China's friendship with the CIA Sage !61KGLATVW. 24-11-21 20:48:57 No. 8757
Simply put, a thread to document and explore China's relationship with the CIA. Here we collate sources, examples, etc, which document China's friendly relations with the CIA and its objectives, in places like Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Angola, The Philippines, Israel, etc.
Sage !61KGLATVW. 24-11-21 21:01:50 No. 8758
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283507520_Pak-China_Joint_Strategy_against_the_Soviet_Invasion_of_Afghanistan Paper which talks about Chinese-Pakistan relations
https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/secret-war-in-afghanistan-panagiotis-dimitrakis/1113787031 book detailing Chinas involvement in Afghanistan, weapons sold, people armed etc.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=GXj4a3gss8wC&pg=PA158&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false Books which focusses on Xinjang, talks about Chinese training camps for guerrilas
https://leftypol.org/leftypol/src/1637749824669.pdf Includes leaked soviet cables detailing Chinas funding of mujihadeen in Afghanistan
http://fc95d419f4478b3b6e5f-3f71d0fe2b653c4f00f32175760e96e7.r87.cf1.rackcdn.com/9E37810890F44F6E8E12A4B14361AEA2.pdf A meeting between Margaret thatcher and Zhao Zinyang, where they discuss policy in Afghanistan, and other places
https://www.upi.com/Archives/1981/06/03/Chinese-Premier-Zhao-Ziyang-today-pledged-Chinas-full-support/6615360388800/ article which confirms Zhao Ziyang's position on Afghanistan
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269851033_Pak-China-US_Triangle_vis-a-vis_Soviet_Union_in_Afghan_War article detailing the China/Pakistan/US alliance
"<Beijing had close contacts with the Afghan groups like Shola-E-Javed, Sorha and Moslem Brothers. During the China’s visit of the US Defense Secretary Harold Brown, Beijing and Washington discussed the consequences of the April Revolution in Kabul. Later, the Chinese Foreign Minister Huang Hua paid a visit to Pakistan for the same matter (Chaudhuri,a 1982, p.121). “Also during the Brown visit a plan was devised to carry on an anti-Soviet campaign in a coordinated way. And for the first time an American representative admitted the possibility of concluding an anti-Soviet military alliance between the USA and the People’s Republic of China” (Chaudhuri,b 1982, p.123). Zbigniew Brzezinski visited Pakistan in February 1980 to examine the situation resulted from war. "
Sage !61KGLATVW. 24-11-21 23:25:07 No. 8762
>>8759 damn hadn't heard the ceylon thing or the shah of Iran thing.
>>8760 good idea
Sage !61KGLATVW. 27-11-21 16:57:58 No. 8794
https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1977-80v13/d110 Deng discusses foreign policy with U.S. National Security Advisor Zbignew Brzezinski
No direct evidence, but hints at the Chinese position on Afghanistan
Anonymous 18-12-21 23:09:51 No. 8957
Ok, after some months searching, not using CIA/NED funded chvds, I could finally rest this from the CPC Thread. Here is some excerpts. Basically, all what wanted China to support was the not so insignificant branches of Maoists in Afghanistan:>In the 1970s the political parties were not highly structured organisations, but served mainly as discussion forums. The capital was the centre of political activity, although some militants were to be found in towns such as Herat and Jalalabad. At the University of Kabul there were dozens of groups, with only fluid boundaries between them. In the case of the Maoists the various provincial branches were for practical purposes autonomous. These organisations, which at their outset often wavered between adopting the status of student unions or that of political parties, generally concentrated on the publication of a periodical.However, in a largely illiterate country, the public they were able to reach was limited. In the absence of exact studies, the total number of militants and sympathisers of all the parties at this time can be estimated at some thousands. Thus the two branches of the communist movement included at most several thousand members at the beginning of the 1970s, of whom 2,500 belonged to the Khalq and 1,500–2,000 to the Parcham, about the same as the Islamists and the Maoists.21 The Pushtun nationalist movement and that of the social democrats, who recruited less exclusively from among the students, had even fewer adherents. >The Sazman-i Demokrat-i Nawin-i Afghanistan (Modern and Democratic Organisation of Afghanistan), known as Shola-yi Jawid (the Eternal Flame), mustered the Maoists within a very loose organisation. This movement was established on 4 April 1968 and led by Dr Hadi Mahmudi, together with his nephew Abdur Rahman Mahmudi, as well as Akram and Sadiq Yari, all of whom were Hazaras from Jaghori.The party recruited mostly among the Hazaras and the Qizilbash of Kabul, as well as in the Kunar valley in cooperation with Muhammad Hashem Khan, perhaps because of the presence of the Chinese in this province in the context of a cooperative agricultural project. The Maoists were particularly important in the Hazrat uprising in 1979: >The city remained in the hands of the rebels for a week, and according to witnesses these were days of total anarchy.The bazaar was repeatedly looted, contradictory rumours circulated, and no organisation appeared able to control events. A number of Soviet advisers were killed although, contrary to what is sometimes said, their bodies were neither mutilated nor dragged through the streets.10 Although, according to one eyewitness, this explosion of violence was a ‘revolution without a leader’, a number of individuals nevertheless stand out. Among the soldiers of the 17th division Sardar Khan, a Maoist artilleryman,and Gholam Rasul Khan,an officer, played a significant role in such coordination as existed>Allauddin Khan and Abdul Ahad, some weeks before the rebellion. After the rebellion’s spontaneous outbreak the officers joined the rebels, with whom—and this is the crucial point—there had been no prior dialogue, for the good reason that there had been no pre-existing organisation on the civilian side. Furthermore, some of the leaders from the army side were Maoists >The student movements. In the towns, and particularly in Kabul, the presence of secondary school and university students, sometimes Maoist or Islamist militants, gave a particular character to the protests. 19 In the capital the student demonstrations were incited by leaflets (shabname) and appeals to jihad proclaimed at night from the roofs of the houses. In particular the Maoists planned an action on 21 April, the Day of the Flag: the anniversary of the replacement of the old red, black and green flag by the red flag of the revolution. Leaflets were circulated on 19 and 20 April, and on 21 April the first demonstration took place. Some of them were eventually active guerrillas: >There were many Maoists among the Hazaras from Hazarajat’s border regions. In these more developed areas some of the notables’ sons attended the university,where most joined Maoist groups.They were active in the province of Ghazni in particular, and especially in Jaghori: the Mahmudi brothers were one example. At the beginning of the war there was apparently a Maoist ‘Front’ of which five members were hanged in Kabul in 1980. No longer able openly to acknowledge their Maoist allegiance in face of the hostility of the other parties and a section of the population, the Hazara Maoists of the SAMA turned to entryism, targeting in particular nationalist movements such as Ettehadia.Later they mostly withdrew to Quetta Other parts of the book are important because outlines how these groups got co-opted by islamic fundamentalists, with leader assassinated or exiled. <Revolution Unending Afghanistan, 1979 to the Present (The CERI Series in Comparative Politics and International Studies) by Gilles Dorronsoro (2005)NOTE . p. 72 shows a comprehensible table of the Maoist parties that can be investigated in the future to establish where they went or if they were co-opted by the taliban. And this another writer also highlights that China had ties with these guerrillas: > During the initial stage of the armed struggle against the Soviet occupation forces in Afghanistan, China provided antigovernment guerrillas with Soviet- made light weapons, such as rifles, light machine guns, and mines (Vert- zberger, 1982:12-13). China supported both the Pakistan-based Islamic parties and pro-China organizations, SAMA, and Rahaye. Abdul Majid Kalakani, head of the SAMA organization prior to his execution by the Kabul regime in June 1980, had tried to establish contacts with China. After Kalakani's execution, SAMA's leadership continued their efforts to establish contacts with the Chinese leadership (Niday-e-Enkilab, 7:1 (1365):32). There is no evidence to show that the organization actually succeeded in doing so. Another pro- Beijing organization, Rahaye, is believed to have succeeded in establishing contacts with China. Yunus Akbari, former professor of Kabul University, Department of Sciences, and a leading member of the organization, was arrested by security in Kabul and confessed the following: >Me, Dr. Faiz and his wife Leila, Najeeb, Abeed, and Naseem flew from Karachi to Beijing via Singapore. However much I questioned Dr. Faiz about the purpose of this trip, he told me nothing. In Beijing we were met by a high-ranking official in charge of foreigners and two interpreters. Later, the head of that department and his deputy met with our delega- tion. At that meeting, Dr. Faiz presented a report to the Chinese and asked $ 10 million in aid. The Chinese expressed doubt about that sum and gave him only $ 200,000 (Afghanistan, 1985:18). Although Emadi agrees that money from China went to help Islamic parties, from 80 to 85, it is clear the main targe was Maoists, and probably the Chinese end-up financing talibans as a condition to send help to their interest (remember that Afghanistan border is greater and better suited for arm supplies with Pakistan, so my guesses are that they had to agree up to some point: (some U.S. diplomat) China or you finance the Pakistan interests, too, or nothing goes to your own interests). I am looking for these two books:>1985 White Book: China's Interference in the Internal Affairs of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. Kabul: Ministry of Foreign Affairs >1985 A History of Afghanistan, Moscow: The Progress Publishers. Emadi quotes and seems to be great sources: One from the Foreign Affairs ministry, and the other from the USSR. These might be the two decisive books to solve this question. I guess China will not produce any academic report with de-classified documents because they be-friended Pakistan, so my guess is they will not go against the Pakistan narrative that wants to portray the U.S. and China alone as the main suppliers and not un-packing what is with what it is and what is not with what it is not. I will periodically review this page to check if any of those two books were uploaded. My guess it is not, that seems to be ghost books.
Anonymous 18-12-21 23:40:54 No. 8958
Ah, I forgot to mention that SAMA, the main and most powerful branch of the Maoists had this (one of them) leader overview: Most of this problem between China and the USSR arised from this:>As the newspaper campaign continued through 1968 and 1969 (until the government clamped down on political activity before the 1969 elections) an interesting newcomer appeared on the scene: Shola-i-Javid (Eternal Flame), edited by Dr Rahim Mahmoudi and Dr Hadi Mahmoudi, began publication on 4 April 1968, a few weeks after Parcham. Like the Settem-i-Melli, its politics were radical left but anti-Pashtun. The logic of international politics was such that both tended to be proChinese – China supported Pakistan which opposed ‘Pashtunistan’, while the USSR supported Afghanistan which was ‘pro-Pashtunistan’. The intrusion of the Sino-Soviet dispute into the politics of the Afghan left further complicated an already complex situation. Shola-i-Javid’s relations with Khalq seem ambivalent. On one hand an antiParcham alliance appeared to have developed during the student unrest of 1969. And the same Amin regarded China support on Afghanistan as "left radical".>In the code phrases that Amin used, ‘reaction’ or ‘regional reaction’ stood for Pakistan or Iran, ‘left-extremism’ for China, ‘imperialism’ for Britain or the USA. Simple ‘foregin intervention’ referred to the USSR Also, tbh, the USSR role was very stupid on attacking Amin: >In the light of the growing regional crisis the USSR reportedly asked Amin, at the end of November, for base facilities at Shindand, in Herat near the Iranian border. Unwilling to agree to a further escalation in the Soviet military presence in Afghanistan which was not only unlikely to contribute to the security of his government, but would in all probability further antagonise opposition groups and be construed as a provocative act by Iran and the United States, Amin refused. At the same time the KGB, operating in Badakhshan, reportedly captured documents revealing Amin’s contacts with the Chinese and the Americans. The significance of Archer Blood’s presence in Kabul in October could hardly have escaped the attention of the Soviet government, and Soviet diplomatic sources have subsequently confirmed Moscow’s suspicions of Amin’s contacts with China and the US. If anything, the particular interest on these narratives that China wanted to overthrow a communist government what shows is that the USSR and China were too retarded to pursue a common goal. If Amin seeks China contacts, that would be better for the USSR to find a mid ground, instead, they decided to stir-up a hive that China had interests, too.
Sage !61KGLATVW. 19-12-21 01:34:57 No. 8961
>>8957 Lmao this literally says the opposite of what you claim it says, when will you fucking give up.
According to your own source
"> During the initial stage of the armed struggle against the Soviet occupation forces in Afghanistan, China provided antigovernment guerrillas with Soviet- made light weapons, such as rifles, light machine guns, and mines (Vert- zberger, 1982:12-13). China supported both the Pakistan-based Islamic parties"
then according to your own words
"Although Emadi agrees that money from China went to help Islamic parties, from 80 to 85,"
then you have said, with absolutely no basis in anything that has been quoted " it is clear the main targe was Maoists," i.e., its fanfiction on your part, again, then still more "e was Maoists, and probably the Chinese end-up financing talibans as a condition to send help to their interest"
nothing in your sources say either of these things, and in fact your source makes it sound like the Chinese weren't that bothered about funding maoists
" After Kalakani's execution, SAMA's leadership continued their efforts to establish contacts with the Chinese leadership (Niday-e-Enkilab, 7:1 (1365):32). There is no evidence to show that the organization actually succeeded in doing so."
lmao.
Again, you think people just aren't going to read the things you quote. I'm glad you did digging to back up my point though thanks.
Anonymous 19-12-21 02:22:24 No. 8963
>>8961 >no source from Emadi >he who can't read and is delirous about his stupidty. Yep, pol-chvd mentality.
>>8957 >Me, Dr. Faiz and his wife Leila, Najeeb, Abeed, and Naseem flew from Karachi to Beijing via Singapore. However much I questioned Dr. Faiz about the purpose of this trip, he told me nothing. In Beijing we were met by a high-ranking official in charge of foreigners and two interpreters. Later, the head of that department and his deputy met with our delega tion. At that meeting, Dr. Faiz presented a report to the Chinese and asked $ 10 million in aid. The Chinese expressed doubt about that sum and gave him only $ 200,000 (Afghanistan, 1985:18). <WITHOUT NO BASIS SAYS THE MORON >it is clear the main targe was Maoists Read the fucking cable, you moron. read what it says in the book from Dorronsoro, China
SUPPORTED Maoists guerrilla.
>your source makes it sound like the Chinese weren't that bothered about funding maoists >conveniently keeps ignoring that >Again, you think people just aren't going to read the things you quote. I'm glad you did digging to back up my point though thanks.No, apparently you are the one not reading the things I quote, just reading the parts that you conveniently fits your confirmation bias.
>>8962 Now you are inventing stuff. The article and the two books none of them talk about funding after 1985 because they focused on the revolts of 1979, and the immediate events after the USSR admission to Afg, and only Dorronsoro speaks briefly after 1985 with emphasizes that the
main contributor of the mujahideen were the U.S. If Emadi found a document, by the U.S. congress stating that China gave 400 million in aid, the U.S. almost 10 billions of help in the 10 years from 1980 to 1990 (and more if included Pakistan assistence).
Again, if even China, trying to support the Maoist militia ended up financed the mujahideen (by the time whatever thing can be a mujihedeen, Amin himself called for a holly war agaisnt those trying to desestabilize Afghanistan) this was a small number. China not only wasn't pursuing the same target, it didn't even accounted a significant role.
That is why you get banned for days, even weeks, for being a retarded.
Sage !61KGLATVW. 19-12-21 13:03:18 No. 8977
>>8963 You are a legitimately insane person, your source says specifically they funded them after 1989, I shall quote
“ As a result, the Soviet Union declared it would withdraw its troops beginning 15 May 1988. The withdrawal was completed within seven months on 15 February 1989. China welcomed the UN-sponsored Geneva talks between Afghanistan and Pakistan and was pleased with the Soviet deci-sion to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan. Although the Chinese leadership began to normalize China's relations with the Soviet Union after its troop withdrawal, it continues to support the Pakistan-based Islamic parties in their struggle to overthrow the Soviet-backed government in Kabul and establish a ' theocratic state in Afghanistan.”
Sage !61KGLATVW. 19-12-21 13:09:12 No. 8978
>>8963 And in fact, you fucking lunatic, the source you give, says 400 million in support was given, but accounts for only 200,000 given to Maoists, not SAMA, but Rayehe some other organisation.
So less than a quarter of a quarter of the funding given by China was given to Maoists. The rest going to Islamic groups.
You have thoroughly beaten yourself out.
Don’t ever talk to me about confirmation bias, or China, ever again, you fan fiction idiot
Anonymous 19-12-21 15:13:41 No. 8984
>>8977 The support weren't weapons, Emadi says it clearly.
READ IT . It was
RICE & CLOTHINGS specially aid for the refugees. You read what you like to read, unlike you I read the whole deal - he doesn't point how it was a
support (. . .) in their struggle to overthrow , how? symbolic? because weapons weren't mentioned.
>>8978 >And in fact, you fucking lunatic, the source you give, says 400 million in support was given, but accounts for only 200,000 given to Maoists, not SAMA, but Rayehe some other organisation. And this is what it was known. Little is known from the Chinese side, as I said, they befriended the Pakistani government and have never published secret meetings, agreements, and so on with the leadership
FINALLY admits it is there. Rayehe, later on, becomes ALO, the
BIGGEST Moaist splinter cell, between 1973 to 1983 in Afghanistan, which exactly fits the narrative on the cable: The target was the Maoists.
NAME ONE SINGLE TIME ANY OF THE PESHAWAR FAR-RIGHT MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD FROM PAKISTAN TRAVELING TO CHINA MEETING WITH LEADERS TO RECEIVE FUNDS You can't because, unlike with the Maoists groups, such thing never happened.
THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE .
>The rest going to Islamic groups. I already said it was probably the Chinese who wanted to give support but they were conditioned to support Pakistanis interests, too.
>>8978 >Don’t ever talk to me about confirmation bias, or China, ever again, you fan fiction idiotPFF hahaha you took tens of posts to finally admit after it was published the communist cable (hopefully not edited) where it was stated that China's goal was to support the Maoists, and finally, I find another secondary, non-communists source describing this, and it is not until now you admit it did happen?
LMAO, you are a retarded and deranged person. I main premise from the beggining was that China wanted to support the Maoists, your bias always denied it.
Sage !61KGLATVW. 19-12-21 15:40:55 No. 8987
>>8984 dude you are fucked up. Its so annoying to talk to you because I have to be ridciulously specific or you will just lie.
Rice and Clothing in 1988, which is a seperate quote from the bit I quoted.
"In 1988, China donated 1,250 tons of rice and
approximately one million yards of cloth to the Afghan refugees in Pakistan
(U.S. Department of State, 1988:21).
China supported the UN General Ass"
Which is separate part, to the part which comes after, which says
"“ As a result, the Soviet Union declared it would withdraw its troops beginning 15 May 1988. The withdrawal was completed within seven months on 15 February 1989. China welcomed the UN-sponsored Geneva talks between Afghanistan and Pakistan and was pleased with the Soviet deci-sion to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan. Although the Chinese leadership began to normalize China's relations with the Soviet Union after its troop withdrawal, it continues to support the Pakistan-based Islamic parties in their struggle to overthrow the Soviet-backed government in Kabul and establish a ' theocratic state in Afghanistan.”
Provided support to the struggle to overthrow the state in Afghansitan isn't just rice asshole, why would the writer bother to separate out these 2 things then?
>And this is what it was known.and yet your source clearly says, numerous times, that funds went to the mujihadeen holy shit you even admitted it yourself.
"FINALLY admits it is there. Rayehe, later on, becomes ALO, the BIGGEST Moaist splinter cell, between 1973 to 1983 in Afghanistan, which exactly fits the narrative on the cable: The target was the Maoists."
God damn you are fucking autistic this is literally what I have said. yes, 200,000 out of 400 million the target was Maoists. Haven't denied it.
The source says, numerous times, where the rest went, which was islamic militias. Why do you only beleive the parts of the source which says Maoists but not the part which says it went to the Mujihadeen? You are a fucking spastic.
In your post here YOUR WORDS
you say
>>8957 "Although Emadi agrees that money from China went to help Islamic parties, from 80 to 85, "
You are quoting Emadi here, with the source material.
You then go well beyond the source, and say "it is clear the MAIN target was the Maoists"
however, the source gives only 200,000 going to Maoists, what you assume the rest of the money just vanished into thin air? No, the majority of it, according to this source, went to islamists, which you have consistently denied in one way or another, which you can't admit, which is why you cope and cope and cope.
You can't even say it, go on, type it out CHINESE MONEY WENT TO ISLAMISTS
you literally cannot do it.
Here look ill say: some chinese money, 200,000, a tiny amount, went to Moaists, the rest of 400 MILLION went to islamists.
Cool. I'm glad we can agree you fucking physco
Anonymous 19-12-21 16:34:32 No. 8989
>>8987 >>8987 >Provided support to the struggle to overthrow the state in Afghansitan isn't just rice asshole, why would the writer bother to separate out these 2 things then? Because for the same reason it wasn't included with a weapon funding support?
You are just coping badly at this point.
>>8987 >that funds went to the mujihadeen holy shit you even admitted it yourself. Again, my main point is to provide evidence that were tha Maoists the ones China tried to support.
>>8987 >God damn you are fucking autistic this is literally what I have said. yes, 200,000 out of 400 million the target was Maoists. Haven't denied it. Of course you did mofo, don't you play dumb now.
>go well beyond the source, beyond? lmao it is not beyond. You are angry at this point hahaha I proved by two independent sources, one communist, another non-communist, that the goal of the Chinese government was to support the Maoists. Wether or not part of this fund ended up in the hands of the holly warriors (again, by time time even Amin declared a holy war, thus even Maoists could be seen as holly warriors, a.k.a mujahideen) it wasn't the story I was trying to prove or debunk. That was your goal, not mine.
>>8987 > some chinese money, 200,000, a tiny amount, went to MoaistsThis up to what ALO funder admits, with all the factions and splits, who know who received what.
But I am done.
Hopefully, in your anger, you can with the same passion, whenever a troll in the CPC tries to say "le China bad funded talibans" with the same passion you go and debunk: China main goal was to fund the Maoists.
I am enjoying your butthurted-ass.
You try to find reasons to hate China, but by no means want to look the main enemy was the west. So obssessed with China, yet when presented with facts, still want to imply China goals were the muslim brotherhood backed counter-revolutionaries.
Sage !61KGLATVW. 19-12-21 16:41:06 No. 8990
>>8989 >Again, my main point is to provide evidence that were tha Maoists the ones China tried to support. which nobody is denying, however, those sources also say that China supported the islamist groups, again, you said as much yourself here:
>>8957 "Although Emadi agrees that money from China went to help Islamic parties, from 80 to 85,"
So why can you now not admit it?
>"Of course you did mofo, don't you play dumb now."you are the one playing dumb, you have been trying to play down China supporting the Mujihadeen and act like it was only Moaists they were supporting, in fact, its the other way round, where the have mainly funding Mujihadeen and only incidently funded Maoists.
>beyond? lmao it is not beyond.yes it is, neither source denies Maoists were funded, neither however, says they were the main groups funded, which is your claim and your claim alone.
In fact the sources you have given place greater emphasis on funding going to Mujihadeen groups, with only a small amount, 200,000 out of 400 million, going to Maoist groups, the rest of the groups that were active were Mujihadeen groups.
> China main goal was to fund the Maoists.nothing you have posted shows this lmao. Both of those sources talk first about China funding Mujihadeen.
Anonymous 19-12-21 17:04:45 No. 8992
>>8990 >>8990 >nothing you have posted shows this lmao. Both of those sources talk first about China funding Mujihadeen. >>8991 >then why was China funding the same groups as the west? IdiotLMAO
You are just enraged you are exposed as a pseud, a lying ultra, and hopefully, this thread serves to the modding team as an example of why never reverse any of your ban appeals.
Man, you deny the real Chinese intentions. As I theorized, the Chinese had to accept the conditioning of how the funds ended up under the supervision of Pakistan (which was the administrative faction of the funds, even the U.S. funds, Pakistan administrated what factions to support), because China's border with Afghanistan isn't useful at all.
Again as I said: It matters because it is different to say "China funded anti-communists to overthrow communists" than to say "China funded Moaists, a faction of the communists, to overthrow another communist faction".
Ideologically speaking, Chinese goals are there, are set-up there, were the Maoists, as Amin said "the far left", and you can't change that.
Anonymous 19-12-21 17:13:14 No. 8993
>>8992 >As I theorized, the Chinese had to accept the conditioning of how the funds ended up under the supervision of Pakistan a nice fan theory but it remains that
>Chinese goals are there, are set-up there, were the Maoists, as Amin said "the far left", and you can't change that.is that why they gave 400 million dollars to islamists lmao
Anonymous 19-12-21 17:28:32 No. 8994
>>8993 Yeah, Sage, no one knows it is you 🤣 you butthurted pseud.
I will stop posting here waiting for the two books I mentioned. They seem to be important, but most likely, as the Ashitkov book Emadi quotes (that I could find), the USSR focused on the real enemy: The U.S. as you should, but I guess your imaginary revolution is progressing by now.
>fanfictionOh, where did I read that word before…. ah, yeah, the "Fictional" comment about ETIM.
:^)
Sage !61KGLATVW. 19-12-21 17:40:06 No. 8995
>>8994 It was me sure.
400 million vs 200,000 mate, facts don't care about your fanfiction
Anonymous 19-12-21 17:42:24 No. 8996
>>8989 >Again, my main point is to provide evidence that were tha Maoists the ones China tried to support. Why do you keep lying about this? They were clearly not "the
main target of support", based off your own citations. You're weaseling really poorly and blatantly here honestly.
Anonymous 19-12-21 18:00:47 No. 8999
>>8995 >It was me sure. Of course, I can detect you. You are the rightoid larping your ass as a leftist. It is transparent to this point.
Do you know that post was deleted?
You are admitting you are ban-evading at this point.
>>8996 >Why do you keep lying about this? They were clearly not "the main target of support", based off your own citations. You're weaseling really poorly and blatantly here honestly.Sage, you don't need to turn off your own tripfag to get a fake chore. It is not needed for you to take a phone or reset your IP to trick mods, it is obviously you are not reading that the ALO members traveled and met the Chinese leaders, very different from the muslim-brotherhood.
And even Amin declaring a holly war means that communists there weren't alien from Islamism, so even Emadi when says "islamist received funded" it is even possible that these were factions close to maoism.
>>8997 I don't have to be a mod (and I not one) at this point to know who you are sage. The deflection of the Chinese intentions is so obvious that your confirmation bias just easily shows who you are.
No other person is this retarded to not admit what China wanted.
Anonymous 19-12-21 18:06:19 No. 9001
>>9000 No sage, it's your own writting style. You can claim all you want, to me it is just simply you. It's like no one knows if you post from a phone even in the same WiFi gets a different IP for the post (hidding the yous).
>>9000 >It’s just a fact that when outsiders look they see you’re a nut job. Yeah, that China wanted to support the Maoists? good they can see it.
Anonymous 19-12-21 18:19:23 No. 9003
>>9002 >>9002 >and 400 million dollars says you are wrong Well, I will make a claim here, debunk me, go on:
The 400 million went for Maoists-Islamists. (backing my claim by the assumption that Islamism wasn't rejected by the communist revolutionaries, like Amin claiming a holy war, a
jihad ).go on, let's see if you are genuine in your investigation or if you are larping and proving every single penny was known by the Chinese leadership went for the ideological enemy, rather they were redirected without their knowledge.
>>9002 >you are wrong The difference between you and I is that you have been caught hiding your tripcode before, said by the mods. I don't play dumb when I take serious reads and want to make clear distinctions of the history.
Differentiated from you, my intentions are genuine.
Anonymous 19-12-21 18:34:24 No. 9006
>>9005 >>9005 >Damn dude, I'm beginning to think you're a superhero with the amount of stretch your body is able to generate right here. Hey, if you resort to fallacies, despite I managed to prove that the Chinese ideologically wanted to fund the Maoists, then I can resort to them, too. Two can play the same fucking game: Prove those Islamic groups weren't Maoists. Weighting for my side: If Amin declares a jihad, anything could be a mujihideen.
Prove the Chinese funds for weapons to the islamists weren't targeting the muslism-brotherhood ones.
Anonymous 19-12-21 18:50:11 No. 9008
>>9003 >The 400 million went for Maoists-Islamists. No it didn't. It went to islamists. Which your source, the one you posted, says specifically.
It does also say money went to Maoists, but only 200,000. What the fuck is wrong with you man just shut up.
> rather they were redirected without their knowledge.you haven't in anyway shown any proof at all that this is happened. Its just a thing that you've said.
Why should we believe your crackpot theories which you base on nothing, when you have proven yourself to be a liar, and we have the real information right in front of us?
>I don't play dumb when I take serious reads and want to make clear distinctions of the history.yes you do you are doing it right now, literally trying to say that all of the 400 million the source says went to islamists, actually went to maoists, because Maoists and islamists were actually the same thing, which is something you've just completely made up. Its completely embarrassing. Fuck off.
Anonymous 19-12-21 18:55:32 No. 9009
>>9006 >Hey, if you resort to fallacies, No that is you.
>despite I managed to prove that the Chinese ideologically wanted to fund the Maoists You didn't prove this. You posted some unrelated shit and then claimed it. Literally nothing you have posted proves this.
>Two can play the same fucking game you are the only one playing the game.
>Prove those Islamic groups weren't MaoistsThe source
YOUR SOURCE THAT YOU POSTED AND CLAIMED WAS RELIABLE differentiates between the Islamists groups, to which 400 million was given, and the Maoist groups, to which 200,000 was given.
Your own source, has already done this. Shut up.
Anonymous 19-12-21 19:03:28 No. 9010
>>9008 >>9008 >you haven't in anyway shown any proof at all that this is happened. Its just a thing that you've said. No, that's my claim. As you want to claim the 400 million went for the far-right mujahideen, without proof, I want to claim the money went for the maoists mujahideen.
>>9008 >your crackpot theories which you base on nothingour crackpot theories which you base on nothing
Oh, nothing is that Amin declares a jihad, nothing is that ALO members traveled to China and not one single mention of the muslim brotherhood traveling to China is known, that's nothing?
Hahaha, I can play the same game, but my hand is a three of As, yours is a double-pair of 4s and 6s.
>>9008 >islamists Maoists>>9009
* Islamists. :^)
>despite I managed to prove that the Chinese ideologically wanted to fund the MaoistsAmazes me I have to quote the post again:
>Me, Dr. Faiz and his wife Leila, Najeeb, Abeed, and Naseem flew from Karachi to Beijing via Singapore. However much I questioned Dr. Faiz about the purpose of this trip, he told me nothing. In Beijing we were met by a high-ranking official in charge of foreigners and two interpreters. Later, the head of that department and his deputy met with our delega- tion. At that meeting, Dr. Faiz presented a report to the Chinese and asked $ 10 million in aid. The Chinese expressed doubt about that sum and gave him only $ 200,000 Dr Faiz was the ALO founder, the biggest Maoists faction in Afgh. Lived
UNTIL 1986 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faiz_Ahmad it matches the period that repeats in every article where says China gave money to assist weapons.
Your confirmation bias just wants to assume these mujahideen were the Muslim brotherhood alone, and/or the Chinese knew and wanted all for the Muslim brotherhood.
And If I proved there was an ideological aligment, I have all the right, weighing in the Amin jihad declaration, and the trips made by those Maoists members to China, that those
mujahideen were in fact, Maoists.
Anonymous 19-12-21 19:24:04 No. 9011
>>9010 Another
"Nothing"
Dorronsoro, p. 214
>Up to the fall of Kabul in 1992 the Maoists were just as active in the west of the country But yeah, N-O-T-H-I-N-G.
LMAO, confirmation biases are awesome, aren't they?
Anonymous 19-12-21 19:29:11 No. 9012
>>9011 (me, again)
Note that I am keeping notes of Dorrosonro's book about Maoists so I can un-mask your untrue ulterior intentions.
Keep butthurted, sage, keep screeching all you want.
:^)
Anonymous 19-12-21 19:55:11 No. 9014
>As you want to claim the 400 million went for the far-right mujahideen, without proof, oops here is the proof from your source:
"From 1980-1985, China provided the Pakistan-based Islamic parties with
approximately $ 400 million worth of weapons, which included HN-5 surface
to air missiles and their launchers, rockets, mines, anti-aircraft machine guns,
and anti-rocket grenade launchers (FBIS, 1985: p. Cl)"
No, "pakistan backed islamist parties" aren't Maoist. You fucking cretin.
>Oh, nothing is that Amin declares a jihad, nothing is that ALO members traveled to China and not one single mention of the muslim brotherhood traveling to China is known, that's nothing?cool, its completely irrelevant, we have a reliable source, which you yourself gave as reliable, stating that the Pakistani islamist parties were backed to tune of 400 million. I have never seen cope like you are giving right now.
>Amazes me I have to quote the post again: the post proves my position and I myself have quoted it. ONLY 200,000, comparsed to 400 million.
You are a loon.
>your confirmation bias and yet multiple people are on my side and only you are on yours.
Crazy person.
>And If I proved there was an ideological aligment,you haven't. You have shown they funded some Maoist groups, but the same source showed they funded the islamists by orders of magnitude more.
>>9011 only in the west of the country.
>>9012 im not the one screeching or butthurt, people agree with me and nobody agrees with you
Anonymous 19-12-21 20:05:23 No. 9015
>>9014 >im not the one screeching or butthurt, people agree with me and nobody agrees with you >the guy that hides the tripfag lmao
you are so butthurted you forgot to put your tripfag, isn't?
Now let me know this "public support you have"
>only in the west of the country. Dorronsoro
<In Farah the Jebhe-yi Moallimin (Teachers’ Front) brought together several hundred fighters, at Bala Bolak and near the Iranian frontier, whose affiliation, although they did not openly advocate Maoism, was known to all in the region. See how the Maoists in factions weren't openly saying they were Maoists in some instances?
Oh hahaha "only", now is not nothing, just "only"
Exercise all the fallacies, my chvd, that doesn't change the China ideological possition.
Anonymous 19-12-21 21:17:51 No. 9017
>>9015 You ignored this part
oops here is the proof from your source:
"From 1980-1985, China provided the Pakistan-based Islamic parties with
approximately $ 400 million worth of weapons, which included HN-5 surface
to air missiles and their launchers, rockets, mines, anti-aircraft machine guns,
and anti-rocket grenade launchers (FBIS, 1985: p. Cl)"
No, "pakistan backed islamist parties" aren't Maoist. You fucking cretin.
Everything you say is irrelevant
Unique IPs: 17