BBC excited for their discovery in Sudan
BBC: China arming Sudan's Darfur effort[url=http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/07/13/BBC_China_arming_Sudans_Darfur_effort/UPI-81891215945692/]http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/07/13/BBC_China_arming_Sudans_Darfur_effort/UPI-81891215945692/[/url]
But...
south Sudan liberation army, garrisoned into Juba.
the truck: unimog, Mecrcedes-Benz, from Germany
[img]http://himg2.huanqiu.com/attachment/080716/8eccacc7fd.jpg[/img]
south Sudan liberation army
the truck: from America
[img]http://himg2.huanqiu.com/attachment/080716/6b25231698.jpg[/img]
this is familiar to every factions
the truck: toyota, from Japan
[img]http://himg2.huanqiu.com/attachment/080716/5c7d5eaf9b.jpg[/img]
mitsubishi, from Japan
[img]http://himg2.huanqiu.com/attachment/080716/21802196b9.jpg[/img]
Renault, from France
[img]http://himg2.huanqiu.com/attachment/080716/17f1945d9e.jpg[/img]
unknown, but it certain not from China
[img]http://himg2.huanqiu.com/attachment/080716/590f2ef8b6.jpg[/img]
another from toyota
[img]http://himg2.huanqiu.com/attachment/080716/83820b76dc.jpg[/img]
[b]BBC blinded again and again, but this turn, it's time to exciting, because they found a Chinese truck!
In addition, do you think truck is weapon? truck can be used in everywhere. you don't need my teaching, because you are clear in you mind.[/b]
[img]http://himg2.huanqiu.com/attachment/080716/aed564ad8f.jpg[/img]
original thread(in Chinese)
[url=http://www.anti-cnn.com/forum/cn/thread-80867-1-4.html]http://www.anti-cnn.com/forum/cn/thread-80867-1-4.html[/url]
[[i] Last edited by tgbhu at 22-7-2008 11:24 [/i]] BBC must really be running out of ideas if they are reporting on a Chinese truck. I can see why people are loosing faith in the media :L :L
-Samtom edit edit edit
[[i] Last edited by innervoice at 19-8-2008 15:16 [/i]] [quote]Original posted by [i]innervoice[/i] at 23-7-2008 20:42 [url=http://www.anti-cnn.com/forum/en/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=18995&ptid=2342][img]http://www.anti-cnn.com/forum/en/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]
Your comparison with the Toyota, etcetera in other parts of Sudan is not a good comparison. Those trucks were probably bought on the free market, and were probably even used when they were bought. In other words, they weren't provided directly by any of the governments concerned (Japan, USA etc.) [/quote]
What makes you think that the chinese truck is not bought on free market just like Toyota? Afterall China car manufacturers have been exporting cars to many countries. Like any other countries, there are companies in China who do import and export on all kinds of things. The chinese truck could be been exported to open market through those private import/export companies.
[[i] Last edited by nobody at 24-7-2008 00:58 [/i]] nobody,
Plates on the first truck show it was imported after the embargo
Number on the plate: 07.07.2005
Embargo were set on March 2005
from the article: "Markings showed that they were from a batch of 212 Dong Feng army lorries that the UN had traced as having arrived in Sudan after the arms embargo was put in place. "
--
Also in this article: Chinese train pilots
From the article "The BBC was also told that China was training fighter pilots who fly Chinese A5 Fantan fighter jets in Darfur. .... The BBC has established that Chinese Fantan fighter jets were flying on missions out of Nyala airport in south Darfur in February. Panorama acquired satellite photographs of the two fighters at the airport on 18 June 2008, and its investigations indicate these are the only fighter jets that have been based in Darfur this year......The Chinese Fantan jets are believed to have been delivered to Sudan in 2003 before the current UN arms embargo was imposed on Darfur....International lawyer Ms da Silva says if China is training Fantan pilots, this represents another Chinese violation of the UN arms embargo. They were sold by the Dongfeng Motor Corporation, they are not army lorries. In China civil trucks' sale is not controled by government. By the way, trucks are not weapons.
[url=http://www.dfmc.com.cn/]www.dfmc.com.cn[/url]
[[i] Last edited by suzheng1983 at 24-7-2008 12:24 [/i]] the article said "Both trucks were equipped with Chinese-made anti-aircraft guns." so it's not just abouyt trucks .
to suzheng : "They were sold by the Dongfeng Motor Corporation, they are not army lorries. In China civil trucks' sale is not controled by government. By the way, trucks are not weapons."
Well, if Dongfend Motor Corporation does not sale army trucks, what is this? [url]http://www.sinodefence.com/army/transport/eq2050.asp[/url]
On the one hand, it's true that great developed countries like the USA or France shouldn't give an lesson to china on weapons, since they've sold weapons to very controversial countries in the past (and probably today too).
But it's not a reason for the media not to tell us this kind of information. The BBC news wrote:" 这两辆卡车都载有高射炮，其中一门是中国的(Both the two trucks were equipped with AA guns, one of them is a Chinese AA gun)". From pictures can see that most of trucks were equipped with weapons, but our truck without weapon:
[img]http://himg2.huanqiu.com/attachment/080716/590f2ef8b6.jpg[/img]
[img]http://himg2.huanqiu.com/attachment/080716/5c7d5eaf9b.jpg[/img]
[img]http://himg2.huanqiu.com/attachment/080716/aed564ad8f.jpg[/img]
The Dongfeng EQ2100 can be found everywhere, you can check them by yourself.
[[i] Last edited by suzheng1983 at 24-7-2008 22:14 [/i]] suzheng,
you see also a picture, where a dongfeng truck is armed with AA-Gun
[url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7503428.stm]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7503428.stm[/url]
but also from the article: The guns were mounted after the lorries were imported from China.
So this is not the big deal on this issue.
--
But the painting of the trucks shows, military camouflage, so they were not send for private use.
According to the
- Resolution 1556 (2004)
no wapons inclusive military vehicles.
They have military camouflage, so they are military vehicles.
[url=http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2004/sc8160.doc.htm]http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2004/sc8160.doc.htm[/url]
- and Resolution 1591 (2005)
There is also an [b]assets freeze[/b]. [b]So, how were these lorries bought with[/b]?
[b][font=Times New Roman][size=4]
[url=http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1591/index.shtml]http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1591/index.shtml[/url]
[/b][/size][/font]
Resolution 1556
The Council decided that all States would take the necessary measures to [b]prevent the sale or supply[/b] to all non-governmental entities and individuals, including the Janjaweed, operating in North, South and West Darfur by their nationals or from their territories or using their flag vessels or aircraft and related materials of all types, including weapons and ammunition, [b]military vehicles[/b] and equipment, paramilitary equipment and spare parts, whether or not originating in their territories.
[b][font=Times New Roman][size=5]
[/b][/size][/font]
-- Found another problem of[b] Resolution 1556[/b]: prevent the sale or supply to all [b]non-governmental[/b] entities and individuals. Those trucks were sold to the government of Sudan, and "the rebels had captured it from Sudanese government forces in December".
[url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7503428.stm]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7503428.stm[/url]
[[i] Last edited by suzheng1983 at 25-7-2008 15:05 [/i]] suzheng,
also in this article:
China has said in the past that it told Sudan's government not to use Chinese military equipment in Darfur.
Sudan's government, however, has told the UN that it will send militaryequipment wherever it likes within its sovereign territory.
An international lawyer, Clare da Silva, says China's point that it hastaken measures in line with the arms embargo's requirements to stop itsweapons from going to Darfur is meaningless.
"It is an empty measure to take the assurances from a partner whoclearly has no intention of abiding by the resolution," she said.
[b]Ms da Silva (an international lawyer) said the BBC's evidence put China in violation of the arms embargo[/b].
--
But I must confess, that law is difficult to understand. I think, without military comouflage the trucks wouldn´t be a violation of the embargo.
--
But there is still the pilot training.
[[i] Last edited by de_guo_ren at 25-7-2008 02:52 [/i]]
de guo ren hehehehhehehehehe
de guo ren:Let's not go into someones house with the intention of stealing ,and call his neighbor killers again. We all know that " The Sudan has a tremendous amount of oil that is being shipped to India,Malaysia,and China...Much of this oil is located in the southern part of Sudan"..it is an attempt,"to break up the Sudan into three or four seperate entities,making it impossible for the Sudanese people to unite and keeping them at war while .." you take their resources,like" O I L." Talkstraight,
what does your "HeHeHeHeHeHeHe" mean.
Sudan break up, because the Government in Khartum are muslims, the people in Dafur a christian. Khartum have the army, Dafur the Oil. Khartum want that Oil, and have the weapons. That this land will split up is due to these facts.
And China needs this Oil more than the west. The result, the Beijing government support the government in Khartum, who were killing the people in Dafur.
And you blame the US for the Iraq.
So hypocritical.
de guo ren
hehehehehe means you make me laugh.hahahaha kkk"American needs this oil and Irag is a classic example of how America and U.K. are willing to go to war for OiL." Just look into the ,"..lobbying of the SPLM to vote for separation in a 2011 referendum in which the people of Southern Sudan will decide if they want to remain a part of Sudan or form a seperate government." Sounds familar? It's the same old "Divide and Conquer"Technique. If successful, guess who will have access to the OiL?.hehehehehehehheheheheheh ..So don't give me the slick potatochip, cause you're not my boss applesause. [quote]Original posted by [i]Talkstraight[/i] at 24/7/2008 20:57 [url=http://www.anti-cnn.com/forum/en/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=19097&ptid=2342][img]http://www.anti-cnn.com/forum/en/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]
hehehehehe means you make me laugh.hahahaha kkk
So don't give me the slick potatochip, cause you're not my boss applesause. [/quote]
Win and awesome!!! I love that rhyming thing you do- it's so 80s!!! Yes, for oil. That's why so many M16 were sold to the rebels, but someone want to censure China with trucks, even most of trucks were sold by America, German and Japan.
In Sudan most of rebels' rifles are M16:
[img]http://himg2.huanqiu.com/attachment/080716/83820b76dc.jpg[/img]
[[i] Last edited by suzheng1983 at 25-7-2008 11:30 [/i]] Talkstraight,
if the US need the Oil of the Iraq, why should they invade them? They have to pay the market price so or so. But after the Iraq war, the Oil supply from the Iraq stopped. And further more, a weak Iraq cannot block the Iran. The result is, they have to station troops in the Iraq, which costs a lot of money and lifes to the US.
classic example: Iraq war is a classic example, why ignorant people will fail. See only the short time advantages, but not the long time effects, endangers everything.
You remember our discussion in another thread about the sustainability ?
- Short time: Economic growth rates
- Long time: economy and ecology and social issues
--
Sudan war
There are several thinks involved.
- history: the arabs from North Sudan get their slaves from the South and West Sudan
- ethnical/tribal: Arabs and blacks
- Oil
- Religion: Muslims vs. Christian and natural religion
- drought, desertification
- overpopulation
- nomads vs. peasants
- mistreatment of the northern Sudanese elite of the people in the south and west
So to reduce it only to a Oil problem is a very narrow sided view.
--
Divide and Conquer
If this would true, a handful men, like in China 1900, would be enough, to divide the country into two or three parts.
--
The election in Sudan
This is the normal way, when people form a nation (=same culture, history, language). To stop this process, the result will be only a bloodshed. Sudan have three civil wars after decolonization.
This can also happen somewhere else
--
Suzheng1983,
the dongfeng trucks were sold after the embargo were set. So you cannot compare them with other cars there, which are obviously no military ones and were sold long time before this.
The same to the M16. The M16 is one of the most popular rifle in the world.
It is allways like this:
- sold before the embargo - legal
- sold after the embargo - illegal Again you try to mislead.
We are here to expose Western Media covert operation.
Will not be mislead by agent provocateur,
with their demand for Human rights and democracy,
without Honesty and Intergrity,it is just a ploy.
I will support Human rights and Democracy if it is applied
Universally to all. fatcat,
where are your so called " Western Media covert operations". The picture here made by the BBC are not what you can call a "Western Media covert operation".
There was an embargo, when the military vehicles were produced and sent to the Sudan. This embargo were broken.
The other vehicles which were here posted, to justify the military vehicles are older, even the M16.
So what´s your point? "if the US need the Oil of the Iraq, why should they invade them?" $$$$$ cha-ching. If you could see how close the connections are to the "The Pentagon-Petroleum Partnership", it will be easy to see how they are "One Big, Happy, Oily Family" Check the bottom of this article by "Nick Turse". Scary as hell might I add.
[url=http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174952]http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174952[/url]
-Samtom
Page:
[1]
2