China declares war on ISIS after terrorists claim to have executed Chinese hostage

originally posted by: skunkape23
Meth. Not even once. Those guys are in for one hell of a come down.

I've been saying the same thing for a while. Talking from experience.

a reply to: crazyewok

Best OP I've read in a while 👍

originally posted by: Dr UAE
so ISIS is now bringing all the players in one region , hmmm sounds like Armageddon

BINGO!
I've been wondering this for a long time. What if they are luring in every nation from around the world to one place, then boom, nuclear bomb goes off?! Scary to think what could happen....

originally posted by: anticitizen
...and meanwhile ISIS oil trade and ISIS banks are doing pretty good.

...and Trump stated he would investigate the bankers involved in the oil trade and figure out who is funneling money to these extremists...

a reply to: damingus

People called Hitler crazy. He wasn't crazy. Just stupid. You don't try and fight Russia and America. You get Russia and America to fight each other.

The sum of all fear's
Tom Clancy

originally posted by: Skywatcher2011

originally posted by: anticitizen
...and meanwhile ISIS oil trade and ISIS banks are doing pretty good.

...and Trump stated he would investigate the bankers involved in the oil trade and figure out who is funneling money to these extremists...

Trumps likely just jealous he not part of the deal.

Anyway we all know who is behind it. The saudis.

TL;DR

But to respond to the question as to why they haven't been stamped on yet..

Realistically, there's nothing to "stamp on". ISIS are not an army, nor a nation. They are fighting a guerilla campaign for an ideal. You can bomb their current capital back to the stone age, their capital will just reappear elsewhere. You can kill their current leaders, others will just take their place.

There is no fast "boots on the ground" solution to this campaign. This is a long haul one.

originally posted by: BMorris
TL;DR

But to respond to the question as to why they haven't been stamped on yet..

Realistically, there's nothing to "stamp on". ISIS are not an army, nor a nation. They are fighting a guerilla campaign for an ideal. You can bomb their current capital back to the stone age, their capital will just reappear elsewhere. You can kill their current leaders, others will just take their place.

There is no fast "boots on the ground" solution to this campaign. This is a long haul one.

A war of extermination you mean. Thats th eonly way to win there is elimination of the entire people who support ISIS or extremist. Death penalties for anyone practicing their ideaology after no matter age or sex as well. Internet restrictions on useage of Prophet,or other certain words too with a re education trip to those who use it alot.

originally posted by: crazyewok
Looks like china will now be officialy entering the fray.

To what extent who knows?

But if the UN votes for joint action now I dont see anyone useing there veto power unless its the USA.
France will be in, Russia in, China now, UK will be in. So that just leaves the US of A and were they will stand.

You have to give ISIS one thing, they keep there foreign policy very simple. War with everyone. Bet they save a fortune on Embassy costs!

Cant see them surviving if they piss off the entire world.

Which leaves the queations who is suppprting them? And we all know that...the Saudis!

It depends on their tactics and to what extent the rest of the world retaliates. Fighting a defensive war with cheap weapons is easy. If the goal of ISIS is to financially beat everyone who could oppose them it's actually a good strategy to bring everyone in. If a major power sits back, they'll have massive leverage when all is said and done. But if ISIS can weaken everyone, then a victory results in no resistance.

Tactically, there's not much difference in fighting against just the US or US+Russia+China+others, it's just a matter of numbers but they're practicing asymmetrical warfare so numbers don't really matter. Muslim extremists are masters of asymmetrical warfare, they've been actively practicing it for 30+ years.

Note that having more enemies actually makes their attacks more effective. If they spend $10,000 to suicide bomb a sporting event, now it's not just the US+France that has to beef up security everywhere else just incase, it's now Russia, China, and others as well. And combined their spending:damage ratio goes from say 1:100 to 1:1000.

a reply to: crazyewok

I also declared war on ISIS. I may be an army of one, but I do pack a punch.... oh yea, and I'm a yellow belt.

originally posted by: crazyewok

China will join the war on ISIS after four of its citizens were killed by Islamist terror groups in two separate attacks last week.

The vow comes after ISIS claimed to have killed Beijing man Fan Jinghui, 50, alongside Norwegian national Ole Johan Grimsgaard-Ofstad, 48, who were feared to have been taken hostage in September.

Chinese President Xi Jinping: "China will strengthen cooperation with the international community, resolutely crack down on violent terrorist operations that devastate innocent lives and safeguard world peace and security."

Chin a declares war on ISIS after terrorists claim to have executed Chinese hostage

Looks like china will now be officialy entering the fray.

To what extent who knows?

But if the UN votes for joint action now I dont see anyone useing there veto power unless its the USA.
France will be in, Russia in, China now, UK will be in. So that just leaves the US of A and were they will stand.

You have to give ISIS one thing, they keep there foreign policy very simple. War with everyone. Bet they save a fortune on Embassy costs!

Cant see them surviving if they piss off the entire world.

Which leaves the queations who is suppprting them? And we all know that...the Saudis!

Isis is a idiology not a military to be defeated. With every enemy country they make in a sense they put for a David and Goliath type scenario. If all these world powers goes to war against a small force of Islamic extremist. They just guaranteed full ranks for months maybe years come. It's one thing to condemn the actions of your own it's another thing to engage them in war. The unfortunate alternative is fight for your own regardless about how you feel about the politics or religions conutations of the war. Being prior military I can definitely tell you our troops didn't 100% believe in why we were fighting for.

This is all part of the grand plan.
The plan to usher in the NWO and have a world police.
A large, one world army, each sharing in their duties to protect the others homeland from terrorism.
Terrorism that erupts "worldwide" and requires boots on the ground "everywhere".

Mission accomplished.

Welcome to 1984, forever.

a reply to: crazyewok

Damn eh? Go china go! Lol

Im glad that Canada has dropped out or will drop out of the attacks. This is building up to ww3 and im glad that we wont have to worry about any drafts or anything.

a reply to: NowWhat

I heardly think isis is doing this for the nwo. Besides the nwo is the un.

Calm down people, China just needs more sand for more islands.

originally posted by: Belgianbloke
The whole damn world against a small radical group and they still can't prevent #.
Nope, nothing wrong here.

People aren't calling it a WW3 but you gotta ask, which major nation isn't involved about now?

The one that has never been involved (isolationist world banking strategists) Switzerland.

originally posted by: damingus

originally posted by: Dr UAE
so ISIS is now bringing all the players in one region , hmmm sounds like Armageddon

BINGO!
I've been wondering this for a long time. What if they are luring in every nation from around the world to one place, then boom, nuclear bomb goes off?! Scary to think what could happen....

ISIS hasn't suicide bombed nuclearized North Korea (so not every nation yet).

a reply to: crazyewok
When ground troops enter that area ,we will see troops accidently being hit by the Allied forces ,and thats when it all starts to fail.

Fingerpointing who made this terrible mistake and tention will rise between allied forced that will escalate to something we all know..

a reply to: Jahari

Well it depends. If we let the russians and chinese commit genocide and then rule over the area after. Its a bad thing to be sure but it will be worse in the long run. they apparently need rulers who are worse than pol pot or stalin there.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

That was excellent!