[El-Meghwar]

Originally Posted by athegan

For the most interesting part Meghwar why didn't you reply to this Come on guys
Point 1: Syrians ended the civil war...They did NOT. At least not alone. When you say Syrians ended the civil war it makes them sound as if they were the only reason there was a civil war. The civil war ended after many of the reasons, regional and Lebanese, disappeared or changed and after an American-Syrian deal hosted by Saudi Arabia with the use of Iran as a scarecrow that day and many other factors I don't wanna get into. I hope someone more knowledgable in the civil war will pick up from here...

I agree, the civil war wasn't ended by Syria.. the civil war was ended by a Syrian invasion and a Taef agreement, the two ones were covered by the International community and who were called the representatives of christians and muslims in the country.
Only GMA opposed that agreement and he payed the price (because in fact that agreement was to legalize the syrian occupation and to give the muslims in Lebanon more constitutional Rights wich was also a reason for the civil war), what ended the civil war was the treason of the deputees who signed Taef agreement and surrendered to those who started the civil war in 1975, i don't call it end of civil war, i call it surrendering.

Point 2: 1990- 2000...Clearly Mr. El-Meghwar for all HAers, they will have the same answer here that the Syrian Presence was necessary for HA operations. I will have to agree with them here, not on their operations or anything else, just on the fact that the created syrian situation in Lebanon helped HA a lot and gave them a big margin to accomplish what they did on many levels...So will u now say the Syrian occupation/presence was necessary for LEBANON?

I don't know how much the syrians helped HA during that era (1990-2000).
but if they did it's just for their own interests, maybe fighting Israel from Lebanon was benefiting them and maybe they didn't expect a victory in 2000.
what it's important to me in here is not who was arming HA, but the important thing is that the South was liberated, maybe the Syrian aim from arming HA wasn't liberating the south, but HA's aim from fighting Israel was liberating the south and they did it... that's what i care about.

Point 3: sorry El-Meghwar, you are not an ally right now with someone u used to "differ" with; you are an ally with an accomplice and traitor with an occupying country...Again waiting for a good argument to change my view on this...

u need to differ between this two eras :

1. During the syrian occupation (1990-2005)
2. After the syrian occupation (2005-present time)

in the first one Lebanon was under occupation, the lebanese parties wasn't allowed or wasn't able to contact each others without the Syrian officer.
General Aoun was in Paris, SHN was in Lebanon... many of Hezbollah supporters didn't knew who's General Aoun and they thought that he's another Antoine Lahed, in the other side FPM'ers knew nothing about Hezbollah, their way of thinking, their manner of life, they thought that they are another Hariri, Jumblat and all the syrians agents in that time.

in the second one Lebanon was freed, Syria was out, GMA is back to Lebanon, the different Lebanese parties became able to contact each others and talk about all the issues without calling Anjar.
during this time : Everything related to the past is from the past ! i don't need to worry myself what was HA position during that time, because like HsN said, they had their reasons.
the most important thing and the difference between HA and other Lebanese who cooperated with the Syrians, is that HA didn't backstab Syria, HA proved that his relation with Syria is not a Master/Slave relation... that's what i respect in Hezbollah and disrespect in the Future Movement and PSP who always claim that they knew the Right from the wrong and they were back again to the right track.. no it's not true, they are now Anti-Bashar and not Anti -Syria or anti-Occupation, and the best clue is that they are now slave to other countries, but HA is preserving his good relations with Syria because they have common interests, that's better than making relations with other countries and being their slaves just for personal benifits.

My answer to point 3 is worse than going to Anjar. HA where part of the team that made Anjar possible for at least 2000-2005....

so what do you suggest ??
boycotting relations with all those who cooperated with the Syrians ??
if yes, everyone cooperated except FPM. even the LF were part of the team that made Anjar possible for 1990-1994.

I repeat again, no one can live in this country alone, we have to build relations with each others. but it's better to build these relations with someone you know he's sincere and you can trust, that's why i prefer being allies with HA who were a part of the Syrian occupation but never participated in a government AKA never participated in corruption and never been slave to Syria, ON being allies with someone launching a war against Syria after her withdrawn and claiming to be patriotic and free while he's still kissing foreign a**es just to stay in power.