维基黑中国开始了?中国支持塔利班

来源:百度文库 编辑:超级军网 时间:2024/04/26 08:54:04


FY上刚看见的http://www.fyjs.cn/bbs/htm_data/159/1012/294879.html
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/g ... mp;headline=Weapons Migrate From China to AfghanistanWeapons Migrate From China to Afghanistan
Dec 10, 2010

Chinese advisers are believed to be working with Afghan Taliban groups who are now in combat with NATO forces, prompting concerns that China might become the conduit for shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles, improved communications and additional small arms to the fundamentalist Muslim fighters.

A British military official contends that Chinese specialists have been seen training Taliban fighters in the use of infrared-guided surface-to-air missiles. This is supported by a May 13, 2008, classified U.S. State Department document released by WikiLeaks telling U.S. officials to confront Chinese officials about missile proliferation.

China is developing knock-offs of Russian-designed man-portable air defense missiles (manpads), including the QW-1 and later series models. The QW-1 Vanguard is an all-aspect, 35-lb. launch tube and missile that is reverse-engineered from the U.S. Stinger and the SA-16 Gimlet (9K310 Igla-1). China obtained SA-16s from Unita rebels in then-Zaire who had captured them from Angolan government forces. The 16g missiles have a slant range of 50,000 ft. The QW-1M is a variant that incorporates even more advanced SA-18 Grouse (9K38 Igla) technology.

So far, there has been a curious absence of manpad attacks on NATO aircraft in Afghanistan. One reason is that the Russian equipment still in place is out of date and effectively no longer usable, the British official says. Another may be that the possession of such a weapon is a status symbol, so owners are reluctant to use it. However, the introduction of new manpads could change that equation.

Although there have been no attacks using manpads, “we act as if they exist,” notes the British officer. “We know they are out there,” he says, alluding to the proliferation of increasingly advanced missiles on the black and gray markets.

In fact, NATO officials know they exist, at least in Iraq, according to the classified U.S. State Department document. U.S. officials were instructed to provide the Chinese government with pictures of QW-1 missiles found in Iraq and ask how such missiles were transferred.

“In April 2008, coalition forces recovered from a cache in Basra, Iraq, at least two Chinese-produced Iranian-supplied QW-1 manpads that we assess were provided by Iran to Iraqi Shia militants. The date of production for the recovered QW-1 systems is 2003, but it is not known when these particular launchers were transferred by China to Iran or when the launchers entered Iraq,” the cable says. “Beijing has typically responded by asserting that its sales are in accordance with international law, that it requires end-users to sign agreements pledging not to retransfer the weapons, or—disingenuously in the judgment of [U.S. government] technical experts—that it cannot confirm that the weapons recovered by coalition forces in Iraq are actually Chinese in origin.”

Talking points in the cable allege that Chinese-origin weapons have been sent to Afghanistan.

“Iran is the world’s most active state sponsor of terrorism,” the cable says. “We know that Iran has provided Chinese weapons to extremist groups in Iraq and Afghanistan that are using these weapons to kill Americans and Iraqis, something we take very seriously. Iran is not a responsible purchaser of military equipment. There is an unacceptably high risk that any military equipment sold to Iran, especially weapons like manpads, that are highly sought-after by terrorists, will be diverted to non-state actors who threaten U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

Other U.S. officials are less sure about the Chinese missile threat. Army officials told Aviation Week of an unsuccessful, multi-manpad attack against a U.S. helicopter in Iraq last year, but a senior intelligence official expressed doubt that Chinese aid to the Taliban has included weaponry. But he acknowledges that Chinese activities most certainly include intelligence gathering that could be of use in China’s own internal conflicts with its restive Muslim populations. That analysis could project U.S. hopes, whether well-founded or not, that China will not become involved in weapons trade to insurgent groups.

这是真的还是假的呀?
到希望是真的,只做不说也挺好。


知情人士称美国官方本意实为引渡阿桑奇并审判
现在可以随便借维基这个名头黑别国了,不管是真是假先引导把黄泥抹上再说,是不是屎都有让人感觉恶心了。

FY上刚看见的http://www.fyjs.cn/bbs/htm_data/159/1012/294879.html
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/g ... mp;headline=Weapons Migrate From China to AfghanistanWeapons Migrate From China to Afghanistan
Dec 10, 2010

Chinese advisers are believed to be working with Afghan Taliban groups who are now in combat with NATO forces, prompting concerns that China might become the conduit for shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles, improved communications and additional small arms to the fundamentalist Muslim fighters.

A British military official contends that Chinese specialists have been seen training Taliban fighters in the use of infrared-guided surface-to-air missiles. This is supported by a May 13, 2008, classified U.S. State Department document released by WikiLeaks telling U.S. officials to confront Chinese officials about missile proliferation.

China is developing knock-offs of Russian-designed man-portable air defense missiles (manpads), including the QW-1 and later series models. The QW-1 Vanguard is an all-aspect, 35-lb. launch tube and missile that is reverse-engineered from the U.S. Stinger and the SA-16 Gimlet (9K310 Igla-1). China obtained SA-16s from Unita rebels in then-Zaire who had captured them from Angolan government forces. The 16g missiles have a slant range of 50,000 ft. The QW-1M is a variant that incorporates even more advanced SA-18 Grouse (9K38 Igla) technology.

So far, there has been a curious absence of manpad attacks on NATO aircraft in Afghanistan. One reason is that the Russian equipment still in place is out of date and effectively no longer usable, the British official says. Another may be that the possession of such a weapon is a status symbol, so owners are reluctant to use it. However, the introduction of new manpads could change that equation.

Although there have been no attacks using manpads, “we act as if they exist,” notes the British officer. “We know they are out there,” he says, alluding to the proliferation of increasingly advanced missiles on the black and gray markets.

In fact, NATO officials know they exist, at least in Iraq, according to the classified U.S. State Department document. U.S. officials were instructed to provide the Chinese government with pictures of QW-1 missiles found in Iraq and ask how such missiles were transferred.

“In April 2008, coalition forces recovered from a cache in Basra, Iraq, at least two Chinese-produced Iranian-supplied QW-1 manpads that we assess were provided by Iran to Iraqi Shia militants. The date of production for the recovered QW-1 systems is 2003, but it is not known when these particular launchers were transferred by China to Iran or when the launchers entered Iraq,” the cable says. “Beijing has typically responded by asserting that its sales are in accordance with international law, that it requires end-users to sign agreements pledging not to retransfer the weapons, or—disingenuously in the judgment of [U.S. government] technical experts—that it cannot confirm that the weapons recovered by coalition forces in Iraq are actually Chinese in origin.”

Talking points in the cable allege that Chinese-origin weapons have been sent to Afghanistan.

“Iran is the world’s most active state sponsor of terrorism,” the cable says. “We know that Iran has provided Chinese weapons to extremist groups in Iraq and Afghanistan that are using these weapons to kill Americans and Iraqis, something we take very seriously. Iran is not a responsible purchaser of military equipment. There is an unacceptably high risk that any military equipment sold to Iran, especially weapons like manpads, that are highly sought-after by terrorists, will be diverted to non-state actors who threaten U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

Other U.S. officials are less sure about the Chinese missile threat. Army officials told Aviation Week of an unsuccessful, multi-manpad attack against a U.S. helicopter in Iraq last year, but a senior intelligence official expressed doubt that Chinese aid to the Taliban has included weaponry. But he acknowledges that Chinese activities most certainly include intelligence gathering that could be of use in China’s own internal conflicts with its restive Muslim populations. That analysis could project U.S. hopes, whether well-founded or not, that China will not become involved in weapons trade to insurgent groups.

这是真的还是假的呀?
到希望是真的,只做不说也挺好。


知情人士称美国官方本意实为引渡阿桑奇并审判
现在可以随便借维基这个名头黑别国了,不管是真是假先引导把黄泥抹上再说,是不是屎都有让人感觉恶心了。
造谣贴!
1.jpg
一、我们目前没这么傻
二、目前维基放出的文件,2008年5月份的电报没有一份是来自北京的,所以可以确定是造谣
那里有造谣?本来就是真的,美国人出钱,中国人出武器,武装塔利班,不过都是很早以前的事情了.
这是为军事攻击中国在西方世界做舆论造势吧
本来就黑啊,加上这个总共5大条吧,还有利用安理会保护巴铁的武装分子,还有驻华大使馆泄的TG高层消息,还有关于朝鲜的,其他的也不说了,说了估计也发不出来
维基这搅屎棍不搅个天翻地覆菊花就不舒服
心中有愿望 发表于 2010-12-11 21:47


    靠,美国佬真不要脸啊,不带这么整的。。。。大爷的也不用脑子想想,中国要真支持塔利班了他们还能在阿富汗立足吗?

靠,美国佬真不要脸啊,不带这么整的。。。。大爷的也不用脑子想想,中国要真支持塔利班了他们还 ...
scandle 发表于 2010-12-11 21:53

对鸟语真不懂。
靠,美国佬真不要脸啊,不带这么整的。。。。大爷的也不用脑子想想,中国要真支持塔利班了他们还 ...
scandle 发表于 2010-12-11 21:53

对鸟语真不懂。
kydzhong 发表于 2010-12-11 21:51
说呗,有啥发不出来的
不就是中国买美国国债的目的就是为了贪污吃回扣,买飞机也是为了贪污吃亏后,瑞士银行有几万的秘密账户,存的贪污的钱,反正中国对外采购的目的都是为了吃回扣。(原文的本意就是为了吃回扣,不是顺便吃回扣)
让我说什么好,中国专家训练塔利班分子用导弹,完了另一边塔利班训练东突分子回国搞破坏。擦, 这年头sb总感觉别人跟他一样是sb
也不想想头目刚被捉了,美帝对2当家说,看吧这就是他的下场,你想混下去就要。。。。。
被捉了?
塔利班在没有大国背后支持的情况下, 把把全球第一的美军拖成这个样, 可见美军的战略是不对的
roxxe 发表于 2010-12-11 21:50 美国人出武器出钱出人 塔利班的毒刺哪儿来的 :sleepy:
从美国政府哪搞出来的中国文件……这有一点可信度吗


大致扫了一下,几点:
(1)所依据的维基揭秘是2008年的外交官电文。同时文中有句话说,很奇怪国际安全部队的飞机几乎一直没有遭到便携式导弹的攻击。文中把俄制导弹过时、不好使用作为一个理由,这样,无论文中提及的中国人帮助训练使用便携式防空导弹是否真实,我们只需知道截至2010年12月(现在),国际安全部队的飞机还是几乎从未遭到便携式导弹的攻击这个结果即可。

(2)在伊拉克发现的前卫1导弹是中国提供给伊朗的。但是伊朗又提供给了伊拉克。文中并没有说中国给塔利班提供武器,而是倾向于伊朗可能会去提供。

大致扫了一下,几点:
(1)所依据的维基揭秘是2008年的外交官电文。同时文中有句话说,很奇怪国际安全部队的飞机几乎一直没有遭到便携式导弹的攻击。文中把俄制导弹过时、不好使用作为一个理由,这样,无论文中提及的中国人帮助训练使用便携式防空导弹是否真实,我们只需知道截至2010年12月(现在),国际安全部队的飞机还是几乎从未遭到便携式导弹的攻击这个结果即可。

(2)在伊拉克发现的前卫1导弹是中国提供给伊朗的。但是伊朗又提供给了伊拉克。文中并没有说中国给塔利班提供武器,而是倾向于伊朗可能会去提供。
值得注意的是,现在有很多假维基解密,阿猫阿狗写了点东西,然后说是维基解密
在巴阿两国,叫塔利班的组织有还几百呢
大戏开锣了,我就觉着,就美帝这么牛逼的人怎么可能放任一个小小的维基解密,随便找个理由就干掉的!看看,前戏都演完了,现在演正戏了!全球污蔑土鳖了,土鳖又要中枪了!话说,全球那个国家不支持下敌人的敌人呢?根本就没什么好说的!
install 13遭雷劈,MD快了
说的应该是这份电文:
http://www.wikileaks.ch/cable/2008/05/08STATE50524.html
是从美国国务院发出的,收件是驻北京大使馆。说的是中国的常规武器卖伊朗,伊朗提供给恐怖分子,被阿富汗联军看到了,所以让驻中国大使馆的人与中国政府交涉,给中国看照片,要求中国不要再卖,要中国提供卖过去的导弹的序列号,等等等等
中国当然有给塔利班提供武器啦。只不过,中国只负责生产,特快专递是让小巴负责的,而买单的是美国。
roxxe 发表于 2010-12-11 21:50


    那是苏联阿富汗战争时期啦,那时候的军火现在就算能用,能怪TG吗,那MD还一大堆武器给塔利班呢
无论真假,可以想到的是,无脑白种P民在看完这篇文章后,又一次匆忙的爬上了道德制高点
搞清楚,中国没有给塔利班提供武器。塔利班是哪年成立的都搞不清么?塔利班是94年在政治舞台上露面的,在此之前抗苏战争早结束了,所谓的巴基斯坦订货、中国制造、美国付钱的事都结束好几年了。当年武器是提供给反苏武装的,可不是给塔利班的。
问下,塔利班和东突有关系吗
伪鸡到最后还是露出本来面目了
鸟语不懂啊!
回复 28# 觉悟之魂

要说有也真有 但是东突在MSL世界里算是被看不上的角色
果然是这样
我越来越相信维基解密是美国佬的贼喊抓贼的把戏了,阿桑奇只是一个烟幕弹。
TG啥时候能这么有个性阿
TG啥时候能这么有个性阿
呵呵,既然这么黑我们,要不我们索性真支持塔利班试下?说真的,塔利班手里的家伙也真够烂的。
为什么没人仔细看原文就开始喷维基?
大红裤衩高高挂 发表于 2010-12-12 00:50


  不是喷维基,维基说到底也只是一个工具,但这工具背后的人往往是最需要警惕的
心中有愿望 发表于 2010-12-11 21:43


    这个真要搞事也太容易了,英美从别处搞两枚前卫,然后放在攻占的塔利班营地里就可以了。
大红裤衩高高挂 发表于 2010-12-12 00:50


    阴毛论的基础便在于此