Beijing vows justice after Islamic State kills Chinese captive

[Aepsilons]

Oh, by the way, I am still laughing from the remark you make last time regarding how British have an important role on establishment of Islamic Brotherhood....Your post is gem. Thank you @TaiShang

I think our friend @TaiShang may just be a bit liberal in his placing of blame on the genesis of international terrorism. Perhaps his choice of words in 'western fascists' is a bit unorthodox, but by principle, I must agree with him on the role of extremist Wahabi theology that has sprung from Saudi Arabia and exported from said country and surrounding GCC states to the region and beyond. One thing is clear tho, my friend, there are many 'factions' in regards to the Syria/Iraq region , and various "fingers" playing a role geopolitical developments there. I suppose our Chinese friends should not be too surprised about this aspect, and it is not just the "fascist westerners" who have caused incense radicalism and demand in said region. There are various domestic regional forces, as well as international forces at play here.

There is no FSA that is sizable enough to form an opposition as a fighting force without cooperation from other fighting elements. In the said area, FSA has been aligned with Jabhat al-Nusra. FSA, even ignoring that they are equally terrorists as US' ideal description of terrorists, has mostly been either dissolved into small radical factions, or joined larger bodies or act in cooperation with them.

My dear tomodachi @TaiShang , the forces on the ground is like this:

The United States and the West trains FSA, Al-Nusra, as well as other minor alliances who are under the umbrella of the descriptive semantic "moderate syrian rebel forces", whereas the Russian Federation and the Chinese and in collaboration with the Islamic Republic of Iran , support the Alawite Regime as well as the Kurdish Peshmerga. The Turks are in opposition to the growth of the Pershmerga and any rise of the independence movement of an internationally recognized Kurdistan, which will most likely emerge if say the Syrian Regime is destroyed, and Syria is separated into various factions as what had happened in Iraq. The Saudis and the GCC of course support by principle the theological aspects of radical forces as it is in tandem with Wahabi theology that is espoused by the Kingdom , and is in principle an opponent of Shia theological vantage point as espoused by the Ayatollah of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

There are various supporters and players , as I have allude to in said post, and the "blame" of radicalization or the powder kegging of said region is to the various factions who are utlizing the Syrian quagmire as proxy mechanisation of geopolitical dictum. I suppose we should also consider the financial reasons and implications of Turkish and Russian opposition of gas pipeline plans on the region. And Saudi opposition of Russian gas developments there.

In the end, my friend, we have to consider the "financial" reasonings. In the end, it always comes back to money. Afterall, money also finances ideological radicalization, yes?



Regards,

 

[TaiShang]

I think our friend @TaiShang may just be a bit liberal in his placing of blame on the genesis of international terrorism. Perhaps his choice of words in 'western fascists' is a bit unorthodox, but by principle, I must agree with him on the role of extremist Wahabi theology that has sprung from Saudi Arabia and exported from said country and surrounding GCC states to the region and beyond. One thing is clear tho, my friend, there are many 'factions' in regards to the Syria/Iraq region , and various "fingers" playing a role geopolitical developments there. I suppose our Chinese friends should not be too surprised about this aspect, and it is not just the "fascist westerners" who have caused incense radicalism and demand in said region. There are various domestic regional forces, as well as international forces at play here.

I use the term "fascist" in its historical reactionary/corporatist context as I read economy on the basis of every social phenomena. One may disagree with this reading of historical events, nonetheless, my use of the term is confined to the institutions, not persons. I use the term very selectively.

The Salafi/takfiri theology is just one of the bloody theologies that abounds in the region. KSA, as you said, is a major progenitor of the said ideology.

Islamic Brotherhood is another one, and supported by Qatar. Oftentimes, the internal fighting among these Islamist factions gets much bloodier than their fight with "infidels." That's not surprising, though, and is true for any factionalist/sectarian religion.

Syrian war is bloody and sustained because it is deeply sectarian.

But, the real question that must be asked is how these ideologies have been sustained, financed, and supported. In the sustainability of the KSA, one finds the perennial US support. KSA was protected even after the 9/11 "terror" attacks.

Same goes with the Al Nusra in Syria, for example. They would not last long without outside interference.

In the end, my friend, we have to consider the "financial" reasonings. In the end, it always comes back to money. Afterall, money also finances ideological radicalization, yes?

 

[Aepsilons]

In fact one of the progenitors of radicalization in the Kashgar valley region has been the exportation of Wahabi theology into South-Central Asia from the GCC. Its quit interesting aslo to see that the radicalization of the muslim population in the caucasus (Russian Federation's Republic of Chechnya and Abhkazia) who have taken up jihad and have been indoctrinized in Syria, and then have been sent not only to Pakistan, but also to the Kashgar region in Western China.

As much as I , as a Japanese Patriot, value the importance of Saudi relations with Japan and the rest of the civilized world, my view and I think I can speak for most moderate Japanese here , is that the context of radical ideology does not incur developmentalist support base, rather is indicative of retrogressive processes as what is happening in regions of Al-Sham. We have to consider the social variables here such as low education, intense poverty, religious fanatical ideologicalization ultimately leads to radicalization. The product, i suppose, of low education, and immense isolation from empiricism.

So long as Saudi Arabia maintains her exportation of radical theology, so long as the clerics in that country continue to spew anti-western, anti-Christian, anti-Jew, anti-Al Qitab (non muslims) messages in their madrassas as well as in their mosques, then they are themselves directly at fault for the continuation of such ideology that ultimately is the cause responsible for genesis of secondary or tertiary groups that are sympathetic to ISIS-like ideology.

Same goes with the Al Nusra in Syria, for example. They would not last long without outside interference.

The problem, my friend, is the sectarian culture of region. I would encourage you to read the history of the middle east, particulary in this region of the middle east. Even prior to the crusades, prior to western imperialism, there has been a perennial sectarian culture of violence between Shia and Sunni groups. I mean, look at Iraq; there are no longer any Christians in Mosul or Iraq for that matter. Most of Iraq's Christian community (Chaldeans and Assyrians) who are one of the oldest in the Middle East, are all gone. They are all refugees. It just illustrates the social dysharmony in said region. It is the very antithesis of Confucian society, to be honest, totally foreign to our civilization (Japan, China, Korea). Totally.

Islamic Brotherhood is another one, and supported by Qatar. Oftentimes, the internal fighting among these Islamist factions gets much bloodier than their fight with "infidels." That's not surprising, though, and is true for any factionalist/sectarian religion.

Some civilizations are not fertile grounds for democracy, my friend. I think that is the reality the western world need to learn to accept. Libya, Egypt, Syria, Iraq --- case in point. Some regions of the world require an iron handed fist to keep their societies together. Case in point Iraq. ISIS would have been quashed by Saddam in a week had he still be in power. In fact Saddam resisted radical Wahabi theology from Saudi Arabia.

Look what happened when you remove a man like Saddam from power. The region is in quagmire and Iraq is practically gone. It has powder kegged into various factions. There is no national solidarity and unity there now.

The same fate awaits Syria. Unfortunately.

 

[TaiShang]

Even prior to the crusades, prior to western imperialism, there has been a perennial sectarian culture of violence between Shia and Sunni groups.

Indeed, very symbolically, the factionalism and sectarianism started right here, in Karbala:

I mean, look at Iraq; there are no longer any Christians in Mosul or Iraq for that matter. Most of Iraq's Christian community (Chaldeans and Assyrians) who are one of the oldest in the Middle East, are all gone. They are all refugees. It just illustrates the social dysharmony in said region. It is the very antithesis of Confucian society, to be honest, totally foreign to our civilization (Japan, China, Korea). Totally.

You are describing the situation very well, my friend. But maybe one should go one step back and ask, why there is no Christians in Mosul any longer?

What happened to the Yazidi young women captured by ISIS in Shangal?

There was inter-faith harmony in Syria before the Syrian war. Did you know that the former Syrian Defense Minister killed by Turkey-supported terrorists in (Damascus？) bombing were Sunni Turkman?

Why did the US and its allies continue to support foreign and domestic terrorist elements in the country? Why was Iraq divided in three parts defined by ethnic lines?

Certain things may not be perfected easily, like political oppression under the Assad government. But, ethnic and sectarian lines cannot be agitated this much like the US and its allies have been doing.

Some civilizations are not fertile grounds for democracy, my friend. I think that is the reality the western world need to learn to accept. Libya, Egypt, Syria, Iraq --- case in point.

Western world already accept that, I guess. That's why their relationship with the Gulf countries have always been good. What the US-led West cannot accept is sovereignty on part of the leadership in these non-democratic countries.

 

[Aepsilons]

Certain things may not be perfected easily, like political oppression under the Assad government. But, ethnic and sectarian lines cannot be agitated this much like the US and its allies have been doing.

I don't like Assad at all, and as a humanitarian, I revile his policies. However, this is a civil war in said country, and the international players in Syria are all responsible for this conflict's continuation. Its unfortunate really, but Syria , like Iraq, is the playground of proxy war between the Great Powers, my friend.

I think i have stated my views enough; some lands are not perfect for democracy. The social culture in said lands are not fertile for civil rights or civil liberties in context to the developed world's understanding. The western understanding of 'multiculturalism' is contextual only to the west. Other parts of the world do not hold such views. Case in point the barbarity that has ravaged much of the Middle East.

 

[jhungary]

We know that US had trained fighters in Libya, and we know that US has been training fighters in Syria, and we know many of them have joined ISIS.

This is why I said you don't understand the situation and to a point, what were I saying.

US train a lot of troop overseas, they may ended up fighting for US or they may ended up fighting against US, some will went on to serve a Terrorist group, does that mean the US trained the terrorist group?

US help trained Iranian defence force and Guards as well as intelligence committee back in the 70s, and then Islamic Resolution started and most of the trained officer went on to serve in Hezbollah, does that mean US trained Hezbollah?

Times change, same with ideology and allegiance, US trained those people when they were friend and they change their allegiance then it would hardly be an American problem. US also trained Vietminh during WW2 and OSI officer trained Ho Chi Minh personally, in fact, the Vietnam independence speech by Ho is a word by word copy form the US declaration of Independence. Does that equal to US supported the North Vietnam government headed by Ho? Back in Vietnam War?

That alone is far more than what China has done contrary to your earlier statement. And there are still a lot of things we don't know. But with US track record , I won't categorically deny any such possibility.

That alone amount to a word called "Hearsay" I don't know is it in China, but in the US, if you suspect someone of wrong doing, they are "Innocent before Proven Guilty" you, along with @TaiShang have an habit to pin something on US and then ask the people in the US to prove it wrong. The problem is, the burden of proof is on the accuser, so if you want to accuse someone or some country for doing something, you need to show hard proof for your claim or like any baseless claim, it will simply got throw out of court.

You say Turkey say no ISIS in that area means no? You might as well say the earth is cube and we shall all believe it?

Dude, it's not turkey, it's the Russian said their Su--24 is supporting the operation in the Turkmen Village themselves.

Putin: Downing Of Jet A 'Stab In The Back'

Beside, did you even know where ISIS is from and where is Syria, Iraq and Jordan in world map?? Can you point it out in the world map below?

ISIS is from Iraq and Jordan, which is S/SE of Syria, The shot down is near Lebanon Border in NW. Where West of Aleppo. While Turkey have troop stationed INSIDE Syria in Suleyman Shah’s tomb East of Aleppo, There aren't any ISIS in the region the Su-24 shot down. This is common Knowledge. A fact not even Russia trying to hide

I think our friend @TaiShang may just be a bit liberal in his placing of blame on the genesis of international terrorism. Perhaps his choice of words in 'western fascists' is a bit unorthodox, but by principle, I must agree with him on the role of extremist Wahabi theology that has sprung from Saudi Arabia and exported from said country and surrounding GCC states to the region and beyond. One thing is clear tho, my friend, there are many 'factions' in regards to the Syria/Iraq region , and various "fingers" playing a role geopolitical developments there. I suppose our Chinese friends should not be too surprised about this aspect, and it is not just the "fascist westerners" who have caused incense radicalism and demand in said region. There are various domestic regional forces, as well as international forces at play here.

I am not laughing at him because he said US support of ISIS, AQ and alike, some one else said that already, did I laugh at him about it?

I laugh at him because he have ZERO, NADA, ZIP, LING (零) idea of how Middle East works and how ISIS work but he somehow moonlighting on the issue which make an complete arse of himself, as I said, I am still recovering from all the laughing last time he said British is Instrumental on the establishment of Muslim Brotherhood (He actually said Islamic Brotherhood) and responsible for the Arab Spring. While the sole purpose said brotherhood was established is to PUSH the British Commonwealth Force out of Egypt back in the 20/30s. So, what he is saying is that the UK established an organisation so they can fight with in Egypt. Funny, ain't it.

What happened in Syria now is not as easy or Black and White as they claim. It's what ISIS want to lure the West or Russia into a ground war in Middle East.

Why I say that? It's because that's how ISIS recruit their fighter, they recruit their rank by showing the West/Non-Muslim occupying the Muslim land and abuse their power. What better serve a recruiting tool by showing Western/Russia boots on the ground in Syria? So that ISIS will simply turn them into propaganda and that's how they get the number, simply because those Muslim living in those region was not educated, they basically will believe what they (ISIS recruiter) said, plus, if they actually see Western soldier near their home, then you simply just push them toward the arms of ISIS.

The only way you can fight ISIS is to use local resource, in Iraq, the question is a bit clear, as Iraq have a functioning government. Even Iran know who to bet with, in Syria, the situation is not as much clear, As they are fighting a 5 way civil war in Syria. (AQ, FSA, Assad, ISIS and Kurd) the problem is, no matter which one you choose to back, you will almost ended up getting called as "supporter of terrorism (all 5 support Terrorism)", as the 5 way fight complicated the situation a lot.

There are only 2 ways this can goes, to fight a 4 + gen war (if you remember, I have covered what's 4 + Generation warfare in PDF before Modern Warfare 1GW to 4GW+ either the world response and send an international force to crush all 5 front at the same time, or have them battling out each other and see who play the ultimate winner. For the first one to go, the world need to have a force that operate without "Ulterior Motive" which unfortunate to say there aren't going to happen, US will have his motive (Backing FSA) Russia will have its own motive (Propping Assad regime) Turkey will have its own and so does Saudi Arabia and any other country. In the end, it just won't work.

The only other way is to support the local fraction, which his what the US has been doing, and if you want to call that supporting terrorist, then well....

 

[Zsari]

This is why I said you don't understand the situation and to a point, what were I saying.

US train a lot of troop overseas, they may ended up fighting for US or they may ended up fighting against US, some will went on to serve a Terrorist group, does that mean the US trained the terrorist group?

US help trained Iranian defence force and Guards as well as intelligence committee back in the 70s, and then Islamic Resolution started and most of the trained officer went on to serve in Hezbollah, does that mean US trained Hezbollah?

Times change, same with ideology and allegiance, US trained those people when they were friend and they change their allegiance then it would hardly be an American problem. US also trained Vietminh during WW2 and OSI officer trained Ho Chi Minh personally, in fact, the Vietnam independence speech by Ho is a word by word copy form the US declaration of Independence. Does that equal to US supported the North Vietnam government headed by Ho? Back in Vietnam War?

Of course when you trained someone, you will be held liable for his action. Remember you become the enabler. That's the same basis for US to threaten Pyongyang with nuclear retaliation if NK sell it's nuclear warhead to any non-state party that utilize the weapon in their attack.

 

[jhungary]

Of course when you trained someone, you will be held liable for his action. Remember you become the enabler. That's the same basis for US to threaten Pyongyang with nuclear retaliation if NK sell it's nuclear warhead to any non-state party that utilize the weapon in their attack.

lol, no, as I said, If I train some people and liable to its action then so should the world.

The person who is changing allegiance is not changing it because he or she got what they trained with by the US, he or she change their allegiance because of the attitude of the world, eg how he or she see the world changing.

If I train someone, not even need to someone overseas. Say in a police academy, what happen if that person gone thru the police academy but decided he or she could better use his/her knowledge to make money by committing crime? Then did the police academy would be accountable to his/her action? So basically, there should never be a police academy because the trainee may choose to become a criminal instead and by your logic, having an academy could use to support criminal. Because the police academy cannot have control over individual will?

This is not the same as the nuclear missile, you don't deal with nuclear missile in a day to day basis, and if you ask me, no country in this world should have nuclear missile to begin with.

 

[Aepsilons]

What happened in Syria now is not as easy or Black and White as they claim. It's what ISIS want to lure the West or Russia into a ground war in Middle East.

Absolutely. The situation in Syria and Iraq is due in part to various international players meddling in the region's internal affairs. There are various regional and international players playing interventionist game here, not only the United States. That is why I disagree with his use of the descriptive "western fascists". I do agree with him on his identification of the source of the radical ideology, however, this Salafist-interjective jihadist ideology that is a product of Wahabi Theological Doctrine. The problem with the extinguishing of ISIS is the fact that there are sympathizers of ISIS in many parts of the Middle East and beyond. For one example is the clerics in KSA.

This is something that the KSA's leadership have failed to address. Either they can't for the sake of national harmony, or they wont due to ideological reasons. One thing is clear; so long as the ideology does not change and so long as there is no genesis of a counter-ideological , political solution, then this radicalization process will remain unresolved, and will remain a perennial problem indefinitely....

 

[gambit]

lol, no, as I said, If I train some people and liable to its action then so should the world.

The person who is changing allegiance is not changing it because he or she got what they trained with by the US, he or she change their allegiance because of the attitude of the world, eg how he or she see the world changing.

If I train someone, not even need to someone overseas. Say in a police academy, what happen if that person gone thru the police academy but decided he or she could better use his/her knowledge to make money by committing crime? Then did the police academy would be accountable to his/her action? So basically, there should never be a police academy because the trainee may choose to become a criminal instead and by your logic, having an academy could use to support criminal. Because the police academy cannot have control over individual will?

This is not the same as the nuclear missile, you don't deal with nuclear missile in a day to day basis, and if you ask me, no country in this world should have nuclear missile to begin with.

That would mean no father would ever teach his son to drive, because -- who know one day the son could become an axe murderer and uses a car to escape justice ? A father would say to his son: 'Screw you. Learn to drive from a real fool.'

Do these guys think before they post ?

 

[Aepsilons]

Of course when you trained someone, you will be held liable for his action. Remember you become the enabler. That's the same basis for US to threaten Pyongyang with nuclear retaliation if NK sell it's nuclear warhead to any non-state party that utilize the weapon in their attack.

But in that case you also have to understand that Russia, too, is in cahoots of international interventionists by directly training B. Asad's Military with counter-insurgency tactics, even in the training of Kurdish forces, who then ultimately utilize that against ISIS, but also against Turkish and even Iranian forces , who are both against the genesis of a Kurdistan. You see the flaw in your argument? The argument that the west is the sole inheritor of blame ? Why even China provides military aid to Kurds, who are separatists in nature, separatist towards Turkey , Iran and Iraq.

You see ? It is not all black and white, my friend. Or perhaps you just chose to ignore that correlation.

 

[jhungary]

Absolutely. The situation in Syria and Iraq is due in part to various international players meddling in the region's internal affairs. There are various regional and international players playing interventionist game here, not only the United States. That is why I disagree with his use of the descriptive "western fascists". I do agree with him on his identification of the source of the radical ideology, however, this Salafist-interjective jihadist ideology that is a product of Wahabi Theological Doctrine. The problem with the extinguishing of ISIS is the fact that there are sympathizers of ISIS in many parts of the Middle East and beyond. For one example is the clerics in KSA.

This is something that the KSA's leadership have failed to address. Either they can't for the sake of national harmony, or they wont due to ideological reasons. One thing is clear; so long as the ideology does not change and so long as there is no genesis of a counter-ideological , political solution, then this radicalization process will remain unresolved, and will remain a perennial problem indefinitely....

The sad fact is, you cannot literally take the ideology out of someone's mind, and you cannot kill an "Ideology"

There are only 2 ways you can deal with ISIS, take away their recruitment, or take away of their money. Neither one of them can be achieve by putting Foreign boots on the ground. In fact, any analyst will tell you a hardball countermeasure with ISIS will only make matter worse, which basically give them excuse to use the air strike or ground war to recruit more Salafist.

 

[Aepsilons]

The sad fact is, you cannot literally take the ideology out of someone's mind, and you cannot kill an "Ideology"

There are only 2 ways you can deal with ISIS, take away their recruitment, or take away of their money. Neither one of them can be achieve by putting Foreign boots on the ground. In fact, any analyst will tell you a hardball countermeasure with ISIS will only make matter worse, which basically give them excuse to use the air strike or ground war to recruit more Salafist.

Precisely. Ideology, especially if it is religious-backed in nature, is a difficult thing to extinguish. This is why terrorism, international radical jihadist terrorism to be precise, will remain an indefinite plague for this region. For generations to come.

Think of it as an endemic issue for this region of the world.

Unfortunately.

 

[jhungary]

That would mean no father would ever teach his son to drive, because -- who know one day the son could become an axe murderer and uses a car to escape justice ? A father would say to his son: 'Screw you. Learn to drive from a real fool.'

Do these guys think before they post ?

Well, or any store would not sell anything that can be remotely used as weapon.

Let me go to a local home depot and get a hammer.

Sale Clerk : "You sure you won't use it to kill someone"?
I said : No I won't

Then I turn around and killed the sale clerk with said hammer....And blame him for selling me the hammer...

 

[Aepsilons]

Well, or any store would not sell anything that can be remotely used as weapon.

Let me go to a local home depot and get a hammer.

Sale Clerk : "You sure you won't use it to kill someone"?
I said : No I won't

Then I turn around and killed the sale clerk with said hammer....And blame him for selling me the hammer...

lol

its like people trying to sue McDonalds for causing them cardiovascular problems after they were eating burger and fries for breakfast, lunch and dinner for 20 years. lol.

A modern day example of who came first : the chicken or the egg.