Your view on the Syrian presence/occupation era.

[El-Meghwar]

based of what Athegan was saying in somewhere else in this forum, i thought opening this thread in order to get some answers from different political affiliations in this forum about this matter.

Originally Posted by athegan

Next time you are in an opposition gathering,head to the closest bearded guy and go tell him the post u just mentioned about Israel and Syria Just put to test how much you have in common with those you are allying yourself with...If the standard of patriotism you just mentioned is to be applied, the whole concept of a country called Lebanon wouldn't make sense

Originally Posted by athegan

My answer is in two parts :

1- First I was saying that if you want to blame 14 marchers, as Mandy did, because they were men zowwar 3anjar blame everyone How controversial is this ?

2- Second I said that this so-called common understanding still sharply splits in threads like this one. You and most FPMer HATE(softest word for the feeling u have) Syria for what they did and see it completely unjustifiable. HAers see it for many reasons, as a concept, justifiable and might have been necessary at the same time they blame some mischiefs on Syrians (interestingly enough only ba3ed ma baramo dahron l soreyyeen )

so guys, and mainly HAers, is what Athegan said about you true ?
what do you think about the Syrians and their role in Lebanon during 1990-2005.. do you consider it an occupation or a necessary presence ??

Please everyone give us your opinion, without any fear

[Mandy]

Mr Athegan, if FPM and HA have the same opinions and political views then what's the utility of they MOU let's unite fared marra and form 1 political party only
I dnt wanna discuss HA's view of the Syrian presence in leb cz it's up to them to explain it I only talk about MY OWN beliefs and views and as I said before, I blame every "Lebanese" that used to visit Anjar and had a direct relation with the Syrian moukhabarat and i guess everyone knows very well who they are.

[Sogelec]

Originally Posted by El-Meghwar

based of what Athegan was saying in somewhere else in this forum, i thought opening this thread in order to get some answers from different political affiliations in this forum about this matter.





so guys, and mainly HAers, is what Athegan said about you true ?
what do you think about the Syrians and their role in Lebanon during 1990-2005.. do you consider it an occupation or a necessary presence ??

Please everyone give us your opinion, without any fear

Well, Me as a HAer Supporter, i Used to HATE the Syrian Presence

1st of All, for some who dont know History, When the Syrian Army Came to Beirut, they attacked HA members, and my uncle is a martyr at that era, he wasn't fighting, he was group praying with Some 20-30 HA members in Some1's House, where The Syrian Army Killed Them All by Shooting them, that was called Fat7allah Mascare in Basta - Beirut, but this insidence is not wat my opinion is based on

to continue, Syrian Presence used to cover the Stealing and all da bad things done @ that era

Syrian Presence used to prevent me as a Shiite from Contacting and Knowing more My Christian Brother

Syrian Presence used to show me that this Christian Brother wants Israel as an Ally, so that ppl hate Christians and their Qadeye

im not gonna talk about the attacks, te3zeeb, 5atef, mo5abarat & all those, that used to happen also in my HA society

but, for those who say y we didnt talk against them, we knew that their presence was a duty we r payin in order to keep the support for the resistance in the South.
after all, i wished they didnt come from the begining, though they stopped the civil war by some how
sometimes i wished they withdrew from Lebanon In year 2000, after the liberation

as for the direct Question By U Meghwar, YES it was an occupation by a Neighbor Arabic Country...that was bad, and 4 SURE it wont return, coz if it does, im gonna hold a Rifle & Bazzoka to Fight them.

PS: im glad ive never heard that SHN visited Anjar to meet Rustom, i used to remember Rustom Coming to Haret Hreik & Meet SHN.. but im MORE GLAD that we r allies with GMA who never Met him mn l Assas

[Gilgamesh]

Originally Posted by Mandy

Mr Athegan, if FPM and HA have the same opinions and political views then what's the utility of they MOU let's unite fared marra and form 1 political party only
I dnt wanna discuss HA's view of the Syrian presence in leb cz it's up to them to explain it I only talk about MY OWN beliefs and views and as I said before, I blame every "Lebanese" that used to visit Anjar and had a direct relation with the Syrian moukhabarat and i guess everyone knows very well who they are.

Everything in black is irrelevant...As for the part in red, if you think HA could operate the way they did while the Syrian intelligence was present at large in Lebanon without a high level of cooperation between the two, I'd like to correct you cuz that is impossible...

Originally Posted by Sweets_HsN®

1st of All, for some who dont know History, When the Syrian Army Came to Beirut, they attacked HA members, and my uncle is a martyr at that era, he wasn't fighting, he was group praying with Some 20-30 HA members in Some1's House, where The Syrian Army Killed Them All by Shooting them, that was called Fat7allah Mascare in Basta - Beirut, but this insidence is not wat my opinion is based on

That continued with the Syrian-Iranian tensions and eventually turned into the Amal (Syria Backed)-HA (Iran Backed) war....Another episode of the same story of Lebanese people being toys for regional powers...

Originally Posted by Sweets_HsN®

to continue, Syrian Presence used to cover the Stealing and all da bad things done @ that era

Syrian Presence used to prevent me as a Shiite from Contacting and Knowing more My Christian Brother

Syrian Presence used to show me that this Christian Brother wants Israel as an Ally, so that ppl hate Christians and their Qadeye

im not gonna talk about the attacks, te3zeeb, 5atef, mo5abarat & all those, that used to happen also in my HA society

There is a lot more that even FPMers and 14 marchers don't mention we agree here 3ala gher 3ade

Originally Posted by Sweets_HsN®

but, for those who say y we didnt talk against them, we knew that their presence was a duty we r payin in order to keep the support for the resistance in the South.
after all, i wished they didnt come from the begining, though they stopped the civil war by some how
sometimes i wished they withdrew from Lebanon In year 2000, after the liberation

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...
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?
Point 3: 2000-2005 Sweets_HsN, when you are the biggest most well financed most organized party in a country you don't wish you ACT...ACT...ACT...you do something not wish before sleeping. I am still waiting for some kinda argument from any HAer to present about the subject of Syrian Occupation from 2000-2005...If no such argument is presented, 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...

Originally Posted by Sweets_HsN®

as for the direct Question By U Meghwar, YES it was an occupation by a Neighbor Arabic Country...that was bad, and 4 SURE it wont return, coz if it does, im gonna hold a Rifle & Bazzoka to Fight them.

Unless they convince you something vague like "If we don't come into your country, Israel will"

Originally Posted by Sweets_HsN®

PS: im glad ive never heard that SHN visited Anjar to meet Rustom, i used to remember Rustom Coming to Haret Hreik & Meet SHN.. but im MORE GLAD that we r allies with GMA who never Met him mn l Assas

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 El-Meghwar and FPMers, do you agree with HsN's post since you didn't reply?

P.S. I preferred to restrict the debate to 2000-2005 since there is where the controversy seems to be clearer..it does exist in the previous era of Syrian occupation though...

[Sogelec]

Originally Posted by athegan

Everything in black is irrelevant...As for the part in red, if you think HA could operate the way they did while the Syrian intelligence was present at large in Lebanon without a high level of cooperation between the two, I'd like to correct you cuz that is impossible...

Well y not? if u remember Athegan Hay l Selom Acts, n Ouza3i Acts, where HA in Hay l Selom was Against Government, and Got Shot by the Lebanese Army, i remember the MPs running between ppl trying to calm them, and a Sheykh was killed also @ dat time, dont u think that was a conflict between HA n Syria? & the lebanese Army as always was Kebesh l Ma7ra2a?

That continued with the Syrian-Iranian tensions and eventually turned into the Amal (Syria Backed)-HA (Iran Backed) war....Another episode of the same story of Lebanese people being toys for regional powers...

Well, yeah HA was a Toy and even without a true mind when Sub7i l Tfayle was el Ameen l 3am, Check After Sub7i l Tfayle, Sayed Abbas l Mousawi n Sayed Hasan Nasrallah, their only Objective was Israel, and Free the South, no toys thing, neither to Iran nor to Syria

There is a lot more that even FPMers and 14 marchers don't mention we agree here 3ala gher 3ade

I Cant Believe We Did

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...

B4 This, Syrians came to Lebanon becoz of Amine's l Jmayel Request, he went to Damascus to Hafez l Assad n Asked Him to Do This

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?

The Occupation they way it was, was bad for Lebanon, I Agree that HA knew how to Live with That Occupation and Invest it for a PURE LEBANESE OBJECTIVE...w For Lebanon's Sake

Point 3: 2000-2005 Sweets_HsN, when you are the biggest most well financed most organized party in a country you don't wish you ACT...ACT...ACT...you do something not wish before sleeping. I am still waiting for some kinda argument from any HAer to present about the subject of Syrian Occupation from 2000-2005...If no such argument is presented, 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...

Athegan, Seriously, What do U Prefer? Live NOT the way U wish, But Making Sure your people are Safe, OR, Live the way U wish, with another Civil war Against the 14 Marchers who LOVE the Syrian Boots ?
The Case Was, Either HA stays the way he was, commenting on Stealing and Social Needs and Accusing the Governments and the Syrians in an Indirect Way, OR, fight the Syrian Presence, make Israel Benefit From That, Knowing that Some Lebanese Who Present Now 14 March (Excluding GMA & LF @ That Era) will stand Aside with Syria, and Also, Not Sure of Rafic l Hariri ( Da Sunni Leader) position if such thing happens, what would he choose?
He Chose to stay Calm, build his Arms Silently, keep the things smooth, until the Time came after Hariri's Assassin, though it came in a very sensitive timing, but HA said Thank U Syria 4 Staying Beside the Resistance, He Didnt Say Please Stay Syria

Unless they convince you something vague like "If we don't come into your country, Israel will"

Bad Try , wat i meant was me as a HAer wont Accept Any Occupation whereever side it came from, and dats y we r fighting the new occupation of America represented by Sanyoura's Government and 14 Marchers, Fighting here is not by the means of Arms...

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....

How are they part? if they didnt participate in Anjar Meetings, wat ever, people who went there made it possible, when Rustum Ghazale Comes to HA leader, that tells that HA leader is not considering Rustum as a Big Thing or a Powerfull Marja3 in order to go la 3endo

So El-Meghwar and FPMers, do you agree with HsN's post since you didn't reply?

Between FPM and HA there is the MoU, it stated the Points That Lebanon is Facing now days Clearly, HA doesnt want a Powerfull Syria in Lebanon Again, neither FPM wants

[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.

[Gilgamesh]

Originally Posted by Sweets_HsN®

Well y not? if u remember Athegan Hay l Selom Acts, n Ouza3i Acts, where HA in Hay l Selom was Against Government, and Got Shot by the Lebanese Army, i remember the MPs running between ppl trying to calm them, and a Sheykh was killed also @ dat time, dont u think that was a conflict between HA n Syria? & the lebanese Army as always was Kebesh l Ma7ra2a?

No actually, I don't... Syrians successfully placed HA as a part of the consensus that agreed on the Syrian armed presence, agreed on the selectivity of applying the Taef agreement, agreed on the exile of Aoun and the imprisonment of Ja3ja3, agreed on the dynasty of Rafi2 Ben 7ariri. HA didn't participate in ANY demonstration or protest any worker's union called for and among them is 7ay l selom...HA care only about such incidents because they don't want to see Lebanese army next to their bases, and that is understandable since it compromises the safety of their bases in many ways ( it is understandable, but is it legal or legitimate? La 3yoonak, we will disagree here )

Originally Posted by Sweets_HsN®

Well, yeah HA was a Toy and even without a true mind when Sub7i l Tfayle was el Ameen l 3am, Check After Sub7i l Tfayle, Sayed Abbas l Mousawi n Sayed Hasan Nasrallah, their only Objective was Israel, and Free the South, no toys thing, neither to Iran nor to Syria

They moved from being an unconscious toy (maybe) to being a "resistance" that benefits from the Syrian presence..They covered for the Syrian presence and helped them stay out of criticism in many ways...I think this point arises later on in our debate (be sha2fe tenye )

Originally Posted by Sweets_HsN®

B4 This, Syrians came to Lebanon becoz of Amine's l Jmayel Request, he went to Damascus to Hafez l Assad n Asked Him to Do This

We now owe amine jmayyel the end of the civil war lol a7la w a7la Read Meghwar's post on this point and my reply to it because the two will sum up(in my opinion) to answer for this point....

Originally Posted by Sweets_HsN®

The Occupation they way it was, was bad for Lebanon, I Agree that HA knew how to Live with That Occupation and Invest it for a PURE LEBANESE OBJECTIVE...w For Lebanon's Sake

You dodged the question...re-answer it buddy...and btw Amine l Gmayyel might claim that if Israel occupied lebanon he will "know how to live with that occupation and invest it for a PURE LEBANESE OBJECTIVE .... w For Lebanon's Sake "....occupation is occupation and they had right to cooperate with it that way (no one did)...

Originally Posted by Sweets_HsN®

Athegan, Seriously, What do U Prefer? Live NOT the way U wish, But Making Sure your people are Safe, OR, Live the way U wish, with another Civil war Against the 14 Marchers who LOVE the Syrian Boots ?

Doesn't have to be either actually...to be continued ta7et

Originally Posted by Sweets_HsN®

The Case Was, Either HA stays the way he was, commenting on Stealing and Social Needs and Accusing the Governments and the Syrians in an Indirect Way, OR, fight the Syrian Presence, make Israel Benefit From That, Knowing that Some Lebanese Who Present Now 14 March (Excluding GMA & LF @ That Era) will stand Aside with Syria, and Also, Not Sure of Rafic l Hariri ( Da Sunni Leader) position if such thing happens, what would he choose?
He Chose to stay Calm, build his Arms Silently, keep the things smooth, until the Time came after Hariri's Assassin, though it came in a very sensitive timing, but HA said Thank U Syria 4 Staying Beside the Resistance, He Didnt Say Please Stay Syria

twisted logic habeebe...Here is the truer version of the story... HA had 6 MPs at least during the Syrian Occupation of Lebanon..We are not talking here about fighting the Syrian Army( I think I have never suggested that)..We are talking about the national consensus that was available for Syrians to rely on that HA was part of...we are talking about sanadee2 sawda and political prisoners HA and everyone knew of...HA wanted Syria for known reasons and no real HA member will deny this( at least when no FPMers are around 1- Syrians were the only way all Lebanese people will "agree" on the concept of HA, 2- Syrians were the only cover for the selectiveness in applying the Taef agreement in ways so absurd we still suffer from,3- The arms thing and finally 4- only syrians could hold the Palestinian camps in Lebanon and prevent them from major problems with their Lebanese surrounding...Syrians provided the cover for HA operations politically because GMA, LF, Hariri (if not for Syrians) and Jounblat (if not for Syrians) would have easily created an allaince that would force HA in many ways to diminish its actions or abandon it all together or force them, which i see more likely, to turning shiite areas into vast camps outside Lebanese sovereignty w men ba3da nobody knows what happens..

Originally Posted by Sweets_HsN®

Bad Try , wat i meant was me as a HAer wont Accept Any Occupation whereever side it came from, and dats y we r fighting the new occupation of America represented by Sanyoura's Government and 14 Marchers, Fighting here is not by the means of Arms...

America l shaytan l akbar w Syria dawle shakeeka that is thanked after years of occupation...If HA needs Syria in Lebanon again, they will convince you how important it is for Syrians to re-enter...

Originally Posted by Sweets_HsN®

How are they part? if they didnt participate in Anjar Meetings, wat ever, people who went there made it possible, when Rustum Ghazale Comes to HA leader, that tells that HA leader is not considering Rustum as a Big Thing or a Powerfull Marja3 in order to go la 3endo

I have mentioned a lot already about this but I can say more...I come for the Southern Suburb of Beirut and have witnessed, a lot of times, frictions between Syrians and Lebanese in my area. HA was always there with the same words and the same arguments to present to the beaten Lebanese people who run to vote for them every four years in hundreds of thousands...HA prevented people from protesting the consecutive Syrian-agreed on governments of Rafik l Hariri..They backed away from their people in Hay l Sellom (the only historic rightful stance that was heard that day was by Sayyed Mohammad Hussien Fadlallah). They backed of hundreds of violations by Syrians that happened infront of their eyes against THEIR followers and preferred to always be "Al-shaytan Al-akhras." The matter of fact is Shiites according to some polls make up around 47% of Lebanese ppl or lets assume it is just 40%. You have 40% of Lebanese people unable to be heard outside the sphere of HA. Do you think that really those 40% of Lebanese people wanted the Syrians taking their jobs, imprisoning their children, stopping them everywhere and taking money from them for some reason and I am sure u heard, raping some of their children? Now to the other 60 %. With HA secured and thus any Shiite opposition that might arise to face Syria silenced, Syrians could move around the Sectarian map to continue forming the consensus. No need to mention in this forum how easy it was to buy Jonblat's or Hariri's silence since you all are aware of these facts. As for Maronites, Kate2eb mensha2, Owet ma7loul and Ja3ja3 imprisoned, and finally FPMers oppressed and their leader in exile...Game over Perfect political occupation with benefits for everyone who adopts it and oppression for everyone who doesn't...

Originally Posted by Sweets_HsN®

Between FPM and HA there is the MoU, it stated the Points That Lebanon is Facing now days Clearly, HA doesnt want a Powerfull Syria in Lebanon Again, neither FPM wants

Ba3ed shoo ? Did you notice that in all your post you didn't actually post any convincing argument for the Syrian presence in Lebanon between 2000 and 2005....still waiting for some real answer by any HAer...

[Gilgamesh]

Originally Posted by El-Meghwar

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.

Hear Hear..Yeslam temmak ma3ak hoon

Originally Posted by El-Meghwar

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.

And Najah Wakim....

Originally Posted by El-Meghwar

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.

I have debated this point in many threads but I want to avoid to debate this era in this thread because maybe for once someone might convince the other in the politics section be shee....But for the record, HA's aim from fighting Israel extends beyond the south and beyond the Lebanese border, has always extended and will always extend far beyond the Lebanese border..Enough said here..

Originally Posted by El-Meghwar

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.

No Meghwar...It is 1990-2000, 2000-2005, and 2005 to present...HA's position on Syrian follows a completely different path if it is before the Israeli withdrawal for the south or after it...As for the not allowed to cooperate, GMA was HA's enemy and they were his...nseeto ya allah ? Didn't you use to watch Kalam l-Nas at the time and did you forget all the rumors about GMA that were systematically surrounded in the Shiite bases?

Originally Posted by El-Meghwar

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.

Every Anjar visitor had his reasons...where they enough reasons to compromise the freedom of the people? Where they real reasons? And if they were, does every party have the right to decide to tolerate occupation AND cooperate with it for some agenda limited to the goals and aims of that party regardless of the collective benefit of the Lebanese people?

Originally Posted by El-Meghwar

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.

This whole slave/master thing is childish.. Jonblat wasn't a slave, he sold his accepting vote of Syrians for a price...Money, common benefits, hidden deals, exchanging "favors" and so forth...The master/slave argument is something we say to make things easier to explain. Cute example. Thats what it is tho, cute and fictional. I don't doubt for a second that HA was out of conviction with the Syrian Occupation although I oppose that conviction vehemently...But so can everyone claim, they all had their reasons and now have other reasons to be with another team. HA, for the record, is not welcomed in the other team so they have no choice but to be in the mo3askar they are in right now since they are the first item on the subject of conflict between the two international groups...

Originally Posted by El-Meghwar

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.

Well I have never suggested something like that...In Lebanon no two parties are enemies forever and no two parties are allies forever since very few parties have actual ideologies or fixed political standards and maybe with the exception of the communist party and HA, none has any ( I can explain what I mean by that if it is not clear enough..)

Originally Posted by El-Meghwar

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.

Well thats all fine and dandy but if you are familiar with law and you know that accomplices are guilty and that is what HA was in the syrian case..But anyways, don't get to excited about hating the other team because sooner or later realignments will happen (which isn't necessarily a bad thing) and you will be trying to find ways to justify ur switch...It happened before when the Lebanese knight singing to the ears of the American congress on the Palestinian camps and HA and the Syrian presence, GMA clearly stated his view of the very concept of HA several times over the years and every FPMer in Lebanon repeated after him. Now u will be in a dilemma on how to cover that. Enno do you think by saying that Syrians didn't allow u to know each other (lek l romance ) they prevented u from knowing what HA is and u ended up against the concept of HA. No, you were against them because by theory, by ideology, GMA will never actually say out of conviction that he is ok with the concept of an armed international proxy militia that exists on sovereign Lebanese land. That was what he believed in the civil war, after it, and I am still COMPLETELY convinced that he still believes in today but he felt the way to get there is the path he took. It is a political decision that was taken to end the subject of HA's arms in a manner that prevents Lebanon a civil war(presumably) but not an idealogical shift from GMA's side. His bases, lel asaf, are going for an idealogical shift and becoming more excited about erasing Israel from the area or whatever such concept is than HAers are...All what am saying is, don't erase ur FPMer identity that has some standards GMA was the first to talk about in Lebanon. You are doing that, unconsciously i hope...

[El-Meghwar]

Originally Posted by athegan

I have debated this point in many threads but I want to avoid to debate this era in this thread because maybe for once someone might convince the other in the politics section be shee....But for the record, HA's aim from fighting Israel extends beyond the south and beyond the Lebanese border, has always extended and will always extend far beyond the Lebanese border..Enough said here..

I disagree with you concerning this point, you may be right and i may be wrong, but this issue was solved in the MoU between FPM and HA.

No Meghwar...It is 1990-2000, 2000-2005, and 2005 to present...HA's position on Syrian follows a completely different path if it is before the Israeli withdrawal for the south or after it...As for the not allowed to cooperate, GMA was HA's enemy and they were his...nseeto ya allah ? Didn't you use to watch Kalam l-Nas at the time and did you forget all the rumors about GMA that were systematically surrounded in the Shiite bases?

ya khayye we were enemies welle baddak ye, but now we had negociations and reached common points of understanding and we are allies.
the most important thing is that Hezbollah won't welcome any syrian or any other interference in Lebanon again, if they do it, i'll stand against them.

Every Anjar visitor had his reasons...where they enough reasons to compromise the freedom of the people? Where they real reasons? And if they were, does every party have the right to decide to tolerate occupation AND cooperate with it for some agenda limited to the goals and aims of that party regardless of the collective benefit of the Lebanese people?

personally i'm against any party buying himself to a foreign force.
but the main question in here is : are those who cooperated with the occupation ready to cooperate with them if they invaded Lebanon again ??
in my opinion:

1. Hezbollah, Marada, LDP (erslan) will never cooperate with them... if they did they'll become traitors to me.
2. PSP, FM will always cooperate with any foreign force because their acts and History proved that they are only loyal to their pocket and their own interests.

This whole slave/master thing is childish.. Jonblat wasn't a slave, he sold his accepting vote of Syrians for a price...Money, common benefits, hidden deals, exchanging "favors" and so forth...The master/slave argument is something we say to make things easier to explain. Cute example. Thats what it is tho, cute and fictional. I don't doubt for a second that HA was out of conviction with the Syrian Occupation although I oppose that conviction vehemently...

U said it all
Jonblat was taking personal benefits from the syrians.
Hezbollah was taking NATIONAL benefits from the syrians, in order to free their country....
you can judge now

But so can everyone claim, they all had their reasons and now have other reasons to be with another team. HA, for the record, is not welcomed in the other team

why HA is not welcomed in the other team but Junblat, FM are ?? in your opinion the two were cooperating with the syrian occupation, so why the other team accepted FM and Jonblat with them but not HA ??
simply because Hezbollah have a cause defending it, but FM and Jonblat have nothing except their own personal benefits, they can be picked up by anyone and be used, but not Hezbollah... that's the difference between men of word, men of principles and low traitors.

Well thats all fine and dandy but if you are familiar with law and you know that accomplices are guilty and that is what HA was in the syrian case..But anyways, don't get to excited about hating the other team because sooner or later realignments will happen (which isn't necessarily a bad thing) and you will be trying to find ways to justify ur switch...

of course if the other team reached common points of understanding with us, and changed their whole attitude they are more than welcome, in the end FPM is seeking to spread understandings culture in all the Lebanese community between everyone.

GMA will never actually say out of conviction that he is ok with the concept of an armed international proxy militia that exists on sovereign Lebanese land. That was what he believed in the civil war, after it, and I am still COMPLETELY convinced that he still believes in today but he felt the way to get there is the path he took. It is a political decision that was taken to end the subject of HA's arms in a manner that prevents Lebanon a civil war(presumably) but not an idealogical shift from GMA's side.

that's why there is something called a MoU with Hezbollah that made a reasonable solution for Hezbollah arms !!!

His bases, lel asaf, are going for an idealogical shift and becoming more excited about erasing Israel from the area or whatever such concept is than HAers are...All what am saying is, don't erase ur FPMer identity that has some standards GMA was the first to talk about in Lebanon. You are doing that, unconsciously i hope...

I won't be sad if Israel was erased from the map, in the end Israel is the main problem in the Middle East, if Israel was erased from the map, the refugees issue will be solved, all the military conflicts in the region will be solved, and peace will take place. are you sad with that ??
anyway we don't want to erase Israel from the map (but i won't be sad if it happened) we just want to secure our country, i will be only supporting hizbullah as long it defends Lebanon, i don't want its arms to remain but i have no option in front of the israeli killing machine, it defended me before and defending me now, why would i take off my shield?

[Gilgamesh]

Originally Posted by El-Meghwar

I disagree with you concerning this point, you may be right and i may be wrong, but this issue was solved in the MoU between FPM and HA.

Originally Posted by El-Meghwar

that's why there is something called a MoU with Hezbollah that made a reasonable solution for Hezbollah arms !!!

I gathered these two parts together although they are originally apart but because they both revolve around the MoU somehow....The MoU stays a weak document of no real value if it didn't give GMA any stronghold on HA to insure they will set their timelines and goals according to that document...

Originally Posted by El-Meghwar

ya khayye we were enemies welle baddak ye, but now we had negociations and reached common points of understanding and we are allies.
the most important thing is that Hezbollah won't welcome any syrian or any other interference in Lebanon again, if they do it, i'll stand against them.

under certian circumstances they would....I am tired of giving example and examples but you know pretty well that they accepted the Syrian occupation in the 2000-2005 era and they did that out of conviction that this was the best for Lebanon (so they claim)...They will do it again if the same kinda conditions arise...

Originally Posted by El-Meghwar

personally i'm against any party buying himself to a foreign force.
but the main question in here is : are those who cooperated with the occupation ready to cooperate with them if they invaded Lebanon again ??
in my opinion:

1. Hezbollah, Marada, LDP (erslan) will never cooperate with them... if they did they'll become traitors to me.
2. PSP, FM will always cooperate with any foreign force because their acts and History proved that they are only loyal to their pocket and their own interests.

Concerning HA, answered right above this. Concerning Marada and Ereslan, they are local leaders that don't change much in the equation and I don't give them a lot of thought...If they cooperate or not, they won't have that big of an effect..

Originally Posted by El-Meghwar

U said it all
Jonblat was taking personal benefits from the syrians.
Hezbollah was taking NATIONAL benefits from the syrians, in order to free their country....
you can judge now

National benefits, be ra2yak aw be ra2yon, but can you prove that protecting the Syrian occupation from 2000 to 2005 brought more national benefit than harm? Or can you prove that what HA label as "National Benefit" wasn't or won't ever be HA benefit? I sometimes really see you ppl believing whatever HA officials say, maybe because most of them are Sheikhs? And for the record, if you don't know about the personal benefits HA got, it is only because you didn't live among them. The reaped and still reap a lot of personal benefits....You don't have to take my word for it, s2al 7ada sade2 w 3ayesh bayneton...

Originally Posted by El-Meghwar

why HA is not welcomed in the other team but Junblat, FM are ?? in your opinion the two were cooperating with the syrian occupation, so why the other team accepted FM and Jonblat with them but not HA ??

The other me7war facing the Irani-Syrian team is a Saudi-American one How will HA fit there ? HA are maybe the only party in Lebanon who didn't have the choice to go to Bristol because they are a point of debate that was to come next...enno mannon just a party with an opinion about this, they ARE THIS!

Originally Posted by El-Meghwar

of course if the other team reached common points of understanding with us, and changed their whole attitude they are more than welcome, in the end FPM is seeking to spread understandings culture in all the Lebanese community between everyone.

Everyone agrees for a while and disagrees for a while...that is how Lebanon has always been...While I might sound way too cynical, but I think no two Lebanese ever really agreed(in the full sense) on anything...

Originally Posted by El-Meghwar

I won't be sad if Israel was erased from the map, in the end Israel is the main problem in the Middle East, if Israel was erased from the map, the refugees issue will be solved, all the military conflicts in the region will be solved, and peace will take place. are you sad with that ??

You really make the middle east sound like it was heaven before 1948 Israel or no Israel, America or no America, the reasons of all the conflicts in the Middle East come from within its borders not from out groups...Maybe you are not very familiar with the history of the area but the Middle East never had peaceful days even before America was discovered I don't care if Israel gets erased as a country but for sure I would have to stand for the lives of its citizens. The answer to terrorism have always failed to be more terrorism. The answer to extremism has always failed to be Extremism in the opposite direction...And that is the situation in Lebanon, we are stuck between two poles, each equally a problem, and we can't seem to find any politician anywhere in the center....

Originally Posted by El-Meghwar

anyway we don't want to erase Israel from the map (but i won't be sad if it happened) we just want to secure our country, i will be only supporting hizbullah as long it defends Lebanon, i don't want its arms to remain but i have no option in front of the israeli killing machine, it defended me before and defending me now, why would i take off my shield?

It goes against GMA teachings..I have said this a billion times, but would GMA have said when he was all about principles in 1990, "I am ok with the concept of a militia from one sect of the Lebanese people being more powerful than the Lebanese army, establishing self governed strips of the country, being involved in a regional domination game, being funded by a country deeply involved in many problems in the area including the Lebanese civil war. arresting suspects and interrogating them and performing many other acts that surpass what the Lebanese police would do (abel reefe ) and undermine all the civil rights of the Lebanese citizens involved in this..." No need to talk more about this..HA the concept is wrong from GMA's patriotic principles, HA the practice is a violation against the concepts of Lebanese democracy and the rights of the citizens living in that democracy, HA the party are a party that still doesn't ascend from the secterian borders in its goals and ideology.....