It's a fine position to take, but the Times takes the position that ISIS must be stopped, and specifically calls on military "pressure" from the US and our Western allies to stop them. But, then it only calls for us to not relent in our efforts that are currently failing.

    Having made the case that they did, don't they need a greater call of action? Don't they need to call for more military intervention?
  4. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    I read it more like that we shouldn't do a lesser call to action. We should keep doing what we've been doing.
  5. da man

    da man Well-Known Member

    Because that's working so well?
  6. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Right. They call for us to continue to keep doing what we've been doing.

    But, if that hasn't been successful so far, why would anyone expect that continuing the same strategy would prove successful at some later date? And, in the mean time, ISIS will continue to work towards its goal to "erase not only whole peoples but also their religions, cultures and histories."

    They describe a crisis in action, but don't call for an increased effort to combat that the crisis. That doesn't make sense.
  7. TheSportsPredictor

    TheSportsPredictor Well-Known Member

    It's like Steeler fans being more upset that the team employs Michael Vick thannBen Roethlisberger.
  8. RubberSoul1979

    RubberSoul1979 Active Member

    ISIS are the world's worst people. Their atrocities are made worse by the world's inability confront them. Bush/Cheney/Wolfowitz/Rumsfeld invaded Iraq and opened Pandora's Box. The current president chooses to battle them from the safety of the air and -- when faced with the reality that Islamic and violent radicalism are hardly mutually exclusive -- says people should think of the Crusades before casting judgment. It's too depressing to even think about.
  9. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    I believe Curt Schilling already covered this.
  10. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    The Times is stuck between the rock and the hard place of watching things crumble while still feeling the need to prop up Obama.
  11. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Seeing that we've already spent years in such as mess, why would anyone expect that using an increased effort would prove successful at a later date?

    Like I said, maybe if the Iraqis showed that they were willing to at least show some fight, then maybe we could help them. But they don't seem like they're willing to come together in the face of a common enemy.
  12. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    You're still not answering my question.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page