Iran Supplying wars In Africa

[Tony-DarkGrave]

The first clues appeared in Kenya, Uganda and what is now South Sudan. A British arms researcher surveying ammunition used by government forces and civilian militias in 2006 found Kalashnikov rifle cartridges he had not seen before. The ammunition bore no factory code, suggesting that its manufacturer hoped to avoid detection.
Within two years other researchers were finding identical cartridges circulating through the ethnic violence in Darfur. Similar ammunition then turned up in 2009 in a stadium in Conakry, Guinea, where soldiers had fired on antigovernment protesters, killing more than 150.

For six years, a group of independent arms-trafficking researchers worked to pin down the source of the mystery cartridges. Exchanging information from four continents, they concluded that someone had been quietly funneling rifle and machine-gun ammunition into regions of protracted conflict, and had managed to elude exposure for years. Their only goal was to solve the mystery, not implicate any specific nation.

When the investigatorsâEUTM breakthrough came, it carried a surprise. The manufacturer was not one of AfricaâEUTMs usual suspects. It was Iran.

Source New York Times

[LemonCrush]

Big deal. So are we.

[leanlifter1]

At 1/15/13 08:56 PM, LemonCrush wrote: Big deal. So are we.

Exactly.

[morefngdbs]

At 1/15/13 09:03 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

At 1/15/13 08:56 PM, LemonCrush wrote: Big deal. So are we.

Exactly.

;;;;
But it is a HUGE DEAL >>>>

Some Ba'tards have cut into yer business & profits could suffer because of it , or !!GASP !!
PRICES COULD FALL !
Ya can't have that, can you believe the cheek of those damn Iranians !
How dare they think they can do exactly what the USA does !

If there wasn't a good reason for war with Iran before ...they need to nuke it now ~;p

[Camarohusky]

Until I see that Africa is no longer a forsaken land (largely by its own volition) I will care. Until then, this is not news worthy of my time.

[leanlifter1]

At 1/16/13 03:42 PM, morefngdbs wrote:

But it is a HUGE DEAL >>>>

Some Ba'tards have cut into yer business & profits could suffer because of it , or !!GASP !!
PRICES COULD FALL !
Ya can't have that, can you believe the cheek of those damn Iranians !
How dare they think they can do exactly what the USA does !

If there wasn't a good reason for war with Iran before ...they need to nuke it now ~;p

You sound like a sociopath nut bar. In layman's terms you sound like a average American.

[JackPhantasm]

You can fix this problem by not making anymore guns. And stopping all foreign aid.

[morefngdbs]

At 1/16/13 04:02 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

At 1/16/13 03:42 PM, morefngdbs wrote: Ya can't have that, can you believe the cheek of those damn Iranians !

If there wasn't a good reason for war with Iran before ...they need to nuke it now ~;p

You sound like a sociopath nut bar. In layman's terms you sound like a average American.

Thank you
I've been practicing in a mirror ~;)

[Tony-DarkGrave]

At 1/16/13 05:06 PM, JackPhantasm wrote: You can fix this problem by not making anymore guns.

yeah that would never work, well known fact that less guns stop violence.

And stopping all foreign aid.

that might work, most foreign aid goes to the local warlords anyways but the UN hasn't figured that out quite yet.

[Warforger]

At 1/16/13 05:06 PM, JackPhantasm wrote: You can fix this problem by not making anymore guns. And stopping all foreign aid.

Oh c'mon man they deserve 2nd Amendment rights too! Guns don't cause these civil wars, people do!

[leanlifter1]

At 1/16/13 10:02 PM, Warforger wrote:

At 1/16/13 05:06 PM, JackPhantasm wrote: You can fix this problem by not making anymore guns. And stopping all foreign aid.

Oh c'mon man they deserve 2nd Amendment rights too! Guns don't cause these civil wars, people do!

People use guns to easily kill other people so why make it easier to enable killing ?

[JackPhantasm]

At 1/16/13 09:50 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote:

At 1/16/13 05:06 PM, JackPhantasm wrote: You can fix this problem by not making anymore guns.

yeah that would never work, well known fact that less guns stop violence.

I think some kind of cutoff for firearms that are markedly sold into trafficking isn't unresasonable.

Make them fight with spears. It's better exercise.

And stopping all foreign aid.

that might work, most foreign aid goes to the local warlords anyways but the UN hasn't figured that out quite yet.

Yeah the UN is pretty much a joke. Make no mistake that the world powers pick and choose the monsters they support, fully knowing they're monsters.

[orangebomb]

At 1/16/13 10:07 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

At 1/16/13 10:02 PM, Warforger wrote:

At 1/16/13 05:06 PM, JackPhantasm wrote:

People use guns to easily kill other people so why make it easier to enable killing ?

Because in much {if not all} of the African wars, they don't solve conflicts with peaceful dialogue, they're much more content on blasting each other like they are on Pandora. Where they get the weapons, it doesn't matter, much of the world has already given up on Africa anyways, considering when a lot of foreign aid ends up on the hands of warlords or corrupt governments.

[leanlifter1]

At 1/16/13 10:41 PM, orangebomb wrote:

At 1/16/13 10:07 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

At 1/16/13 10:02 PM, Warforger wrote:

At 1/16/13 05:06 PM, JackPhantasm wrote:

People use guns to easily kill other people so why make it easier to enable killing ?

Because in much {if not all} of the African wars, they don't solve conflicts with peaceful dialogue, they're much more content on blasting each other like they are on Pandora. Where they get the weapons, it doesn't matter, much of the world has already given up on Africa anyways, considering when a lot of foreign aid ends up on the hands of warlords or corrupt governments.

Not talking about Africa I am talking Am"ER"ica seeing as how there is a literal epidemic of gun violence in that country.

[orangebomb]

At 1/16/13 10:45 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

At 1/16/13 10:41 PM, orangebomb wrote:

At 1/16/13 10:07 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

At 1/16/13 10:02 PM, Warforger wrote:

At 1/16/13 05:06 PM, JackPhantasm wrote:

Not talking about Africa I am talking Am"ER"ica seeing as how there is a literal epidemic of gun violence in that country.

Stop trying to derail another thread. This is about gun violence in Africa, there are plenty of American gun violence topics on here. BTW, what's your solution to all the gun violence, then?

[JackPhantasm]

I think respect of land and real negotiation and support of countries through trade instead of aid could go a long way.

Most violence is about resources in Africa. Start there.

[leanlifter1]

At 1/16/13 11:22 PM, orangebomb wrote:

Stop trying to derail another thread. This is about gun violence in Africa, there are plenty of American gun violence topics on here. BTW, what's your solution to all the gun violence, then?

Same goes for Africa, Mexico, Canada, Bulgaria, EU, Russia, India etc .... so I am not derailing a thread I am just pointing out the simple fact that gun violence will go down if the populouses of the world are disarmed and heck why the hell stop there as we might as well disarm the Militaries at the same fucking time as the Police.

[Iron-Hampster]

USA funded rebel forces in Afghanistan to fight against Russia, didn't result in war with them.

China and Russia funded the communists in Vietnam, didn't result in war with them either.

Hitler and Mussolini aided Franco in Spain, while we sent troops lead by Russian commanders to fight against them, but that didn't trigger a war either.

France aided the Americans in their revolution against the British, but once again, didn't trigger a conventional war between France and Britain.

this is just another excuse.

[Camarohusky]

At 1/17/13 11:10 PM, Iron-Hampster wrote: France aided the Americans in their revolution against the British, but once again, didn't trigger a conventional war between France and Britain.

Actually, France entered the war with the US largely so it could attack British interests in the Carribean. In short, it was a conventional war between France and Britain.

[Korriken]

At 1/17/13 01:13 AM, leanlifter1 wrote:
Same goes for Africa, Mexico, Canada, Bulgaria, EU, Russia, India etc .... so I am not derailing a thread I am just pointing out the simple fact that gun violence will go down if the populouses of the world are disarmed and heck why the hell stop there as we might as well disarm the Militaries at the same fucking time as the Police.

thanks for pointing out your flaming ignorance yet again. disarm the militaries? right. first military to disarm will be the first nation overrun and subjugated by their rivals. Also. disarming the police would simply enable organized crime to overrun the cities.

that and it doesn't take a magical forge deep in Death Mountain to make a gun. you can make an effective gun with some pipe. it's also simple enough to make bullets. Even if you DID shut down all the gun factories in the world you would still have gunsmiths who are capable of making guns.

you would have to shut down and dismantle all gun factories, disassemble and melt down all their equipment, confiscate and melt down every single gun and bullet ever made, destroy all schematics and books related to guns, and finally, kill every gunsmith in the world.

good luck on that one. instead of living in a fantasy world, try living in reality. it's not going to happen.

now back to the topic.

does this surprise anyone? Iran selling weapons and ammo to the warlords of Africa who get UN aid? It's a very roundabout way to obtain UN funding for their nuclear ambitions.

[Camarohusky]

At 1/18/13 12:12 PM, Korriken wrote: does this surprise anyone? Iran selling weapons and ammo to the warlords of Africa who get UN aid? It's a very roundabout way to obtain UN funding for their nuclear ambitions.

This is the sad thing about aid. Money is fungable and even non-monetary aid can be turned into money for bad thing.

Aid money can be directly misused (think Mississippi and Federal Education money misused) for weapons.
Aid in the form of help or good can be misused in that the money that would go to paying for food for the people doesn;t have and would now go to guns, and so on.

[science-is-fun]

Would it be wrong to say western arms shipments are restrained and rarely end up in the hands of dysfunctional groups while Iranian arms shipments seem to go to Islamic extremists and dictatorships?

The west's priority is to preserve macro-level business interests, namely security allowing investment in raw materials and light industry.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19990480

China and Russia are apathetic, they won't interfere with private business interests but if the west tries to stop one of their arms shipments for some reason they won't bend over backwards to protect the business responsible.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7354428.stm

Iran's interests are political, they want to maintain a strong global Islamist movement to counter-balance the power of the west in the Middle East, Central Asia and Africa.

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article26012
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/opinion/17iht-edarfur.1.13 773063.html

Iran Supports Khartoum policies in Darfur

[aviewaskewed]

At 1/16/13 09:50 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote: that might work, most foreign aid goes to the local warlords anyways but the UN hasn't figured that out quite yet.

I think they actually know that. Most nations (and therefore the UN, since most nations are in the UN) have never had a gigantic problem supplying dictators, even nations like the US that claim to be against them. Because it's of course always easier to insure a region doesn't fuck with you by paying off the one guy in charge vs. dealing with the citizenry. That was the theory anyway, and with the rise of terrorism and such, that theory is proven pretty crap.

But yeah, this to me is a shitty situation, but is there anything to really do? I say no. This just sounds like the Times trying to heap a little more onto the "that evil Iranian government", but never mind we've done this traditionally too, are still doing it, and still making back door deals with despots. Just like everyone else.

[animehater]

At 1/15/13 08:56 PM, LemonCrush wrote: Big deal. So are we.

In the previous quarter century? SOURCE.