China opposes expanded sanctions against Sudan

BEIJING, May 29 (Reuters) - China said on Tuesday that it opposed expanded sanctions against Sudan after reports the United States will unveil tough new restrictions on Sudan and push for another U.N. resolution on the bloodshed in Darfur.

China's representative on African affairs, Liu Guijin, who has been acting as an envoy on Darfur, said "pressure and sanctions" did not help resolve problems.

"Expanding sanctions can only make the problem more difficult to resolve," Liu told a news conference in Beijing. Asked whether China would veto any new U.N. Security Council resolution targeting Sudan, he said: "It's still too early to speak of."

Liu's comments reflected the pressure China faces as it seeks to balance ties with Sudan and calls from Washington and other Western capitals for tougher action on Darfur.

Fighting by government-linked militia and rebel groups in that region of western Sudan has killed more than 200,000 people and driven about 2 million from their homes, the United Nations has estimated. Sudan says only about 9,000 have died.

Beijing said earlier this month it would send 275 military engineers for a U.N. force to bolster African Union peacekeepers already in Darfur, as an initial step of the "Annan" peace plan, which Sudan has accepted in principle but delayed implementing.

But China, a major investor in Sudan's oil, has blocked sending U.N. peacekeepers to Darfur without Khartoum's consent, bringing accusations from human rights groups that it is abetting widespread bloodshed, even genocide. As a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, China can veto resolutions.
News | Africa - Reuters.com

This is CLEARLY about the oil. If China wants to block sanctions then I'd suggest they send in troops to clean up the mess.

Have a good one!:s4:

Fighting by government-linked militia and rebel groups in that region of western Sudan has killed more than 200,000 people and driven about 2 million from their homes, the United Nations has estimated. Sudan says only about 9,000 have died.

Sounds familiar, except about 650,000 have died in Iraq. The 2 million displaced sounds about right, and the lying about the number killed rings a bell with US figures in Iraq. Gee, do you think the US government and the Sudanese government are run by the same type people? Kill em all and let God sort it out! ..........................................This is CLEARLY about the oil. If China wants to block sanctions then I'd suggest they send in troops to clean up the mess.........Sound familiar? clearly about the oil, Ha Ha Ho Ho He He, talk about hypocritical!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by medicinal

Fighting by government-linked militia and rebel groups in that region of western Sudan has killed more than 200,000 people and driven about 2 million from their homes, the United Nations has estimated. Sudan says only about 9,000 have died.

Sounds familiar, except about 650,000 have died in Iraq. The 2 million displaced sounds about right, and the lying about the number killed rings a bell with US figures in Iraq. Gee, do you think the US government and the Sudanese government are run by the same type people? Kill em all and let God sort it out! ..........................................This is CLEARLY about the oil. If China wants to block sanctions then I'd suggest they send in troops to clean up the mess.........Sound familiar? clearly about the oil, Ha Ha Ho Ho He He, talk about hypocritical!

---

Find me a valid article that states that the reason that the U.S. invaded was to protect our oil interests and that we could really give a rats ass about the killing in the country. NOTHING hypocritical about it.....

Have a good one!:s4:

Find me a valid article that states that the reason that the U.S. invaded was to protect our oil interests and that we could really give a rats ass about the killing in the country. NOTHING hypocritical about it.....

I suppose the definition of "Valid" would be the key player in this venue, If you think I can't find a hundred articles that state we're in Iraq for the oil, you'd be wrong. As far as the killing, we started it and are continuing it, without us, there would be 600,000+ Iraqis alive that aren't now!PROOF - WAR ON IRAQ IS FOR OIL

Bush decided to invade Iraq in April 2001, six months before September 11th, and the official reason was to improve Western access to Iraqi oil.


"President Bush's Cabinet agreed in April 2001 that 'Iraq remains
a destabilising influence to the flow of oil to international markets
from the Middle East' and because this is an unacceptable risk to
the US 'military intervention' is necessary."[1]
The decision for military action had nothing to do with 9/11, the war on terrorism, the UN weapons inspections, weapons of mass destruction, Iraqi human rights, or any of the factors that the US government would like you to believe are the true motives for war.

The only people who will benefit from the war on Iraq are the elite wealthy oil men who finance Bush's election campaigns, and people like Bush who have huge personal investments in the oil industry. Oil company profits have already increased by fifty percent this year because of the war, and the invasion hasn't even started yet!


"Profits in the fourth quarter soared 50% to $4.09bn (£2.5bn),
beating analyst expectations."[2]
War-time propaganda tells you what you want to hear; that your politicians have noble motives for the war on Iraq.

Before you choose what to believe, have you considered the facts[3] for yourself?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by medicinal

Find me a valid article that states that the reason that the U.S. invaded was to protect our oil interests and that we could really give a rats ass about the killing in the country. NOTHING hypocritical about it.....

I suppose the definition of "Valid" would be the key player in this venue, If you think I can't find a hundred articles that state we're in Iraq for the oil, you'd be wrong. As far as the killing, we started it and are continuing it, without us, there would be 600,000+ Iraqis alive that aren't now!

---

There would still be 600,000 dead but the only difference would be that there would be no Sunni and a hell of alot more Kurds and Shiites.

Have a good one!:s4:

PROOF - WAR ON IRAQ IS FOR OIL

Bush decided to invade Iraq in April 2001, six months before September 11th, and the official reason was to improve Western access to Iraqi oil.

"President Bush's Cabinet agreed in April 2001 that 'Iraq remains
a destabilising influence to the flow of oil to international markets
from the Middle East' and because this is an unacceptable risk to
the US 'military intervention' is necessary."[1]
The decision for military action had nothing to do with 9/11, the war on terrorism, the UN weapons inspections, weapons of mass destruction, Iraqi human rights, or any of the factors that the US government would like you to believe are the true motives for war.

The only people who will benefit from the war on Iraq are the elite wealthy oil men who finance Bush's election campaigns, and people like Bush who have huge personal investments in the oil industry. Oil company profits have already increased by fifty percent this year because of the war, and the invasion hasn't even started yet!


"Profits in the fourth quarter soared 50% to $4.09bn (£2.5bn),
beating analyst expectations."[2]
War-time propaganda tells you what you want to hear; that your politicians have noble motives for the war on Iraq.

Before you choose what to believe, have you considered the facts[3] for yourself?
__________________

Can I ask what your news source is on that?

Have a good one!:s4:

www.thedebate.org/thedebate/iraqWAR ON IRAQ - IS OIL A MOTIVE FOR THE MILITARY CONQUEST OF IRAQ? READ THE EVIDENCE AND DECIDE FOR YOURSELF..asp This is just one of hundreds

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by medicinal

www.thedebate.org/thedebate/iraqWAR ON IRAQ - IS OIL A MOTIVE FOR THE MILITARY CONQUEST OF IRAQ? READ THE EVIDENCE AND DECIDE FOR YOURSELF..asp This is just one of hundreds

---

No offense dude but isn't that blog just a bit to the left? Just a tad maybe....:D

Have a good one!:s4:

See whenever the right see,s something that is against there belief then its a left wing propoghanda piece.Everybody on this planet knows its about the oil except half or more of the population in America.This is how brainwashed Americans are LOL sad really.You see this is the reason why Americans are regarded soo highly throughout the world.Now if the rest of the world really believed that you guys invaded Iraq to liberate the country from an evil tyrant dont you think they would love you guys......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishman3811

You see this is the reason why Americans are regarded soo highly throughout the world.Now if the rest of the world really believed that you guys invaded Iraq to liberate the country from an evil tyrant dont you think they would love you guys......

---

First off, who really gives a rats ass what the rest of the world thinks. We're always the assholes untill a favor is needed THEN we're the good guys for A DAY if lucky.

Next, so with the "world opinion" being the end of genocide in Darfur.....what do you feel about China's opinion regarding oil over lives? Don't you find it the least bit ironic that these left wing bloggers aren't jumping on a "human rights" story like this?

Have a good one!:s4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishman3811

Now if the rest of the world really believed that you guys invaded Iraq to liberate the country from an evil tyrant don't you think they would love you guys......(?)

---

the answer to the above question is, "of course not." the us is now the biggest kid on the block and the prime target for petty political games. after decades of an escalating cold war arms race, the us arsenal is the most dangerous on earth and that creates fear. politicians love to use fear as a means of attaining and maintaining their power. by playing on the fear and hatred generated by touting the bogeyman of american aggression, they can give their constituents something to bitch about besides their own shortcomings. the world of politics is filled with lies and deception and the world is full of politicians.

obviously, the iraq invasion was not completely about liberating the people from saddam's regime. it was also about safeguarding american interests and spreading the american version of freedom. to believe otherwise would be naive at best, but that is what all countries have always done if they are able to. expanding the influence of your ideology is necessary for the survival of any political or religious group and if your ideals are sound then that's not such a bad thing.

the ideals that the us was founded on are better than most. equality, freedom and the protection of those too weak to defend themselves. though we have strayed from the path many times, the original concepts are still alive and worthy of being spread around the world. we grow or we die, this is a very simple fact. while older, stagnant cultures rail against the youthful zeal of america's global influence, there are enough people around the globe trying to emulate our way of life to prove that it is preferable to many of the alternatives.

while older, stagnant cultures rail against the youthful zeal of america's global influence, there are enough people around the globe trying to emulate our way of life to prove that it is preferable to many of the alternatives.
Yeah, everyone wants what the American dream is supposed to be all about, the problem is, in America, that dream is dwindiling away, little by little. The middle class is on the down incline and the poor are on the rise. The elites are taking over and a plutocracy is gaining power in leaps and bounds. So we're going full circle, and we even have a king George to go with it.

Med good point...Most countries in this world are just happy being themselves.The States did not invent democracy and America is not the best country in the world many countries have better health care better education and a whole list of other things and they didnt need the states to help them out.So as far as spreading the American way of life many countries dont want it and dont need your influence we are happy just as we are thank you.

I find it AMAZING on how the left in here won't even address the issue regarding China.........hell, they can't even type the word. But yet we see the bleeding hearts on TV night after night saying on how we need to stop the genocide in Darfur........what a joke! The west should stop the genocide BUT leave China to pump that same countries oil? Let CHINA deal with the genocide and if they don't........history will remember that one also.

Have a good one!:s4:

Yeah i would like to see China go in there with troops to stop the killing there but it looks like that isnt going to happen.When was the last time you saw China stick its nose in other countries affairs i cant even remember if they ever have.Its a shame really but also smart why spend the money and blood when other countries are willing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishman3811

Yeah i would like to see China go in there with troops to stop the killing there but it looks like that isnt going to happen.When was the last time you saw China stick its nose in other countries affairs i cant even remember if they ever have.Its a shame really but also smart why spend the money and blood when other countries are willing.

---

When they march it becomes part of China.........Tibet is a GOOD example. IF they want to do business there though it should be made a mandate by the U.N. that THEY supply all the peacekeeping forces or face sanctions.

Have a good one!:s4:

P4B i couldnt agree with you more the Cninese have been sitting on the sidelines for way too long.They should be thrown out of the U.N if they dont particapate in crisis.