What's new

China Should Send Troops to Fight ISIS

Status
Not open for further replies.
You present a poignant analysis, @Gufi . The development of these radical groups , many of whom are forced inot it or are contributing to its critical masse vis-a-vis herd mentality. We have to also consider the behavioral and cognitive psychology that posits their actions -- and givent he ambivalence in human behavior --- requires an analysis on the external environment (and various independent variables there, such as stress, filial dynamic, religious institutionalization, economic depravity, and various others that are common in communities of low socoieconomic stratum).

One can , in part, link two events in the region as catalysts for what has happened: 1) The initiation of the Syrian Civil War (and the methodology used), and 2) The evacuation of the US Armed Forces from Iraq and the subsequent Power Vacuum (to refer @jhungary 's premise in his past post ).

What is the situational awareness we have? How can this situational awareness project itself in a thorough game plan. Clearly, one thing has to happen to restore some kind of balance: 1) Provide a power re-balancing in Iraq, 2) End the Syrian Civil War. How can we do this ? Well, for one, a power balance can be achieved in various ways --- the deployment of an allied contingent to help aid the Iraqi Armed Forces to combat and retake ISIS-held municipalities throughout the country. Establish a UN Peace-Keeping Force in war affected towns, cities, provinces and thus prevent communal clashes from happening post-ISIS. Lastly, how can we end the Syrian Civil War? Clearly and ultimatly the only way the war will end is if Assad steps down (or is removed from power), he cannot expect to maintain legitimacy as ruler of Syria when he has been responsible for humanitarian travesty in his own country. Syria would, thus, be required to be under UN Peace Keeping until a democratic assembly is made and a leader and administration is selected through popular will.

Then, here's the caveat --- how can we dis-arm ex-militants / ex-terrorists ? Therein lies another conundrum for policy and strategic analysts.



Therein lies the caveat --- this problem is a result of various external factors. The Syrian Civil War, the American Pullout and subsequent power vacuum in Iraq, the Sectarian differences in Iraq (Sunni vs Shi'a vs Kurd), then to nefarious interferences to destabilize the region (and there is a plethora of players here; ergo, the united states is not the one you should be focusing on all the time).

Actually, the power vacuum @Gufi mention is not when we left in 2011, but we disbanded Iraqi Government and Military in 2004 after we declare Mission Accomplished..

As I explained to him, this is not the case, and when we left Iraq in 2011, the power is there and Iraq has came back from a defeated force, but just trained in an opposite direction.
 
Trolling now? Getting desperate are we? Better that you stick to your sinking ship of poorly constructed arguments than to try insulting me again. :rofl:

Oh poor gambit. I expected more from you. :agree:
That ship is floating mightily as the US carrier Gerald Ford, son. Your charge that the US invaded Iraq under 'false pretenses' was debunked a long time ago. Long before you got on this forum. Everything I posted about how the WMD inspection regime structured and worked have NEVER been disputed. They are public information that anyone can verify for themselves.

Again...Going by YOUR line of reasoning that you derived from your sources, if Saddam Hussein had contained himself in Iraq, IS would not be IS today. That mean IS is Iraq's fault.
 
Actually, the power vacuum @Gufi mention is not when we left in 2011, but we disbanded Iraqi Government and Military in 2004 after we declare Mission Accomplished..
But what could have been done differently was understanding the delicate balance in the region and understand what bringing a hard line Shiite prime minister would do. Many knowledgeable Arabs had predicted this would happen. They did not let Sunni soldiers recruit, there were less government jobs for Sunni people and there was an extreme hatred for the American placed government and system because there was real discrimination. If sensible governance had been placed many of these soldiers would have been part of the Iraqi army.
This was step one which happened when you formed the first Iraqi government. There were thousands of unemployed bitter soldiers who were discriminated because they were Sunni Muslims.
Step two was when America left and the vacuum occurred. Anyway thank you for your explanation.
 
That ship is floating mightily as the US carrier Gerald Ford, son. Your charge that the US invaded Iraq under 'false pretenses' was debunked a long time ago. Long before you got on this forum. Everything I posted about how the WMD inspection regime structured and worked have NEVER been disputed. They are public information that anyone can verify for themselves.

Again...Going by YOUR line of reasoning, if Saddam Hussein had contained himself in Iraq, IS would not be IS today. That mean IS is Iraq's fault.

Saddam did contain himself. GWB and his neo-con buddies messed up royally, screwed up the region and paved the way for ISIS. You're engaging in what is known as "victim blaming."

But alas, we're just going in circles at this point. As I must go to bed, you can have the last word today - maybe insult me for being Chinese or Canadian? Or Chinese Canadian? It seems to be what you do best when you've lost an argument. :lol:
 
But if I were the American president, I would refuse China to participate. Why should the U.S. train the Chinese army when some Chinese, or should I say most Chinese here, view the U.S. as competitor? the second reason alone is great enough for the Chinese government to be involved in the middle east.

PLA is not your useless KMT army, we don't need the training from anyone.
 
Yes or no.

lol, you are really dumb on the issue, what you ask does not matter, AQI is not the ISIS today, even the guy in charge is different. ISIS can be trace back to AQI by name only, your lack of Middle Eastern knowledge do not cease to amaze me.

I bring up I was in Iraq fighting for AQI because that way I know who I am fighting with, you see that as a brag whom I kill or whom I invade to is your business, but dud, judging by your knowledge, you probably not even know what Is AQI and what is ISIS. Even @Gufi put up a fight with knowledge of substance of sort, you on the other hand, pick 2 things up and ask if there are any different. lol

For you this is your logic

USA = Bad

then from Wikipedia

Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad (Organization of Monotheism and Jihad) =
Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn (al-Qaeda in Iraq) =
Mujahideen Shura Council =
Islamic State of Iraq =
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant

and US war in Iraq create vacuum and boosted Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad

then US is responsible for ISIS lol

Discounting....

We offer the same reward with Zarqari and OBL
We killed Zarqari in 2006
AQI was disbanded and cease to operate in Iraq in 2008
Russia and China against using force on Syria after the chemical weapon
Rebirth of ISIS is no earlier than 2011

Oh well, we are the bad guys lol, maybe we should just stop bombing ISIS and let them run over to Afghanistan, see how the Chinese like when the crazy ISIS is just next door south of Chinese Border lol
 
Last edited:
Saddam did contain himself. GWB and his neo-con buddies messed up royally, screwed up the region and paved the way for ISIS.
But under the logic that you derived from your sources, what Saddam Hussein did after Desert Storm is irrelevant. His invasion started the chain reaction that led up to the events of today. Further, had Saddam Hussein cooperated with the WMD inspection regime, the one I schooled you about, he would live today to control Iraq as he see fit. So that is two losses for your argument.

You're engaging in what is known as "victim blaming."
Iraq is the victim of what ? We really did liberated Iraq from Saddam Hussein. The Iraqis gave US a list of candidates for leadership and Nouri al-Maliki became Iraq's PM. We helped the Iraqis in the fight against Al-Qaeda and that alliance pretty much defeated Al-Qaeda. Iraq's victimhood status, if any existed, was over.

But alas, we're just going in circles at this point.
You must be dizzy from the information you learned today. Have a glass of warm milk. Get some booty to ease off the stress. Not everybody can deal with me effectively. I put many people into rehab. :lol:
 
Senor Orange is probably in his mid-20s. If so, he must have been a toddler when I was in Desert Storm, and playing in the small sandbox when you fighting in the much bigger sandbox in '04.

He would probably still be in his diaper saying dad-dad. I guess he is about 16 or 17, not even thinking like a 20 years old.
 
Many people who keep screaming China never send expedition forces forget one thing. China has intervene massively by throwing troops into Vietnam and North Korea. ROC sent expeditionary forces into Burma.

The time will come when China project herself further away.

Because these expeditions linked to our core national interests, while ISIS is not our business.

Isn't the US army the number one in the world? Then let them handle this job.

We are now concentrating to make ourselves even stronger, and there is no possibility for you stooges to stop us to become even more powerful.
 
lol, you are really dumb on the issue, what you ask does not matter, AQI is not the ISIS today, even the guy in charge is different. ISIS can be trace back to AQI by name only, your lack of Middle Eastern knowledge do not cease to amaze me.

I bring up I was in Iraq fighting for AQI because that way I know who I am fighting with, you see that as a brag whom I kill or whom I invade to is your business, but dud, judging by your knowledge, you probably not even know what Is AQI and what is ISIS. Even @Gufi put up a fight with knowledge of substance of sort, you on the other hand, pick 2 things up and ask if there are any different. lol

For you this is your logic

USA = Bad

then from Wikipedia

Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad (Organization of Monotheism and Jihad) =
Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn (al-Qaeda in Iraq) =
Mujahideen Shura Council =
Islamic State of Iraq =
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant

and US war in Iraq create vacuum and create Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad

then US is responsible for ISIS lol

After talking so much about USA, one get confuse. To make things clear, I give you one person USA is emulating now.

Cardinal_de_Richelieu_mg_0053.jpg


Cardinal de Richelieu

Because these expeditions linked to our core national interests, while ISIS is not our business.

Isn't the US army the number one in the world? Then let them handle this job.

We are now concentrate to make ourselves even stronger, and there is no possibility for you stooges to stop us to become even more powerful.

You seems more like a race traitors or someone who make noise without knowledge.
 
Because these expeditions linked to our core national interests, while ISIS is not our business.

Isn't the US army the number one in the world? Then let them handle this job.

We are now concentrating to make ourselves even stronger, and there is no possibility for you stooges to stop us to become even more powerful.
There are many ways for a country to increase its esteem and prestige on the international stage. One is humanitarian missions. Another is peacekeeping. Both involves physical risks, meaning the country's citizens put themselves in harm's way -- FOR THE BENEFITS OF OTHERS.

Yes, China can do one but not the other. But the image problem have two major factors: That China is a permanent member of the UN Security Council and that China does not want to be compared to Russia.

China should want to be CONTRASTED with Russia. But not compared to. As such, the citizens of the world will expect China to behave -- like it or not -- similar to US. The Islamic State may not be a direct and immediate threat to mainland China. But if China want to be perceived as among world's elite members, and all the signs are there that China want that perception, then China must contribute to the fight against IS.
 
China should want to be CONTRASTED with Russia. But not compared to. As such, the citizens of the world will expect China to behave -- like it or not -- similar to US. The Islamic State may not be a direct and immediate threat to mainland China. But if China want to be perceived as among world's elite members, and all the signs are there that China want that perception, then China must contribute to the fight against IS.

This hit the nail on the head. Dead on. Again, all of the things you mentioned goes in part with the requisites of being a Responsible Power. China, as the world's 2nd largest economy, and with already impressive interests in Africa and in the Middle East -- is consigned to that.
 
There are many ways for a country to increase its esteem and prestige on the international stage. One is humanitarian missions. Another is peacekeeping. Both involves physical risks, meaning the country's citizens put themselves in harm's way -- FOR THE BENEFITS OF OTHERS.

Yes, China can do one but not the other. But the image problem have two major factors: That China is a permanent member of the UN Security Council and that China does not want to be compared to Russia.

China should want to be CONTRASTED with Russia. But not compared to. As such, the citizens of the world will expect China to behave -- like it or not -- similar to US. The Islamic State may not be a direct and immediate threat to mainland China. But if China want to be perceived as among world's elite members, and all the signs are there that China want that perception, then China must contribute to the fight against IS.

lol, just keep dreaming, the US is now getting into big troubles, and your Asia-Pacific pivot is officially dead.

In 2001-2003, the US has underestimated China, so she was easily getting distracted by Afghanistan and Iraq.

And now, the US knows that she couldn't underestimate China anymore, but too bad, ISIS + Ukrainian Crisis make the US fall into another trap.

Yeah, we are blessed by our bright destiny in the future, you have no chance to stop us, just keep crying.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom