By continuing you agree to eChinacities's Privacy Policy .
Sign up with Google
Sign up with Facebook
Q: ISIS attacks - will China help out?
Apparently, Obama has organised (or something) by the US to combine with forces from the rest of the world to try and wipe out ISIS (at least from Iraq/Syria).
Do you think a) China would join in the hunt?
b) if they do, would ISIS start showing up in China?
I ask, because Australia is about to raise it's 'Terrorist Threat Alert" to high - ie, we can expect a terrorist attack somewhere in Aus :(
a) They don't have anything to gain from it, so no.
b) They don't have the mandatory 2 years of experience yet. Plus China already has its own terrorists, so they would be taking up positions from nationals.
Scandinavian:
You mean apart from the fact that ISIS has China on the "Evil list" and their dream of a caliphate extends far into China. Bombing ISIS in Syria and Iraq doesn't remove ISIS, they have a deliberate strategy of having "management staff" from all over the world, to make sure they appeal to people everywhere, they are not depending on operations in Iraq and Syria (although if they are not there, perhaps the caliphate seems less likely to the nutters)
Yes, China will probably help ISIS.
Hulk:
I answered correctly. China will probably help ISIS fight everyone else.
mattsm84:
Hulk isn't that far off. They are (were) ok with Milosevic, Qadafi, Assad, and three generations of crazy in North Korea. In fact the only reason they would intervene at all would be to protect their selected despot in Syria. And its not even a matter of political expedience as it is with so many other countries then they support strong man, its that China has a stated preference for tin pot dictators.
Most likely China would only get significantly involved if ISIS posed a threat to China's business interests in the region. As long as the oil and minerals flow freely why should China care about internal squabbles in the Middle East? Leave that to the USA.
sam239:
US's motivations for involvement would be similar ~ interest in keeping resource production in friendly hands, interest in preventing another safe haven for Muslim terrorists,etc.
According to China Daily online English version, yes.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2014-09/12/content_18585765.htm
Lord_hanson:
The article doesn't really comment on how China would help. Moral support is not very useful. Perhaps they won't veto everything that comes up at the UN security council (shame Russia still will).
iWolf:
Mr Lord_hanson, I think at this stage of the game, every country will give it The Nod but without any specific commitment or details about what level of support they will offer. Pom Pom Girls from the sidelines will be the level for most.
the high alert level means there is more of a chance of a attack
Not that there is certain to be one
however that is not to say that you should not be alert to your surrounds
and sus activety like abandoned baggage
most people will not even notice much of a change or any for that matter
Shining_brow:
Very true... but, let's face it, Aus has been pretty fortunate not to suffer any such terrorist attacks, unlike some other countries.
China does not have a military that can operate far from their shores.
Chinese have not heard about this stuff going on yet... if and/or when they do... them extremists better watch out!!!!
And who the hell cares about ISIS, that is a problem the Arab world should deal with themselves. Air strikes are costing the taxpayers (US) close to 8 million a day. What do we get for that? They still hate us more than they hate ISIS. Let them kill each other.
Lord_hanson:
Should they overrun the middle east and capture some of Iran or Isreals nuclear weapons then I am sure it would be Americas problem then.
Shining_brow:
35,000 NOW. Remember, only a couple of years ago, there was no-one - and especially none wanting to volunteer coming from the US or UK. That's all changed.
The idea of an Islamic state is one firmly in the minds of many people on this planet - obviously. If you really think that it's something that should be allowed to flourish - and thus, to involve itself in international politics and economics (ie, take over and influence of various regimes in the world), then I think you're being a bit ignorant.
Such people aren't going to be content with just having Iraq and Syria... (and, if they're true Jihadists of the militant variety (acknowledging that Jihad doesn't have to be violent - nor even against other people) would love to start up chemical and biological weaponry... and nuclear - I'm sure someone would love to sell them that technology!)
Also, by your statement clearly shows just how much you're ignoring European intervention in the whole area for the last century or more!
Englteachted:
Shining: How much is Australia spending to combat ISIS? Your stance is an easy one to take when you're not the one spending 8 mil a day.
Englteachted:
Oh and by the way, the Kurds will never support ISIS. Persians (Iran) will never support ISIS. And there are many different sects of Islam that conflict with their brand of Islam.
But let's assume you are right, many Arabs will gravitate towards them . What does that say about the people in that region? Wouldn't it be better to wait until all the nutjobs are gathered under their banner, and then wipe them out?
But I disagree ISIS will never become strong enough to take all of Iraq, Syria and Iran.
Shining_brow:
US has a population of ~320 million. Australia has a population of ~23 million... so, if we divide your $8 million by 11, we get $727, 000. We also have about 1/16th of the US's GDP.
I suspect it may not be that far off... (though I don't have exact figures).
Which would mean - the effects on the average Australian would be somewhat similar to the effects it would have on the average American.
However, nice of you to be more worried about money than people's lives....
Englteachted:
You are looking at the wrong number. Aus is a very wealthy country.
Honestly, I think China has more to gain from joining the hunt than losing because there have already been quite a few attacks linked to Islamic extremists in China.
They will get a pat the back from the developed countries and maybe even get help to control or exterminate the nut jobs going around tossing bombs and knifing people in train stations. I am not sure if they are the same group but it seems like they may be tied together. I know the nuts running people down in Tianamen square were reported as Muslims.
Sitting out wouldn't really benefit them as much as allying with other forces to try and stop the ones (nut jobs using religion as a justification for murder) ruining it for all Muslims.
Shining_brow:
That's sort of the angle I was thinking of - that there are some extremists already in China. Going up against ISIS (even if in a relatively minor - albeit well publicised!! - manner) could be important for PR.
I reckon China is more worried about the Scottish independence vote than about who sells guns to what warlord.
Shining_brow:
I suspect the governor up north west of China may disagree.
China won't engage in this!
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/09/11/news-organizations-finally...
Destroying what Obama calls the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant won’t create an effective and legitimate Iraqi state. It won’t restore the possibility of a democratic Egypt. It won’t dissuade Saudi Arabia from funding jihadists. It won’t pull Libya back from the brink of anarchy. It won’t end the Syrian civil war. It won’t bring peace and harmony to Somalia and Yemen. It won’t persuade the Taliban to lay down their arms in Afghanistan. It won’t end the perpetual crisis of Pakistan. It certainly won’t resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
All the military power in the world won’t solve those problems. Obama knows that. Yet he is allowing himself to be drawn back into the very war that he once correctly denounced as stupid and unnecessary — mostly because he and his advisers don’t know what else to do. Bombing has become his administration’s default option.
Rudderless and without a compass, the American ship of state continues to drift, guns blazing.
Maybe, and for the same reason that Russia might. Syria, with whom they have significant economic and military ties, is their proxy in that part of the world Joining, even a limited role, is a way to assure that the government in Syria isn't placed in a weakened position by or as a result of the coming intervention.
Probably not unless it spreads into Chinese territories. But then again, they are getting a bit paranoid about Xing Jiang so you never know...
