China Violating UN Embargo, Providing Arms & Training to Sudan Army

By the way, Ottomotton, I just realized a nice little spin.

12 years ago, the US/UK had an economic sanction on Iraq.

10 years ago, all that was left using the name Yugoslavia was Serbia and Montenegro, which the US/EU had an economic sanction on.

5 years ago, the US/part of EU called for an economic sanction on Rwanda. Hell, Liberia, Angola and Sierra Leone too.

The US/EU still maintain current and active economic sanctions on North Korea. We'll see how it turns out in couple of years.

Non-governmental as in Hezbollah? Now why ain't I surprised. Now that they ARE governmental, the US still isn't recognizing them despite the general election results.

US/UK actively called for economic sanctions for the country formerly named Zaire.

US and UK never recognized the Taliban, hence the "foreign combatant" line to get out of the Geneva Convention. They kinda also had an economic sanction on Afghanistan.

So in summary, because of the ECONOMIC SANCTIONS, you wouldn't have been able to export to those countries, PERIOD.

Nice little attempt to portray them as arms embargoes.

I suppose next you'll be telling me an arms embargo prevents truck exports to Cuba.

 

That's it? That's your best shot? HA. Does it matter where the term is defined as opposed to the DEFINITION of the term?

Clearly, your assertion that the US/Europe view trucks as arms is false.

Of course, I'm also wondering why you gave the definition of motorized infantry in your wiki article instead of that of the truck, which can be found here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truck

 

OK. Now you are just throwing **** at the wall and hoping it sticks. We are done. Good luck. Declare yourself the internet genius or whatever you want. If you think spinning out a larger volume of bull**** louder than anybody else means you've won, more power to you.

If anybody else wants to talk rationally about things, I'm still game.

 

Hardly. The problem with people like you is that you don't have an argument to begin with. Then you try to create an argument where there was none. Then of course you are humiliated.

That typically come from the lack of an argument, hence you repeated attempts to spin control, grasping every straw for life line.

 

some people just can't accept a completely different view/thinking.

 

How is that relevant to whethether sanctions allow the sale of arms to country X? That is pretty clearly a situation where one position is correct, and one isn't. No two ways.

 

ah nothing like PMSing posters...good drama though, definitely better than all my children.

 

Looks like some participants are ready to bow out. Too bad. Keep the pissing match going guys! I am having tons of fun watching it.

 

China paper decries Sudan's Bashir arrest move

An international prosecutor could "pour oil on fire" by seeking to arrest Sudan's president, China's top official newspaper said, amplifying Beijing's opposition to pursuing charges of genocide in Darfur.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor asked the court on Monday to approve an arrest warrant for Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, accusing him of a campaign of tribal genocide that killed 35,000 people outright and another 100,000 through "slow death" in his country's war-stricken Darfur region.

link

 

1. China needs oil.

2. They strike deal with crazy African to get oil.

3. Crazy guy starts bringing attention by killing people with the weapons fairly traded for the oil.

4. China has a decision to make. Veto the resolution or support it and continue business as usual?

a. A veto is public and final. No backing out and political suicide. Kinda hard for CCTV to spin that.

b. supporting it and still trading is much better. You have decent control over the media and you get no immediate politcal pressure.

5. ?????????????????

6. Profit!

 

Sums it up nicely.




Impeach Bush/Nixon... I mean Cheney.

 

Once again this comes down to a pissing match between pro and anti-PRC posters. Since I've alternately been accused of being both please forgive me for trying to come back on subject and ask what I think are some substantial questions

I think this is a very interesting point and without reading the text of the UN Resolution I am curious if it does allow pre-existing contractual relationships to continue. My understanding of sanctions is that they generally mandate a cut off of dealings even those where there is a pre-existing contract. I presume something like this would be covered under an an act of God clause for terminating or suspending the contract.

For anyone familiar with the sanctions against Sudan is this the case?

Regarding the Dongfeng trucks I'm no expert on this but have heard that heavy trucks do often count as part of a military embargo. My guess is that these trucks fall under dual-use as something that could both be for military and non-military use. Again without more knowledge of the particular sanctions it seems that the PRC could be shipping trucks that technically might not be violating the sanctions but violate the spirit of them given that these type of trucks have a particular military use.

 

I guess genocide is ok by the Chinese now. Does that mean the Japaness can re-write their history books now? After all, since China opposes going after a country's leaders for genocide, I guess Japanesse war memorial can now have war criminals and it's ok for everyone to visit them right?

 

I can't believe you would make a comparison like this and do not even possess the grey matter between your ears to see the difference.

Let me try to simplify it for you so hopefully you will be able to see the difference.

Japan: A cold blood murderer.

and

China: Someone who did not do enough to stop a murder.

China is at the wrong side here. But the fact that you try to make the comparison to Japan is just plain r****ded.

Let me use your dumb logic and go even farther with it. Since, you are so sympathetic to the Japanese war criminals and got touchy and b****y every time someone complained about your heroes whose hobby is mass killings, I can also compare you to these mass murderers and put you people in the same sentence. So either you should agree with me here or you should agree that your logic is dumb. Which one do you choose?

Seriously, are you just acting dumb or are you really this dumb?

 

You kids are still arguing over this?

Does it make any difference at the end? Since China is on the UNSC and has veto power, China does have power in interpreting what constitutes violation of resolution. It can just veto away the interpretations it doesn't like until gets it. Sounds stupid? Yes, but that's how it is.

Same goes for the U.S. Since UN had its resolution regarding Iraq in place before US invaded it without seeking UN approval. The US invasion was actually violation of UN resolution also. But you think the US cares?

UNSC is a ridiculous power game. It STRIVES to urge countries play within the so called rules. But at the end, the powers either write the rule or not abide by it.