China Should Send Troops to Fight ISIS

[Shotgunner51]

@Nihonjin1051 Nice article to share, thanks dude!

Apparently the author does make some sense, if I were to pitch China government for going to fight ISIS I would use the same selling points, so this is not a bad article.

Though these selling points make sense, very convincing actually, and as some posters said who knows when they will be knocking on China's front door. However I doubt China government will accept the invitation now because of the probably the most important unanswered question: Who is behind ISIS?

From a pure military angle, no air force, no navy, no WMD, no satcom, no nothing ... but clearly exposed geographical locations, ISIS should be piece of cake for any advanced military forces let alone powerful USN/USAF. What takes everyone so long?

 

[gau8av]

If Japan pays the 200 million ransom, then the next they will try to kidnap more Japanese citizens as the ease meal.

I think Japan should be the one to fight ISIS than China.

true, and no country should negotiate with terrorists but this is the first time they are making a ransom call for cash, the previous westerners who were executed were just killed out of revenge, or they made insane demands like calling off air strikes.

 

[DMF]

China will not fight the isis, because we know where the real problem is.

The problem in the middle east have been created by the west, especially the USA, the religion is used as a tool to against the Soviet in Afghanistan, before this CIA work, the Islamic terrorist does not exist. You can see all the Islamic militia groups fighting in the region are supported by the west.

For the religious problems in the EU countries, the Muslims are from their colonies, the white pig deserve their own troubles. All the problems in the Middle East were rooted by the west colonization, one example is that most the countries, including Israel, within the old Ottoman Empire were created by the British and France and some other Europeans.

Religion has been weak in China all the times since the last 2000years, China is not a religious country, even Islam, brought in by the Mongolian invaders, survives by marriage and birth, you know how passionate Islam always wanted convert any body into their religion, but in China they do not believe any Han Chinese will seriously become a Muslim.

Before China open up to the outside world, religion already burred deep in the grave, but the west gives China an ideology oppression and forced China to allow a” freedom of religion”.

In this world only the west has the right to preach what is right what is wrong, the Jews are the God father of the world, Japan must follow them, China is the victim of this ideology struggle between the west and the Islam world, but for the time being, I think we can not say we are the victim of Islam, hope China can understand how to deal this situation.

 

[powastick]

What Japan doing now is what they doing after Tokugawa. Emulating west. Some western values are good, and some are bad. But do not enforce your ideal on other people. Its no different calming other people as infidels. Also, it is like telling other people "You must learn of our peaceful way by force".

It is hard for you to feel the sentiment in the Muslim country because you don't live in one. I have already conceded the muslim were right on the Iraq War. What a fool am I defending the US. Very embarrassing.

 

[EL LOBO]

no sir, not a good idea to send troops..... Pakistan needs China MORE.....

 

[TaiShang]

What Japan (or should i say Abe) wants and i can see @Nihonjin1051 's desire as well is to let JSDF have a more prominent role in safeguarding its assets and maintaining peace in the ME/Africa region. By "dragging" China into this mess it may be seen as an opportunity for building up real life battle experience by joining the coalition with US and Japan. It could be a chance for creating trust between China and Japan according to nihonjin although i doubt this. Some experts consider Japan's military intervention could be seen as the kickoff point for a stronger militarization and gaining influence in the region by stationing in those countries. From China's point of view, outsiders should understand our politicians are skeptical of the revival of Japanese forces though we all know Japan cannot threaten China again. Most likely Germany and Japan will not try that sh!t ever again.

Now back to the question whether China should be sending troops fighting ISIS. First i'd like to know why aren't the Europeans and the US sending boots fighting ISIS? The f*cked up mess is the ramification of constant meddling and training of terrorists by using these barbarians fighting enemies until one day those dogs starts biting the "trainers".
The region wasn't peaceful already and we all know what the Americans did by adding more oil (pun not intended) to fire by using x to fight y, and then when x is not needed anymore x becomes angry and starts attacking Americans as well or others whom x considers as meddlers. Americans will use y or z to fight x in retaliation and we have a vicious circle, a never ending problem period.
I understand there are foreign investments, assets, fellow countrymen that needs protection from these barbarians but declaring terrorists war is like inviting trouble. Just look at some of the EU countries being attacked from these vermin. The US has made plenty of mistakes, removing Saddam and Gadhaffi or anyone they don't like and replacing these countries with a new puppet isn't gonna work. It seems to me chaos after chaos, which begs the question why should China be sending troops to fight ISIS? Isn't it why 2 Japanese lives are now in grave danger after Abe had pledged financial aid in fighting ISIS? ME is a hopeless sh!thole, better stay away from it.

That sums it up perfectly.

ISIS is a US-led creation. It is to them to sort out the problem. None of China's business.

No matter how much some "experts" try, they will not see China in any way helping the US and its allies to tame the monster they funded, trained and nurtured.

China will only veto if the US tries to pull out another stunt move to openly declare war against Assad.

Besides it geopolitically makes more sense to encourage the US to stay busy in the Middle East.

Why bail them out?

US has some great allies; all extremely democratic and liberal, unlike the evil Assad. To name a few, Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia. Let them open up their bases and pledge soldiers. March on, US! Free world (KSA, Qatar and Turkey, France and UK) is behind you.

 

[Lux de Veritas]

China will not fight the isis, because we know where the real problem is.

The problem in the middle east have been created by the west, especially the USA, the religion is used as a tool to against the Soviet in Afghanistan, before this CIA work, the Islamic terrorist does not exist. You can see all the Islamic militia groups fighting in the region are supported by the west.

For the religious problems in the EU countries, the Muslims are from their colonies, the white pig deserve their own troubles. All the problems in the Middle East were rooted by the west colonization, one example is that most the countries, including Israel, within the old Ottoman Empire were created by the British and France and some other Europeans.

Religion has been weak in China all the times since the last 2000years, China is not a religious country, even Islam, brought in by the Mongolian invaders, survives by marriage and birth, you know how passionate Islam always wanted convert any body into their religion, but in China they do not believe any Han Chinese will seriously become a Muslim.

Before China open up to the outside world, religion already burred deep in the grave, but the west gives China an ideology oppression and forced China to allow a” freedom of religion”.

In this world only the west has the right to preach what is right what is wrong, the Jews are the God father of the world, Japan must follow them, China is the victim of this ideology struggle between the west and the Islam world, but for the time being, I think we can not say we are the victim of Islam, hope China can understand how to deal this situation.

That sums it up perfectly.

ISIS is a US-led creation. It is to them to sort out the problem. None of China's business.

Now matter how much some "experts" try, they will not see China in any way helping the US and its allies to tame the monster they funded, trained and nurtured.

China will only veto if the US tries to pull out another stunt move to openly declare war against Assad.

Thats right. Islamofascism have a love hate relationship with USA and are essentially USA + Saudi creation. In Indonesia, former president Sukarno was a socialist fighting for a sectarianless nation with fair income distribution.

That hit Islamofascist hard and Islamofascist + USA + Suharto conspire to take down Sukarno. The country since then rapidly Islamize, but fortunately Sukarno ghost still around, and Indon elites never went to the shit extreme of Malaysia.

Other example includes using Islam to take down Nasser Egypt.

Using Islam against USSR in Afghan.

The Bhutto are more socialist. Suddenly USA support Zia U Hak the Islamo general to kill Bhutto and make Pakistan very Islamic. Islam is a dangerous weapon of USA against her enemy that could also bite the master.

 

[TaiShang]

This is the best China is willing to offer. Some sense. Free study sessions. The ground work is to be done by the US and its democratic allies.

Commentary: Unified standard, self-reflect needed in U.S. anti-terror approach
English.news.cn 2015-01-21

by Xinhua Writer Luo Jun

BEIJING, Jan. 21 (Xinhua) -- In his second-to-last State of the Union speech on Tuesday, U.S. President Barack Obama vowed to defeat the Islamic State (IS) terrorist group with coalition partners and urged the Congress "to authorize the use of force."

The call for tougher measures does reflect the realities of the global fight against terrorism, but adopting a universal standard on the issue is equally important if Washingtion wants to tackle the challenge in a more effective way.

Deadly attacks carried out by extremists have increased significantly around the world in recent years, and have grown into a malignant epidemic in some conflict-torn countries and regions.

Violent extremism and terrorism are no longer threats to one country or one region, but common enemies of the international community as a whole. Thus a universal standard on such threats should be established and constitute the basis of effective global cooperation.

Holding a double standard on terrorism, whether it is out of a strategic objective, misunderstanding or prejudice, not only discredits the holder, but also hinders concerted anti-terror efforts.

Leading countries and blocs in fight against extremism and terrorism must resist the temptation to hurt their rivals under the disguise of counter-terrorism.

The realistic political agenda out of self-interest, if being confused with the menace of terrorism, will deviate the crucial global anti-terror efforts from focusing on the real fight, harbor mistrust and allow terrorists to breathe and grow.

Meanwhile, eliminating the root causes of terrorism also deserves prior attention. The IS may not be the ultimate villain. Before it there was al-Qaida, and there could be other forces of violent extremism surging after the IS.

A proper review of the past counter-terrorism policies and a diagnosis of the root causes of terrorism are necessary for efforts to reflect upon past mistakes and improve the ability to address these threats in the future.

Obama acknowledged in his annual speech that the U.S. is "supporting a moderate opposition in Syria," following Pentagon's announcement last week to send 400 troops to train Syrian rebels to fight the IS.

Whether such moves can effectively help crack down on terrorism is debatable, but they undoubtedly raise doubts over the U.S. agenda in Syria.

If handled without prudence, not only regional anti-terror efforts will suffer setbacks, but the risk of broader conflicts in the region will be triggered, creating more natural breeding grounds for violent extremism and terrorism. The bottom line is anti-terror efforts should stem or reduce terrorism, not give rise to more of it.

 

[terranMarine]

That sums it up perfectly.

ISIS is a US-led creation. It is to them to sort out the problem. None of China's business.

No matter how much some "experts" try, they will not see China in any way helping the US and its allies to tame the monster they funded, trained and nurtured.

China will only veto if the US tries to pull out another stunt move to openly declare war against Assad.

Besides it geopolitically makes more sense to encourage the US to stay busy in the Middle East.

Why bail them out?

US has some great allies; all extremely democratic and liberal, unlike the evil Assad. To name a few, Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia. Let them open up their bases and pledge soldiers. March on, US! Free world (KSA, Qatar and Turkey, France and UK) is behind you.

Thing is after Monster x, there's gonna be a new mutation and Monster y emerges and US will train Monster z. Can't be tamed, the problem is the interference of the West. No matter how tough the Americans are with their coalition it's an endless war, look at Iraq and Afghanistan. More recruits after new setbacks, it keeps on growing after countless of drone strikes or using high tech weaponry fighting peasants. These people fight for an ideology, their spirit cannot be killed. I don't care if some members here calling China not capable or irresponsible power. They must think we are
If the French keep insulting Islam through cartoons they can expect new tragedies at unexpected times.

 

[55100864]

Some people just so naive, they have no idea how deep the water is in this so called 'ISIS' game. The conflict of interests between all major powers became white-hot, the only reason why ISIS is still alive is because none of the 5 big boy want them die, the ISIS provides a perfect opportunity for the big 5 to contest silently without direct military conflict, a highly complex poxy war, whoever win this game can control the Euroasia continent, It's not even conspiracy theory.

I would assume china has already made some trade-offs with other players in this game, that's why our oil fields in Iraq remained untouched, and we have not see any large scale pullout of chinese citizens. So no, i don't think china will intervene directly in ME.

I would not be surprised to see direct chinese intervention in Afghanistan in near future though.

 

[Nike]

Thats right. Islamofascism have a love hate relationship with USA and are essentially USA + Saudi creation. In Indonesia, former president Sukarno was a socialist fighting for a sectarianless nation with fair income distribution.

That hit Islamofascist hard and Islamofascist + USA + Suharto conspire to take down Sukarno. The country since then rapidly Islamize, but fortunately Sukarno ghost still around, and Indon elites never went to the shit extreme of Malaysia.

Other example includes using Islam to take down Nasser Egypt.

Using Islam against USSR in Afghan.

The Bhutto are more socialist. Suddenly USA support Zia U Hak the Islamo general to kill Bhutto and make Pakistan very Islamic. Islam is a dangerous weapon of USA against her enemy that could also bite the master.

Soeharto is never get a close relationship with Islam, neither he fond with Islamic value themselves he is very traditional at heart. After all he is what you called Kejawen adherent.

You shouldn't talking about Indonesia if you don't understand a bit about our country, i was fed up to read your rant and nonsense every time you posting about Indonesia.

 

[Lux de Veritas]

Soeharto is never get a close relationship with Islam, neither he fond with Islamic value themselves he is very traditional at heart. After all he is what you called Kejawen adherent.

You shouldn't talking about Indonesia if you don't understand a bit about our country, i was fed up to read your rant and nonsense every time you posting about Indonesia.

I am not saying that he is close to Islam, but compared to Sukarno, Suharto is far friendlier though he is suspicious of them. Or you want deny Islam groups involvement in 1965 massacre against the socialist. And then, there is an alliance of army and Islam against commie.

Women, Sexual Violence and the Indonesian Killings of 1965-66 - Annie Pohlman - Google Books

Islam in Liberalism - Joseph A. Massad - Google Books

I am sick of you putting words in my mouth.

 

[RescueRanger]

to the world interest? Yes, of course, almost most definitely, to Chinese interest? No.

First of all, ISIS is a global problem, you have to dislodge your enemy before they settle in an area. ISIS is jow currently settle in Iraq and Syria border and potentially spilled over Turkey, Iran and even as far as afghanistan. Which if you look at it like this, they are at the gateway of Central Asia.

Any delay in dislodging ISIS mean fanning it grow, the only way you can make sure it would have never exist is by killing it when the Idea is still in infancy, meaning, now.

However, on the Chinese prospective, they dont want another mess with radical muslim, already have to deal with uyghur in their north west province, the last thing Chinese want to do is to have the problem expand. Seems like not touching ISIS now would mean you stay out of their way and they stayed out yours. Not involving may seems like a good idea for Chinese

However at this point, ISIS grew strong simply because they bet on inactiveness of other government and they keep winning on that bet. Before ISIS were beaten offf to Syria border, they bet on Iraq will not care about them anymore and start grewing in Syria, they bet on Iraqi would think this is a syria problem, then when they get back to Iraq timing precisely after the US left, they bet on Iran wont do a thing and think this is a Iraqi problem. And they did. Sames goes with Kurdish and turkey, Turkey will think its the kirx problem, while the kurd supposed think Iraqi supposed to protect them...

It worth notice that China, although safe for now, is uncomfortably close to the whole mess, And ISIS is only going to presist until somebody have a substancial army start challenging it, and China would still betting on "This is somebody's else problem" until it suddently appear in Chinese western border.

The real question is, how many time chinese think "its someone's else problem" before ISIS start knocking on Chinese door step. And would it be too late by then?

Very nice analysis, just a question. Do you know a Chinese strategic analyst by the name of Professor Zhou Rong from the Guang Ming Daily? He did some great work here in Pakistan.

 

[gambit]

@Nihonjin1051 Nice article to share, thanks dude!

Apparently the author does make some sense, if I were to pitch China government for going to fight ISIS I would use the same selling points, so this is not a bad article.

Though these selling points make sense, very convincing actually, and as some posters said who knows when they will be knocking on China's front door. However I doubt China government will accept the invitation now because of the probably the most important unanswered question: Who is behind ISIS?

From a pure military angle, no air force, no navy, no WMD, no satcom, no nothing ... but clearly exposed geographical locations, ISIS should be piece of cake for any advanced military forces let alone powerful USN/USAF. What takes everyone so long?

Because in order to fight IS the way we fought the Iraqi Army and Al-Qaeda, the US must have absolute control of the country. We must be able to send our forces, either ground troops or just air power, at the time we wish and at the level we need. Right now, no one have the political stomach to cede that level of control to the US.

 

[jhungary]

Very nice analysis, just a question. Do you know a Chinese strategic analyst by the name of Professor Zhou Rong from the Guang Ming Daily? He did some great work here in Pakistan.

i have heard of the paper (Think its call Citizens Daily) dont think i have heard of the man lol...sorry

Because in order to fight IS the way we fought the Iraqi Army and Al-Qaeda, the US must have absolute control of the country. We must be able to send our forces, either ground troops or just air power, at the time we wish and at the level we need. Right now, no one have the political stomach to cede that level of control to the US.

What ISIS doing is what we called a fourth generation warfare, (yeah, not only fighter have generation lol) Anyway, its a combination of conventional combine warfare combined with Guerilla Warfare, this is what the NVA did to ARVN in reverse...

To fight ISIS now, we need to first defeat ISIS in afew set piece battle, then when we dislodge their stronghold, they will dissolve into Iran or Syria , and supporting insurgency in Iraq.

What we need to do was , take over control of the IQA and then use them to hammer the ISIS, when we hammer them hard enough, then release IQA to do what they do best for the past 9 years while we station our troop in Iraq.

To do that, we will need both US and Iraq government on the same boat but honestly, i dont see us going back unless ISIS start touching our asset in Iraq or ME...