digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Dockers refuse to unload China arms shipment for Zimbabwe

timesonline.co.uk — South African dockers are refusing to unload a Chinese cargo ship carrying 77 tonnes of small arms destined for Zimbabwe. The arms, including three million rounds of ammunition suitable for AK47s and 1,500 rocket-propelled grenades, were ordered by the Zimbabwean military at the time of the March 29 election...

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • nahsrocketeer75, on 04/19/2008, -1/+189Good for them.
    • fkr3, on 04/19/2008, -0/+11Yeah.... except they've probably already been 'aquired' by someone and are listed on the arms-equivelent of eBay.

      How is Zimbabwe able to afford any of this stuff with their economy in such a horrible mess?
      • jmpeagle, on 04/19/2008, -0/+12they mine "coal, gold, platinum, copper, nickel, tin, clay, numerous metallic and nonmetallic ores" which are sold in dollars and therefore usable as a means of purchase from a country that defines the value of its currency via a slowly moving peg to the dollar
        • nospinhere, on 04/19/2008, -3/+11I thought they meant Docker's pants when I read the title. I was about to say good on them and go out and buy some slacks.
      • BloodyHell, on 04/19/2008, -2/+34As a South African I am glad they refuse to unload the shipment, at least our people show more backbone than our government, who are too scared to be seen as “taking sides”.

        As for the affordability of the weapons, it’s really quite simple. China has been providing a huge amount of aid to Zimbabwe in return for access to its mineral wealth. It would not surprise me if the weapons are a “gift” to the Zimbabwean government form China.
        • Saffa, on 04/19/2008, -0/+7Yup I'm South African too and pretty proud of what they did, pretty ballsy really. I hate our governments approach to Zim, it gives the rest of the world the impression that your average South African is OK with the situation there, but we're not, nearly everyone is 100% anti Mugabe.
    • robthom, on 04/19/2008, -1/+1Hopefully their enemies can get them at a discount now for quick sale.
    • ennTOXX, on 04/19/2008, -0/+4I agree with you alllllll the way. I am a longshoreman (dock union worker) here in the Los Angeles / Long Beach port and that's exactly what we would do. We were just talking about it at work last night. Sometimes it's up to the people to decide, I mean, WE THE PEOPLE is what this country was founded on... :||
    • saikyan, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3In other news, the Chinese legs shipment made it without issue.
  • louiebaur, on 04/19/2008, -8/+33Thats crazy just shipping guns around everywhere
  • ABadPerson, on 04/19/2008, -2/+37Lets just hope there wont be any reprisal against the South Africans.

    This is like stopping a dogfight.
    • herecomes, on 04/19/2008, -3/+20Like stopping a dogfight where we sold weapons to both dogs.
      • logiktrip, on 04/19/2008, -1/+21And the dogs aren't dogs at all; they're people.
        • wheresmysnack, on 04/19/2008, -25/+1And the people aren't really people, they're African.
      • superkendall, on 04/19/2008, -5/+1They have only themselves to blame. It's not like the opposition is even armed, they were trying to work things out through elections - the people with the arms there are the government. Which just goes to show what a great idea it is to have that balance of power.
      • diggrim, on 04/19/2008, -4/+3WE = China? Troll much?
  • borez, on 04/19/2008, -9/+41How about a world wide boycott, the military industrial complex has been out of control for far too long now.
    • ABadPerson, on 04/19/2008, -6/+15yeah like since the dawn of men.
    • deuceswilde, on 04/19/2008, -1/+1Then people will fight each other with sticks
    • LuckyASN, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1So I shouldn't put in my order for a fleet of M1A1 Abrams just yet?
    • darkamster07, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1the only problem being that the military industrial complex has well... a military, and most people faced with that usually comply
  • soulkitchen, on 04/19/2008, -2/+49Way to go! Thats good khakis.
    • Gabberwok, on 04/19/2008, -1/+19They have resisted the stains of the weapons trade...
  • daiguitar, on 04/19/2008, -18/+7Just give them a shipment of these: http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/9323/1196541807 ...
    It'll be fine guys, it'll be fine. /sarcasm
  • TrevaLVF, on 04/19/2008, -1/+53So far, those dock workers have a lot more backbone and dedication to what they believe in (at least on this issue) than most people I personally know and encounter.
    • ennTOXX, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3Way to go, just how myself & fellow workers feel about the same issue. We Americans can learn a bit from actions like this. Taking this country back one step at a time... :||
    • Bamont, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1And how many times a day are you tasked with loading or unloading firearms from a boat destined for a country in turmoil?
  • ArandiaT, on 04/19/2008, -10/+115Wow, there goes any illusion of China being a beneficial force in the world...
    At least they've been delayed in this case - but it's no big secret that the Chinese have been supplying many brutal dictatorships with arms.
    Comparatively, the US looks clean. At least the US don't support repressive governments like Saudi Arabia or arm fanatics like the Taliban... oh wait...
  • smacksaw, on 04/19/2008, -15/+2What's stopping these dockworkers from overtaking the ship and scuttling it out at sea with it's cargo aboard? If they're serious about no one having those weapons, that's how you do it.
    • ojno1rules, on 04/19/2008, -3/+2hmmmm... are you really that naive? If they do that the best they can hope for is that they will lose their jobs at worst they (or their families, a common tactic) could be beaten, tortured or killed
      • BloodyHell, on 04/19/2008, -3/+9Although I agree with you stating that smacksaw is naive, I can proudly say that they would lose their jobs, but sure as hell would not be beaten, tortured or killed. South Africa is NOT Zimbabwe or China or America. Here we still have habeas corpus.
        • walugi, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1I suppose Zimbabwe would just sit back and not care then. I think you're also naive. We're talking about an international arms shipment here.
        • chicofaraby, on 04/19/2008, -0/+5"South Africa is NOT Zimbabwe or China or America. Here we still have habeas corpus."

          Ouch. I would argue if I could.
    • jdepp, on 04/19/2008, -2/+2you'd think the US military would be able to arrange a stray cruise missile or collision with a submarine or something.
      • chicofaraby, on 04/19/2008, -1/+2and endanger the profits to be made selling weapons to the other side? Not likely.
        • miket, on 04/19/2008, -1/+0yes it would be terrible if they hurt China's weapon sales
    • warriorscot, on 04/19/2008, -2/+2Its one thing to refuse on moral reasons there is no felony in that but theft and destruction of property is a crime and when you are talking about ships its a fairly large one. Not to mention the ship is probably just a hire and not belong to either the PRC or Zimbabwe so you would sink some poor guys ship for no reason.
    • kublerross, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3yes, lets destroy the environment while were at it
    • pimonserry, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1Not everyone is John McClane.

      Shut up.
  • moldykorn, on 04/19/2008, -5/+7And we can all thank Bush Sr. and his import ban for those arms and munitions not coming to America. Mountains and mountains of 7.62X39 and we cant touch any of it.
  • Elderon, on 04/19/2008, -8/+27Good for those workers. So they managed to stall one shipment from the Chinese, how many of ours from the U.S got through? I'm sure we got our finger in that weapon pie somehow.
    • warriorscot, on 04/19/2008, -3/+2Doubt it, thats small potatoes not worth the hassle for a US or UK company to sell to you have to at least pretend to be a good guy to get sold to by the boys with the good toys.
    • HappyScrappy, on 04/19/2008, -4/+2Yes, the US is the #1 arms dealer in the world. But in this case, I doubt we could compete on price against the Chinese.
    • ennTOXX, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2Actually, the only arms allowed through OUR ports to dock on OUR American soil are American bound arms. But that doesn't go to say what happens to these American arms once our government receives the shipment. In the L.A. / L.B. there is only ONE port / terminal that can handle these types of shipments. It's called "APL" & sometimes US longshoreman can't even touch the cargo work at all. The government will bring soldiers onto the dock to work the ships cargo... :||
  • avengingturnip, on 04/19/2008, -3/+17What do comfortable, casual pants have to do with Chinese arms?
    • natchiketa, on 04/19/2008, -0/+9yeah, pants aren't even supposed to go on your arms! what a waste of time.
  • JasonCox, on 04/19/2008, -4/+10Excuse me, but if you can reroute those weapons to Cleveland, I'll take them off your hands for you.
  • soomprimal, on 04/19/2008, -1/+23The more subtle part of this story is the fact that a trade union is standing up for principle and refusing to partake in what could possibly be a mass purging by Mugabe. They deserve credit for this.
    • ennTOXX, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1I agree with you. Here in America OUR own government has been lashing out against the union worker to damper actions such as this, not to mention just to get rid of organized work forces all together. If ONE voice can be heard, then many voices WILL BE known... :||
  • poidh, on 04/19/2008, -7/+8Once again, do all you can not to buy Chinese goods.
    • kahrytan, on 04/19/2008, -2/+7Then means don't buy Apple products.
      • poidh, on 04/19/2008, -2/+1Ok then.
      • Memnoch30, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1Or Lenovos....:( *hugs his T61*
      • darkamster07, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1looks like the next 30 or so years are gonna be slim pick'ns
        • kahrytan, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1I build my pcs using Taiwan parts. -- Taiwan IS NOT part of China.
  • Observer001, on 04/19/2008, -1/+6Three million 7.62x39mm M43 rounds, eh? That's a lot of murdered partisans. I wonder if the AU will do anything. I wonder if they have the power to do anything.
  • sleepingcitizen, on 04/19/2008, -3/+7im finding more and more digg readers are idiots. read the full article (not just the title ) before snapping judgement. wouldnt hurt to read more than one take on it as welll.... gasppp.
  • Saffa, on 04/19/2008, -1/+18Just to add to the next installment of the story - the court case to block the ship was successful, it's fled Durban
    http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,, ...
    • Jebra, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2Fled Durban but heading where? They can't get a hold of the captain, have no idea where it's going, and when approached lifted anchor and took off. Doesn't sound shady at all.
      FTA:
      The ship's master, who earlier this week identified himself as captain Sunaijun, could not be connected by radio phone. Operators in Cape Town reported that calls to the ship were left unanswered.
      It was not immediately known where the vessel, owned by Chinese state owned company Cosco Group, was headed.
      Nicole Fritz, the director of the Southern African Litigation Centre, said she had been informed that as the sheriff of the Durban High Court approached the vessel, it lifted anchor and began sailing.
      • superkendall, on 04/19/2008, -0/+5Costco? No wonder the arms were so cheap. And that also explains the three million rounds - it was the smallest box they had.
  • cambob76, on 04/19/2008, -5/+29See America? This is what true activism looks like. Stop the war already.
    • liquidpele, on 04/19/2008, -4/+2Riiiiight. You really think it will get better over there if we just left at this point?
      We got into a mess, but at least we're trying to clean it up...
      • snoox, on 04/19/2008, -1/+4i do think so actually
      • chicofaraby, on 04/19/2008, -1/+5"You really think it will get better over there if we just left at this point?"

        Is this still a question? OF COURSE IT WOULD BE BETTER!!!! Yes, taking a foreign army out of Iraq would be better than having a foreign army in Iraq. How in the hell does that even require a thought? It was wrong to put the US military there in the first place. It's still wrong every day the military stays. It will continue to be wrong until they are gone.

        Do what's right and get OUR military out of THEIR nation. ***** duh.
        • agambino, on 04/19/2008, -1/+2your missing the point. The debate should not be about why we are there in the first place, it should now be about making the best of the situation. Say we leave tomorrow, a couple months go by and suddenly the country is just another hot bed for antisocial activity. We would essentially do what we did during Desert Storm; accomplish out military objective and leave the mess there. That is why Iraqis are weary about the US being there, because they think we will just abandon them again. People bitch and moan about how middle easterners just hate us, but they fail to see why. Forget the circumstances that got us where we are. You cannot change the past; but you can do your best to change the future. Do our best with Iraq and it will come back to us later on ten fold.
          • chicofaraby, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3The point is what? We should ignore the Iraqis' wishes and stay to "fix" the problems our military is causing?

            It's wrong for the US military to be inside Iraq. Nothing else matters. The "best of the situation?" No amount of US troops killing more Iraqi civilians is going to make the illegal invasion right. You speak of "abandoning" the Iraqis as if they invited the US to invade. As if they wanted the US military to "free" them. That underlying assumption is simply wrong. No amount of time will make it right.

            Arabs don't hate us because we haven't done enough to them. They hate us because of our assumption that we have the right to invade their countries in the first place. We don't. We have to get out of their lands. That is the only solution.
          • darkamster07, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1seriously. our prescence only incites more hate in the people, and in the midst of that pepetual destruction and warefare, there can be no optimistic resolution
    • lacronicus, on 04/19/2008, -2/+5Actually, liquidpele is right. Just up and leaving right now would cause more problems than it would solve. I'm not saying we were right to go there, I'm not saying I want us to be there now, but I am saying that leaving that country in the state they're in now would make the matter all the worse.
      • superkendall, on 04/19/2008, -1/+2Leaving Iraq now kills a few million people. But hey, if everyone's good with that I guess we'll just run away and let them all die! That should be great for mideast relations, for decades to come.
      • catbeller, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1The Americans in 1900 or so believed in staying in the Philippines after we "liberated" them from the Spaniards. Our President talked with God (really) and decided it was our divine duty to bring civilization to our little brown brothers. His words exactly.
        The "insurgents" were so tenacious in attack that our soldiers changed their sidearms to .45's to have enough stopping power to drop the oncoming terrorists, who even armed with a stick or a sword, refused to die as we mowed them down.
        An American sergeant famously said, "There won't be any peace until all these ***** are dead."
        Americans used waterboarding for the first time in that occupation. Unlike now, Americans then were scandalized and demanded trial of the soldiers. Only one was showtrialed and punished. But amazingly, we've been drowning people for over a century, for the same insane reason.
        Oh, yes. We slaughtered somewhere between one and three million "insurgents" "fixing" the Philippines after we invaded it. No American remembers.
    • billbugger, on 04/19/2008, -3/+3agree with lacronicus
  • Evildudetx, on 04/19/2008, -9/+4Excellent. Now ship those rounds to the US so I can buy them. I need a few more thousand rounds for my AR-15. (Mine has the 7.62 conversion, so no lame comments about it being 5.56.....)
    • Pinhedd, on 04/19/2008, -4/+27.62 winchester or 7.62 kalashnikov?
      • moldykorn, on 04/19/2008, -3/+1What about 7.62 Nato? And arent AR-15's primarily chambered in .223???

        :D
    • exgiexpcv, on 04/19/2008, -2/+1Good luck with the extractor! /sigh.
    • zephyr42, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2what's wrong with the 5.56 round? it's a better round for a smaller weapon like the ar-15.
  • notouch, on 04/19/2008, -7/+2Wasn't there a digg story about a kid in his 20s, got military contracts, buy cheap ammunition and sell high to the soldiers?
    Think he'd be getting this shipment and resell it to US troops soon?
  • ChingKing, on 04/19/2008, -5/+2There is only one thing that will solve this problem, a shipment of Tom Cruise Purple (Marijuana endorsed by our good friend).
  • mrzack, on 04/19/2008, -1/+3It must have been some Family members with close ties with the Chinese govt that was selling these arms.
    Over 60% of the wealthiest families in China come from government backgrounds.
    • ennTOXX, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2Actually since the dawn of Communist government in China, maybe for all countries with kings even. But that goes without saying in a Communist regime... :||
  • neozeed, on 04/19/2008, -2/+11Wow someone stood up to China! What a surprise! I wonder how this will pan out.... Invasion of .ZA anytime soon? by proxy, of course....
  • 3tcp, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1Durban Gun Party plz.
  • ZenMojo, on 04/19/2008, -1/+1Zimbabwe! Now that's Democracy.
  • erik22h, on 04/19/2008, -0/+26Nicholas Cage is going to be pissed.
  • nationalist, on 04/19/2008, -5/+6but...but...but...didn't the US sell arms to dictators?
  • robthom, on 04/19/2008, -6/+1They should be shot.
  • mutz, on 04/19/2008, -1/+3take this ak47 as a gift from the peoples democratic republic of China so you can democratically sqauch all those opposing you...
  • PurpleDingo, on 04/19/2008, -1/+5Good job on the South Africans' parts. Considering that Chinese machetes were the primary weapons in the Rwandan genocide, they may have just saved a bunch of people from who knows what.
  • rahamm, on 04/19/2008, -0/+6Harry Bridge's longshoremen did the same thing when America was still buddy buddy with Nazi Germany
  • tuzziel, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1btw: what happens to that shipment now ? i am curious..

  • Stieffers, on 04/19/2008, -1/+1Anyone else read it as "Dockers refuse to unload China khaki pants shipment.."?
  • wexmajor, on 04/19/2008, -1/+1Withholding weapon shipments doesn't help anyone, it just allows whichever side the weapons weren't meant for to gain an advantage. People without weapons can't defend themselves. The sentiment is nice but in reality these people are as likely to hurt people as to help them.
  • eFiniTi, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1I wish they would've taken it one step further and dispersed them amongst the citizenry. The people need to be able to keep their government in check or at least protect their rights.
  • Obzerva, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2People, lets not forget who the world's largest arms exporter is...the United States of America.
  • blademanx, on 04/19/2008, -1/+1Those bastards, how dare they? Arming brutal dictatorships is OUR thing.
  • compucomp2, on 04/19/2008, -4/+2The American hypocrisy reeks in this thread. What the hell have the Americans been doing with respect to weapons export in the last 60 years? How about shipping weapons around to their allies all over the place?

    Douchebag diggbots.
    • rova, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1It was probably not the same US citizens here that also support the arms trading. Don't make blanket statements about a country. Douchebag diggbot. (I'm not from the US btw)
  • olbap, on 04/19/2008, -3/+1Americans, Chinese and Jews busy arming the world. There will be a world war soon and it will be a calculated and timed war. There is a subset of humanity which feeds on blood. These people exist in our political and military complex. You don't just sell weapons and expect them to sit on shelves collecting dust. We, who live in these countries, should be ashamed of ourselves.
    • thedinomeister, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2Captain Obvious to the rescue!
  • calroot, on 04/19/2008, -1/+1Damn those Chinese bastards, trying to encourage turmoil and discord in other countries.
  • kensho, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1Everyone, please sign this petition to stop the arms shipment and digg the article below!
    The petition can actually make a difference!

    http://digg.com/world_news/STOP_the_Zimbabwe_Arms_ ...
    • godplaysdnd, on 04/22/2008, -0/+0because Mugabe cares so much about your petition right?
      • jackharrybill, on 04/22/2008, -0/+0It's not aimed at Mugabe it's aimed at those who will be allowing the weapons through - those who have the power to stop 77 tons of weapons that according to one UK paper at least were ordered 3 days after the election. That is when Mugabe knew the game was up.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.