Lebanese Government Quits

[a_unique_person]

http://www.theage.com.au/news/Middle-East-Crisis/Lebanese-government-quits/2005/03/01/1109546827897.html



Lebanon's Syrian-backed government collapsed today, piling more pressure on Damascus, already under fire from the US and Israel.

Prime Minister Omar Karami, under opposition fire since the February 14 assassination of his predecessor Rafik al-Hariri, told parliament his government was resigning to ensure that it "does not become an obstacle to the good of the country".

The news delighted thousands of flag-waving demonstrators who had defied an official ban to protest at Syrian domination of Lebanon. Banks, schools and businesses had closed after an opposition call for an anti-Syrian general strike.

Druze opposition leader Walid Jumblatt said the "people have won" and called for calm.

"Today, we are at a new turning point in the history of the country," he said.

A Syrian official source, who asked not to be named, said only: "This is an internal affair. Lebanon has the constitutional channels that govern these issues".

Syria plays a dominant role in Lebanon and maintains 14,000 troops there. Pressure has been growing within Lebanon and from abroad for a complete military withdrawal.

[Rob Lister]

Tell me what you personally think of this AUP. I'm interested in your opinion.

[a_unique_person]

Also this http://theage.com.au/articles/2005/02/25/1109180101953.html .

Syria denies it is behind the bombing, (of course it would). But the article here goes into the internal politics of Syria. (As is usual in the middle east, nothing is as simple as it first seems). The claim here is that the Syrian government is divided between moderates who want to bring Syria into the modern world, and criminals and extremists who would prefer that things stay just as they are. Also, what middle east issue would be complete without a reference to Israel. The Golan heights are still a sore point.



For some, the real question is not whether Syrians were to blame, but which ones. "I don't think anyone in the Syrian Government took this decision as a policy decision, but there are many Syrian and Lebanese mafiosi in the security systems and they are doing this to protect their money," said Anwar al-Bounni, a leading lawyer active in the Human Rights Association in Syria.

Another man with close links to the Syrian Government explained matters thus: "For the past 25 years, Lebanon has played a role for Syria comparable to Hong Kong's present role for China - to be the window to the world for Syria's economy. But the flow between the two countries is controlled by various mafia networks working inside the security forces.

"At the same time, these forces play a major role in determining the balance of power in Syria itself. I can tell you, for example, that about 40 per cent of goods imported into Lebanon are smuggled on by these people into the closed Syrian economy. That means an awful lot of money for those controlling the trade."

Officially, though, Syria is present in Lebanon only as a good neighbour and in accordance with the Taif agreement, preventing another outbreak of bloodshed between rival sectarian groups. It has always insisted that it would leave the moment the Lebanese government asked it to - not much of a hostage to fortune, considering Damascus' role in deciding who that government will be.

Less official, but well understood by all concerned, is Syria's strong desire to use Lebanon to maintain indirect military pressure on Israel for the return of the Golan Heights, seized by the Jewish state in the 1967 War and later annexed.

Although Israel finally withdrew its troops from its south Lebanon "security zone" in 2000, the Shiite militia of Hezbollah, jointly supported by Syria and Iran, still exchanges the odd flurry of shots with Israeli forces garrisoning a small disputed border enclave known to Lebanese as Shabaa Farms, to Israel as Mount Dov. Although fighting only flares in short and usually bloodless incidents confined to the disputed area itself, Hezbollah can still threaten to shower exposed Israeli communities with its dormant reserves of artillery and rockets.

According to a popular line of Syrian logic, giving up Lebanon also means giving up on the Golan - a savage blow to the regime's prestige and to Syria's already battered national pride.

"Driving Syria from Lebanon would deprive Syria of the last card it has that gives it any chance of winning peace talks with Israel and retrieving the Golan Heights," said a Damascus insider. "That card is Hezbollah, and Hezbollah is important not only in terms of the Arab-Israeli conflict but also in terms of its Iranian dimension. Syria is considered by Iran as its main bridge to the long hand that could possibly deter Israel from attacking its nuclear facilities. This is a new element in the equation."

Apart from that, though, it seems that many ordinary Syrians don't really care much one way or the other about staying in Lebanon. "We paid a high price to be there and we stopped their civil war, with the approval of the US, Europe and all the foreign countries at the time. Now they want us to withdraw we'll withdraw, but there'll be civil war again," said businessman Fayez Mousilli.

The major danger now - assuming that Syria really does intend to comply with the UN and withdraw - is that the process will be drawn out or violently disrupted by power struggles within the regime itself.

One analyst spoke of hardline elements in the Syrian security services who believe they can still control Lebanon after the army leaves by putting together a coalition of disaffected Muslims - fundamentalists from the north, Hezbollah in the south and Palestinian refugees, 250,000 of whom still live stateless and squalid lives in camps across the country. It probably wouldn't work, but it would certainly end in tears.

[a_unique_person]

Lebanon was a shambles till the Syrian Peace Keepers turned up. They have clearly overstayed their welcome. The justification that is given for their continued presence in the previous quote, that if they leave there will be civil war, is not good enough. Lebanon has to be given a chance to try to make it's own way. I am not looking forward to seeing artillery duels between gun batteries in high rise buildings again, one of the stranger and more memorable scenes from the '80s. (IIRC).

[demon]

BBC: "A cheer went up among more than 10,000 protesters who had gathered in Martyrs Square to demand the resignation of the government and the withdrawal of Syrian troops."

Do you think of we get 100,000 in Parliament Square for a few days we could get a government resignation and the withdrawal of US/UK troops? Worth a try, isn't it?

[Elind]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Lebanon was a shambles till the Syrian Peace Keepers turned up. They have clearly overstayed their welcome. The justification that is given for their continued presence in the previous quote, that if they leave there will be civil war, is not good enough. Lebanon has to be given a chance to try to make it's own way. I am not looking forward to seeing artillery duels between gun batteries in high rise buildings again, one of the stranger and more memorable scenes from the '80s. (IIRC).

Perhaps it's because they, Syrians, did much more (worse) than try to keep the peace. However I think the question Rob was asking was not a history lesson or your personal desires, but whether you think the Lebanese are now able to manage their own affairs in a civil manner?

[Elind]

Originally posted by demon
BBC: "A cheer went up among more than 10,000 protesters who had gathered in Martyrs Square to demand the resignation of the government and the withdrawal of Syrian troops."

Do you think of we get 100,000 in Parliament Square for a few days we could get a government resignation and the withdrawal of US/UK troops? Worth a try, isn't it?

Give it a rest buddy. You keep confusing circumstances that have nothing in common. Next you'll be talking about the brown Lebanese no doubt.

[geni]

Originally posted by demon
BBC: "A cheer went up among more than 10,000 protesters who had gathered in Martyrs Square to demand the resignation of the government and the withdrawal of Syrian troops."

Do you think of we get 100,000 in Parliament Square for a few days we could get a government resignation and the withdrawal of US/UK troops? Worth a try, isn't it?

To stay in line with the population ratio you would need 160,000.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Elind
Perhaps it's because they, Syrians, did much more (worse) than try to keep the peace. However I think the question Rob was asking was not a history lesson or your personal desires, but whether you think the Lebanese are now able to manage their own affairs in a civil manner?

Would you like the lottery numbers too? The only way it can be determined if they are ready to is to give them to opportunity. It sounds like there is popular support for the concept. I can't say the Syrian forces are actually contributing anything, and, if the article I linked to before is correct, it's not so much Syria itself as a Mafia that runs a lot of what is happening there. If that is the case, the sooner they are removed the better.

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Elind
Perhaps it's because they, Syrians, did much more (worse) than try to keep the peace. However I think the question Rob was asking was not a history lesson or your personal desires, but whether you think the Lebanese are now able to manage their own affairs in a civil manner?
To be fair to the lebanese they have had a lot of outsiders using thier country as a convenient place to fight each other... They have had the Syrians always believing they are rightfully part of Syria, there are many Zionists who fancy that god gave them southern lebanon (there's a nice river there and you know how attracted to rivers zionists are) plus lots of palestinians fleeing the IDF.....sounds like a great recipe for stability and good government doesn't it.

[geni]

Originally posted by The Fool
To be fair to the lebanese they have had a lot of outsiders using thier country as a convenient place to fight each other... They have had the Syrians always believing they are rightfully part of Syria, there are many Zionists who fancy that god gave them southern lebanon (there's a nice river there and you know how attracted to rivers zionists are) plus lots of palestinians fleeing the IDF.....sounds like a great recipe for stability and good government doesn't it.

Well The centeral african repulic elections seem to be on tract at the momnet so you never know.

[Elind]

Originally posted by geni
To stay in line with the population ratio you would need 160,000.

Presumably this is meant in regard to Iraq, but may I suggest that there was a demonstration, by about 8.5 million people, not just a hundred thousand or so.

[Skeptic]

Lebanon was a shambles till the Syrian Peace Keepers turned up.

That's like saying, "France was a shambles till the German Peace Keepers turned up", or perhaps, "Kuwait was in shambles till the Iraqi Peace Keepers turned up".

And to think I blamed AUP for being an apologist for dictators...

[Cleon]

Originally posted by Skeptic
Lebanon was a shambles till the Syrian Peace Keepers turned up.

That's like saying, "France was a shambles till the German Peace Keepers turned up", or perhaps, "Kuwait was in shambles till the Iraqi Peace Keepers turned up".

And to think I blamed AUP for being an apologist for dictators...

That's just really, really, really, wrong.

Lebanon had been in a state of civil war when Syria's troops came in. That is not the case with Kuwait in 1990 or WWII France.

The analogy is not only invalid, it's downright incorrect.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by The Fool
there are many Zionists who fancy that god gave them southern lebanon (there's a nice river there and you know how attracted to rivers zionists are)

You seem to have access to inside info, care to share with us? Could you name some of those " many Zionists"?

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by demon
BBC: "A cheer went up among more than 10,000 protesters who had gathered in Martyrs Square to demand the resignation of the government and the withdrawal of Syrian troops."

Do you think of we get 100,000 in Parliament Square for a few days we could get a government resignation and the withdrawal of US/UK troops? Worth a try, isn't it?

Well, in the interest of keeping up with the times it's no longer called "Martyr's Square",...it is now "Freedom Square". This is what happens when a dictator overplays his hand. Assad screwed up by assasinating Harriri...now his worst nightmare is about to come true.

Now the Syrians, especially the Kurds, watching the Iraqis vote in free multi-party elections to the east...and the Lebanese freedom intifada gaining momentum to the west are seeing just how fragile Assad's hold on them really is. It won't be too much longer before we see such demonstrations in Damascus itself.

Freedom is breaking out in the Arab world Demon, you should be happy for your brother Arabs who may soon be enjoying the freedoms you had to go to the UK for. Isn't that something that even you can get behind Demon??

-z

[Cleon]

Originally posted by rikzilla
Well, in the interest of keeping up with the times it's no longer called "Martyr's Square",...it is now "Freedom Square".

You have no idea why it's called Martyr's Square, do you?

(Hint...It has absolutely nothing to do with Assad or Syria. And the name is about as likely to change as Red Square's, revolution or no.)

[IllegalArgument]

Originally posted by rikzilla
Well, in the interest of keeping up with the times it's no longer called "Martyr's Square",...it is now "Freedom Square". This is what happens when a dictator overplays his hand. Assad screwed up by assasinating Harriri...now his worst nightmare is about to come true.

Now the Syrians, especially the Kurds, watching the Iraqis vote in free multi-party elections to the east...and the Lebanese freedom intifada gaining momentum to the west are seeing just how fragile Assad's hold on them really is. It won't be too much longer before we see such demonstrations in Damascus itself.

Freedom is breaking out in the Arab world Demon, you should be happy for your brother Arabs who may soon be enjoying the freedoms you had to go to the UK for. Isn't that something that even you can get behind Demon??

-z

Things be a changing, I hope it turns out alright.

BTW rikzilla I did finish "Case for Democracy", great book. I know think I understand how Bush views his foriegn policy. Or at least his FP speaches make sense.

At some point I'll post a review.

[Skeptic]

Originally posted by Cleon
That's just really, really, really, wrong.

Lebanon had been in a state of civil war when Syria's troops came in.

So if a state is in civil war it's OK for a neighboring state to come in and occupy it? Since when? What does one have to do with the other? What about the 1982 israeli invasion--I suppose that was OK, too? After all, Lebanon was still in civil war, was it not?

To give some more details, by the way, the French-German analogy is, I'd say, more than apt--it is almost perfect. In both cases we have:

a). A dictatorship invading and occupying a neighboring country;
b). Setting up military occuption;
c). Setting up a puppet government, newspapers, etc., to try and convince the world the conqeured welcomed the invader with open arms;
d). Setting up secret police to crush all dissent;
e). Setting up systematic economic exploitation of the occupied country with the "consent" given by the puppet government.

Sounds like a rather good analogy, of you ask me...

[Cleon]

Originally posted by Skeptic
So if a state is in civil war it's OK for a neighboring state to come in and occupy it?

I neither said nor implied anything of the sort. AUP didn't, either.

He pointed out--correctly--that Lebanon was "in shambles" when Syria came in. He's more generous than I--I would characterize Lebanon at the time as something straight out of hell.

But your statement that AUP's pointing this out is like saying "France was in shambles when Germany invaded" or 1990 Kuwait is simply flat-out wrong. AUP is correct. You are not.

That simple fact says nothing about whether Syria was right to invade or not.

If you're trying to make a point about occupying a country in the middle of civil war, that's one thing. There are better ways to make the point, however, than saying something so off-the-wall it's impossible to take you seriously.

[Skeptic]

I neither said nor implied anything of the sort. AUP didn't, either.

He pointed out--correctly--that Lebanon was "in shambles" when Syria came in.

That AUP didn't SAY this is a justification for the invasion is true. But that he IMPLIED is is obviously the case--for if it is not meant to be a partial justification of the invasion, why mention it in the very same sentence?

If AUP said about someone, "Well, she was sleeping around with everybody when she was raped", that, too, is not actually SAYING that the slut had it coming... and it might be merely poiting out correctly the victim's sexual history... but it sure as hell IMPLIES just that, does it not?

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by Cleon
You have no idea why it's called Martyr's Square, do you?

(Hint...It has absolutely nothing to do with Assad or Syria. And the name is about as likely to change as Red Square's, revolution or no.)

Well I didn't make it up. Since this square belongs to the Lebanese people, I think it's safe to say they can call it what they like. Apparently these days, they like "freedom"....

Protesters have gathered in Martyrs' Square, which they dubbed Freedom Square, ever since Hariri's assassination on Feb. 14 to demand the withdrawal of Syrian troops and the resignation of all top pro-Syrian political and security officials.

The First Link (http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/546580.html)

Beirut (AsiaNews) – More than 100,000 people rallied today demanding the pullout of Syrian troops from Lebanon. Many schools and businesses were shut across the country following a call for a general strike. Many of the opposition groups and young people who descended on Martyrs' Square renamed it Freedom Square.



The Second Link: (http://www.asianews.it/view.php?l=en&art=2667)

Soldiers initially blocked some demonstrators attempting to reach Martyrs Square, renamed "Freedom Square" by demonstrators after Mr. Hariri's death.


The Third Link: (http://washingtontimes.com/world/20050301-121948-8862r.htm)

I'm only going to give you 4 examples, but there are more...but this is, I think, the best as it is from the Daily Star of Lebanon:
BEIRUT: Tens of thousands of protesters calling for the government's resignation had their voices finally heard when Prime Minister Omar Karami handed in his resignation and left behind him a Lebanon crazed with cheers of victory. "We did it, united we got our Lebanon back, free of Syrian poison!" shouted John Marri, who was feverishly waving the Lebanese flag along with thousands of others in Martyrs' Square, or what is now called, "Freedom Square."


The Daily Star (Lebanon) (http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=2&article_id=13058)

Cool beans...eh? :cool:

-z

PS: IllegalArgument, Glad you liked the book. The only problem I found with it was that some of his footnotes were incomplete....other than that small fault I think it's perhaps one of the most important books I've ever read. It lends an insight to current world events and happenings such as the Iraqi vote, and the democracy movements in Cairo and Beirut. Those who have yet to read it need to hurry up!! ;)

[Skeptic]

Strange.

This can't REALLY be happening, can it? After all, we all know that the "Domino Theory" for the democratizing of the middle east is a totaly naive idea by the dangerously stupid and unrealistic Chimp W. Bushitler, and that it's all a cover for oil interests anyway...

...of corse, the democratization can fail. But at least one myth had been laid to rest--the belief that Arabs do not want and are not ready for democracy.

[Cleon]

Originally posted by Skeptic

That AUP didn't SAY this is a justification for the invasion is true. But that he IMPLIED is is obviously the case

No, he didn't. And your statement that it's "like saying, 'France was a shambles till the German Peace Keepers turned up', or perhaps, 'Kuwait was in shambles till the Iraqi Peace Keepers turned up'" remains not only invalid, but downright wrong.

Here, you're just looking for a reason to criticize AUP. Here's a free hint: if you want to criticize someone, it's better that you do it for what they actually say and using comparisons that have some basis in reality.

[Skeptic]

Originally posted by Cleon
No, he didn't.

Repeatedly denying the obvious won't make it go away, hon.

[Cleon]

Originally posted by Skeptic
Repeatedly denying the obvious won't make it go away, hon.

Translation: "I will continue to fabricate positions for people so I can knock them down using any silly, wacky comparison I can, no matter how incorrect."

[demon]

"Freedom is breaking out in the Arab world Demon, you should be happy for your brother Arabs who may soon be enjoying the freedoms you had to go to the UK for. Isn't that something that even you can get behind Demon??"

Rik, I guess we just have different ideas of what "freedom" is.

For example, I'll never forget the first time I saw Rashid Dostum interviewed on TV. He was talking to some Taleban prisoners and he told them, quite audibly, that if they didn't co-operate he would rape and kill their wives and children then destroy their villages. Having read about the man before I think it's safe to assume these weren't idle threats. This is a guy reported to have tied prisoners to tank tracks and crushed them to death.
U.S. puppet Hamid - vote early, vote often (http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2004/tr20040811-secdef1152.html)- Karzai has just appointed him chief-of-staff to the commander of the armed forces.

So now the warlords are back in office, along with their lucrative heroin trade (biggest in the world) and the death penalty.

Freedom and Liberation never looked so good eh?

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by demon
"Freedom is breaking out in the Arab world Demon, you should be happy for your brother Arabs who may soon be enjoying the freedoms you had to go to the UK for. Isn't that something that even you can get behind Demon??"

Rik, I guess we just have different ideas of what "freedom" is.

For example, I'll never forget the first time I saw Rashid Dostum interviewed on TV. He was talking to some Taleban prisoners and he told them, quite audibly, that if they didn't co-operate he would rape and kill their wives and children then destroy their villages. Having read about the man before I think it's safe to assume these weren't idle threats. This is a guy reported to have tied prisoners to tank tracks and crushed them to death.
U.S. puppet Hamid - vote early, vote often (http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2004/tr20040811-secdef1152.html)- Karzai has just appointed him chief-of-staff to the commander of the armed forces.

So now the warlords are back in office, along with their lucrative heroin trade (biggest in the world) and the death penalty.

Freedom and Liberation never looked so good eh?

It's tragic if true...but what the heck does it have to do with Lebanon?

Can you not stick to the subject at hand with out shooting at your two favorite targets, which btw, once again have nothing to do with this topic.

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by demon
For example, I'll never forget the first time I saw Rashid Dostum interviewed on TV. He was talking to some Taleban prisoners and he told them, quite audibly, that if they didn't co-operate he would rape and kill their wives and children then destroy their villages. Having read about the man before I think it's safe to assume these weren't idle threats.

Was he being interviewed by the prisoners, or did he bring them to the interview, or what?

Can you show us some article or something backing up this claim?

[rikzilla]

Mark Steyn (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml;sessionid=NP5J5NRUH3NELQFIQMGCM54AVCBQU JVC?xml=/opinion/2005/03/01/do0102.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/03/01/ixopinion.html) puts the current events in the Arab world into context:
Consider just the past couple of days' news: not the ever more desperate depravity of the floundering "insurgency", but the real popular Arab resistance the car-bombers and the head-hackers are flailing against: the Saudi foreign minister, who by remarkable coincidence goes by the name of Prince Saud, told Newsweek that women would be voting in the next Saudi election. "That is going to be good for the election," he said, "because I think women are more sensible voters than men."

Four-time Egyptian election winner - and with 90 per cent of the vote! - President Mubarak announced that next polling day he wouldn't mind an opponent. Ordering his stenographer to change the constitution to permit the first multi-choice presidential elections in Egyptian history, His Excellency said the country would benefit from "more freedom and democracy". The state-run TV network hailed the president's speech as a "historical decision in the nation's 7,000-year-old march toward democracy". After 7,000 years on the march, they're barely out of the parking lot, so Mubarak's move is, as they say, a step in the right direction.

Meanwhile in Damascus, Boy Assad, having badly overplayed his hand in Lebanon and after months of denying that he was harbouring any refugee Saddamites, suddenly discovered that - wouldja believe it? - Saddam's brother and 29 other bigshot Baghdad Baathists were holed up in north-eastern Syria, and promptly handed them over to the Iraqi government.

And, for perhaps the most remarkable development, consider this report from Mohammed Ballas of Associated Press: "Palestinians expressed anger on Saturday at an overnight suicide bombing in Tel Aviv that killed four Israelis and threatened a fragile truce, a departure from former times when they welcomed attacks on their Israeli foes."

No disrespect to Associated Press, but I was disinclined to take their word for it. However, Charles Johnson, whose Little Green Footballs website has done an invaluable job these past three years presenting the ugly truth about Palestinian death-cultism, reported that he went hunting around the internet for the usual photographs of deliriously happy Gazans dancing in the street and handing out sweets to celebrate the latest addition to the pile of Jew corpses - and, to his surprise, couldn't find any.

Why is all this happening? Answer: January 30. Don't take my word for it, listen to Walid Jumblatt, big-time Lebanese Druze leader and a man of impeccable anti-American credentials: "I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, eight million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world. The Berlin Wall has fallen."

What's happening now is starting to look like a sea-change in Arab politics. Even if it's not though, there sure is alot of excitement and hope for more freedom in the near future.

We live in interesting times....

Thanks George Dubya! ;)

-z

[kimiko]

Originally posted by rikzilla
Mark Steyn (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml;sessionid=NP5J5NRUH3NELQFIQMGCM54AVCBQU JVC?xml=/opinion/2005/03/01/do0102.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/03/01/ixopinion.html) puts the current events in the Arab world into context:

What's happening now is starting to look like a sea-change in Arab politics. Even if it's not though, there sure is alot of excitement and hope for more freedom in the near future.

We live in interesting times....

Thanks George Dubya! ;)

-z This reminds me much more of the Ukraine than of Iraq. The only connection to Iraq seems to be proximity. Ukrainians taking to the streets in huge numbers day after day showed the world that public demonstrations are still meaningful. That's more akin to what happened in Lebanon.

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by kimiko
This reminds me much more of the Ukraine than of Iraq. The only connection to Iraq seems to be proximity. Ukrainians taking to the streets in huge numbers day after day showed the world that public demonstrations are still meaningful. That's more akin to what happened in Lebanon.

Tell that to Walid Jumblatt:
"I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, eight million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world. The Berlin Wall has fallen."

Personally, I think it's more likely that Walid is right. Seeing their brother Arabs freed from a tyrant brings home to them the idea that they could do the same. The happenings in the Ukraine were also a fine thing to see...and very akin to what's happening in the ME, but I'd wager they see little of themselves in a nation so far removed from their sphere of experience/culture...

-z

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by rikzilla
Well I didn't make it up. Since this square belongs to the Lebanese people, I think it's safe to say they can call it what they like. Apparently these days, they like "freedom"....


The First Link (http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/546580.html)





The Second Link: (http://www.asianews.it/view.php?l=en&art=2667)




The Third Link: (http://washingtontimes.com/world/20050301-121948-8862r.htm)

I'm only going to give you 4 examples, but there are more...but this is, I think, the best as it is from the Daily Star of Lebanon:



The Daily Star (Lebanon) (http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=2&article_id=13058)

Cool beans...eh? :cool:

-z

PS: IllegalArgument, Glad you liked the book. The only problem I found with it was that some of his footnotes were incomplete....other than that small fault I think it's perhaps one of the most important books I've ever read. It lends an insight to current world events and happenings such as the Iraqi vote, and the democracy movements in Cairo and Beirut. Those who have yet to read it need to hurry up!! ;)

All this 'see I told you so' is just so pig ignorant.

You finally realise, after you read this book, the propping up dictators is a dead end. Yet you still won't acknowledge that the Shah of Iran was the creation of the US, and the movement that defeated him, was the Islamic extremists, who gained a monumental amount of credibility from the event, and still reign in Iran due to his overthrow.

Dubya never mentioned the people of Iraq as the reason for his invasion, over 100,000 have died as a result of that event, and you are quite happy to sit back in the safety of your livingroom and proclaim to the world what a righteous man Dubya is. He scrambles for a fig leaf to save his @**, and he still doesn't even know if this is a winner.

He stirs the pot, and already you are proclaiming Lebanon a winner. Yet when the pot stirring fails, as in the disaster that was Cambodia, it has nothing to do with the USA.

Cherry picking at it's finest.

[Skeptic]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
All this 'see I told you so' is just so pig ignorant.

You finally realise, after you read this book, the propping up dictators is a dead end.

Bush's plan for democracy in the middle east must be doing better than I though.

AUP had already passed from the "Bush's plan for 'democracy' in the middle east is naive idealism and cynical covers for oil interest at the same time" stage, to the "I told you all it will be a quagmire; Bush will run away and appoint a dictator at the same time" stage, and now to the "I was always for the expansion of freedom in the middle east, you know, unlike you stupid people" stage.

Then again, since AUP is a classic case of the "man who is always wrong", perhaps his new-found distaste for propping up dictators and sudden concern for democracy there signals the high point of the democratising point, which will dwindle from now on.

[BPSCG]

Much as I'd like to think otherwise, the outcome in Lebanon is still very much in doubt. David Frum sheds some excellent light on the hard issues behind the encouraging photos:
A fierce confrontation is already emerging in Lebanon, powered by these contending facts:

1) Syria cannot afford to set Lebanon free. Lebanon is by far the wealthiest portion of the Assad family domains, thanks in part to the Syrian-approved drug trade. Possession of Lebanon, which Syrian nationalists regard as a natural part of greater Syria, is also essential ideologically. Finally - and maybe most important - a retreat from Lebanon under American pressure would be interpreted in Syria and throughout the region as a confession of weakness: which is fatal to any dictatorship.

2) On the other hand, if Syria does not now withdraw after the joint American-French demand, it will be the United States that will have confessed weakness - repeating past mistakes in the region and inviting further attacks on American interests and American friends, like Rafiq Hariri.

3) The Syrian policy of covert war against the United States has failed. The Syrian-backed insurgency in Iraq did not drive US troops out of the country or defeat George W. Bush. Instead, it has provoked the US into intensifying its pressure on Syria itself.

4) Syria accordingly now faces a choice of options: Find some way to appease the United States short of true withdrawal from Lebanon - or else move from covert war to an all-out anti-American terror campaign.

5) Appeasement is the logical first strategy. Syria is full of terrorist operatives who can be handed over to the US. As well, Syria can in a pinch agree to withdraw its 15,000 troops from Lebanon. A Syrian troop withdrawal would look like a big concession, but would not much alter the power-dynamic in Lebanon, since Syria controls Lebanon through its intelligence agencies and its penetration of the Lebanese government and cabinet. Better still, a troop withdrawal might give France an excuse to end its uncomfortable association with the Bush administration - short of actually changing anything important in Lebanon.

6) The Bush administration is unlikely to be fooled by an appeasement policy. The joint US-French demand for Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon followed the surrender of Saddam's half-brother. And Condoleezza Rice made clear that both the Syrian troops and Syrian intelligence services must go.

But will the Bush administration press the point if the Syrians seem to meet them half-way? That will be a real moment of testing for the Bush policy. Will the Bush administration hold firm? Will it insist on total withdrawal, including the spy services, on the full restoration of Lebanese sovereignty, and on genuinely free elections in May? If so, expect a furious response from Syria, from its ally Iran, and from the terrorist militias they control inside Lebanon.

Link. (http://www.nationalreview.com/frum/frum-diary.asp)

[Skeptic]

You're quite right, BPSGC, but you're missing the point: what people are celebrating here, as in Iraq, is NOT the fact that Iraq or Lebanon ARE ALREADY in fact free and democratic--they aren't, at least not yet--but that all this gives the lie to the dumb-asses who kept telling us how Arabs don't want / are not ready for / are constitutionally unable to create / etc. a democracy.

This "progressive" viewpoint--Arabs enjoy tyranny because they always lived under it--is essentially the same thing as saying that blacks enjoy slavery because they always lived under it. Lebanon and Iraq disprove it.

[BPSCG]

Originally posted by Skeptic
You're quite right, BPSGC, but you're missing the point: what people are celebrating here, as in Iraq, is NOT the fact that Iraq or Lebanon ARE ALREADY in fact free and democratic--they aren't, at least not yet--but that all this gives the lie to the dumb-asses who kept telling us how Arabs don't want / are not ready for / are constitutionally unable to create / etc. a democracy.

This "progressive" viewpoint--Arabs enjoy tyranny because they always lived under it--is essentially the same thing as saying that blacks enjoy slavery because they always lived under it. Lebanon and Iraq disprove it. I don't disagree with any of the above - except for "you're missing the point."

I'm just saying things can still turn out badly - and will, if we don't help the Lebanese people. People marching in the streets sometimes leads to democracy, but sometimes it leads to tanks in the streets, viz. Tiannamen Square.

Right now, Assad is casting about for ways to salvage the situation. We mustn't allow him one.

[Skeptic]

I don't disagree with any of the above - except for "you're missing the point."

Fair enough. I think we actually are in full agreement on this issue.

Right now, Assad is casting about for ways to salvage the situation. We mustn't allow him one.

All too true.

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
All this 'see I told you so' is just so pig ignorant.

Look, Cleon was the one who told me I had the Martyr's square name change all wrong. I just posted 4 links to prove that I was not lying, dreaming, or whatever Cleon thought I was up to.

You finally realise, after you read this book, the propping up dictators is a dead end. Yet you still won't acknowledge that the Shah of Iran was the creation of the US, and the movement that defeated him, was the Islamic extremists, who gained a monumental amount of credibility from the event, and still reign in Iran due to his overthrow.

Huh?? Clearly I did read Sharansky about 6 weeks ago. Clearly I have changed my opinion. Clearly I did believe that there were "good" dictators...now I know otherwise.

I am not omnipotent AUP, nor have I ever claimed to be. You accuse me of not acknowledging US support of the Shah?? Perhaps, but I don't believe that I've been asked the question here at all. When, or in what thread have I dodged the question of US support of the Shah?

Of course the US supported the Shah...we supported Pinochet... hell, we even supported Saddam! We currently support Musharraf and the Al Sauds. I believe, after reading Sharansky that this support of "useful" dictators is indeed wrong (both morally and politically) and will lead to long term problems for us.

I am not being inconsistent in my position simply because I can cite to you exactly how and why my position has evolved. If you are accusing me of "flip-flopping"...well go ahead! I have nothing to lose. I'm running for no office. My opinion has not changed out of a desire to be all things to all voters...it has changed as a result of open minded examination of the issues coupled with a desire to learn. JREF in general, and you in particular have helped me see how perspective and bias play a roll in political thinking. It's not objective like science and so all perspectives must be examined. I thank you for your role in my personal evolution
(even if your example has been mostly a negative one)...you are the yin to my yang. ;)

Dubya never mentioned the people of Iraq as the reason for his invasion, over 100,000 have died as a result of that event, and you are quite happy to sit back in the safety of your livingroom and proclaim to the world what a righteous man Dubya is. He scrambles for a fig leaf to save his @**, and he still doesn't even know if this is a winner.

I don't think I've done this. I did thank GWB in my last post. I thanked him because the way I see it, it would have been far easier for him to do little or nothing as opposed to the huge risks he took to do what he thought was right. I applaud him for this because it took political courage....such as we have not seen in the White House since RR waved goodbye. Mentioning the dead of Iraq should ring hollow even to your ears. Saddam would have killed as many...and more...and would still be doing so until he died of old age...then his sons, and their sons...where would it end? Would it? How many dead then? How much freedom experienced by Iraqis in the meantime?

He stirs the pot, and already you are proclaiming Lebanon a winner. Yet when the pot stirring fails, as in the disaster that was Cambodia, it has nothing to do with the USA.

I fail to see how you can draw any analogy to Cambodia. Just as the Vietnam/Iraq analogy has always failed so miserably...now instead of admitting you may have been wrong you spin more bogus analogies. May I ask you why you hate America so much? Your hatred has twisted a fine mind, and is leading you to purely emotional and illogical conclusions.

One such was when you told me that if the elections failed the US invasion failed, and if the elections were successful the US invasion still failed. No one is going to take you seriously if you cannot come up with logical assessments of reality. It's really as simple as that. What's become painfully obvious to everyone except you is that your irrational hatred of one nation; the USA, has led you into a willfull blindness to reality.

Cherry picking at it's finest.

Have you read Sharansky yet? If not, aren't you at least a little curious? Read it. Then let's talk.

As far as Bush's change from WMD concerns to freeing the Iraqi people...well read Sharansky!! Sharansky has been pushing his ideas for decades. He only recently found willing ears in power. Clinton also liked Sharansky's ideas, but for some reason did not aggressively champion them. Sharansky has finally found a powerful champion for his theory...GWB. If you look back at Bush's speeches you'll see that he starts sounding very Sharansky-like prior to the invasion of Iraq;

[quote][

[Cleon]

Originally posted by rikzilla
Look, Cleon was the one who told me I had the Martyr's square name change all wrong. I just posted 4 links to prove that I was not lying, dreaming, or whatever Cleon thought I was up to.


Thereby establishing that you really don't have a clue.

There's no name change; this is simply something going on while the protests are happening. (Such "name changes" are pretty common when ongoing protests are occurring. They don't last beyond the protests.)

The reason I pointed out that you don't have a clue as to why it's called Martyr's Square is because you seem to think the name has something to do with Syria. It doesn't. Not a thing.

After all this is over, it will remain Martyr's Square. If it doesn't, that will be a very sad day for Lebanon, whoever wins out.

[Hutch]

Originally posted by Skeptic
This "progressive" viewpoint--Arabs enjoy tyranny because they always lived under it--is essentially the same thing as saying that blacks enjoy slavery because they always lived under it. Lebanon and Iraq disprove it.

Going to have to ask you to substantiate that... "progressive" viewpoint--Arabs enjoy tyranny becuase they have always lived under it.... line with some evidence--unless you want to be like Ed in a previous post and promise to address it and then let the thread drop off the front page...:p ;)


Originally posted by BPSCG
I'm just saying things can still turn out badly - and will, if we don't help the Lebanese people. People marching in the streets sometimes leads to democracy, but sometimes it leads to tanks in the streets, viz. Tiannamen Square.

Concur, I'd also mention the 1848 Revolutions, Hungary in the 1950's and Checzoslovakia in the 1970's. But you say 'help' the Lebanese people--care to expand on that a bit?

Right now, Assad is casting about for ways to salvage the situation. We mustn't allow him one. '

And again, outside of overt military threat, is there any influence we have if Assad decides on stronger measures to stop the Anti-Syrian protests? Unleash Israel? (that is, if they want to be unleashed). Use military assets from Iraq? (More money and blood and even less justification the American public is likely to buy)

Maybe I'm just one of those progressives Skeptic is ranting about above, but I don't think the political equation it is quite as simple as it looks to some--I'm willing to own up if I'm wrong in the long run, but predicting history is like herding cats, as you well know my friend. :)

[Hutch]

Originally posted by Cleon
The reason I pointed out that you don't have a clue as to why it's called Martyr's Square is because you seem to think the name has something to do with Syria. It doesn't. Not a thing.

After all this is over, it will remain Martyr's Square. If it doesn't, that will be a very sad day for Lebanon, whoever wins out.


Cleon, just in case rik is too busy reading from the Book of Schrankzy (sic) to reply, I goggled this info for the rest of us:

Then in 1916 it was given the name Martyr's Square in memory Lebanese nationalists who were executed by the Ottomans. In 1921 the public garden was razed for the construction of the pavilions of the Beirut Fair and in 1925, a new square was planned here in the French style. The square acquired its modern landmark in the 1950's when a monument to the martyrs was erected.

[Cleon]

Originally posted by Hutch
Cleon, just in case rik is too busy reading from the Book of Schrankzy (sic) to reply, I goggled this info for the rest of us:

That's pretty accurate. I was trying to make the point that Rikzilla is less concerned about historical accuracy, and more concerned about propaganda memes (like calling it "Freedom Square" to "keep up with the times").

There was a pretty major uprising against the Ottomans in the area, encompassing Lebanon, parts of Syria, Palestine, and Jordan. The leaders were hanged in Beirut.

[rikzilla]

I had more to add to my last post but alas experience imminent computer failure....so was lucky to get a post out at all....

I'll respond to any comments to my last post when I can...but for now shaky electronics are screwing me up.....

-z

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by Cleon
Thereby establishing that you really don't have a clue.

There's no name change; this is simply something going on while the protests are happening. (Such "name changes" are pretty common when ongoing protests are occurring. They don't last beyond the protests.)

The reason I pointed out that you don't have a clue as to why it's called Martyr's Square is because you seem to think the name has something to do with Syria. It doesn't. Not a thing.

After all this is over, it will remain Martyr's Square. If it doesn't, that will be a very sad day for Lebanon, whoever wins out.

Where did I say it was a permanent name change? You were the one accusing me of making things up....I proved you decisively and objectively WRONG. Then you merely ignored my posting till now.

It is you who have no clue,...or is it that you have no integrity??

I'm not the one "coming up with propaganda memes"...I quoted directly from a Lebanese source....anyone with a mouse can go back and check.

-z

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by Cleon
That's pretty accurate. I was trying to make the point that Rikzilla is less concerned about historical accuracy, and more concerned about propaganda memes (like calling it "Freedom Square" to "keep up with the times").



I will remind everyone exactly where I got this, ahem, "propaganda meme" (http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=2&article_id=13058)
Quoted from the Daily Star (Lebanon):BEIRUT: Tens of thousands of protesters calling for the government's resignation had their voices finally heard when Prime Minister Omar Karami handed in his resignation and left behind him a Lebanon crazed with cheers of victory. "We did it, united we got our Lebanon back, free of Syrian poison!" shouted John Marri, who was feverishly waving the Lebanese flag along with thousands of others in Martyrs' Square, or what is now called, "Freedom Square."

So, tell me again about propaganda memes....

:rolleyes:

-z

[Cleon]

Originally posted by rikzilla
Where did I say it was a permanent name change? You were the one accusing me of making things up....I proved you decisively and objectively WRONG.

Wrong about what, exactly? That you have (had, assuming you read Hutch's post) no idea why it was called Martyr's Square? Nope, didn't prove me wrong there. In fact, you didn't even address it.

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by Cleon
Wrong about what, exactly? That you have (had, assuming you read Hutch's post) no idea why it was called Martyr's Square? Nope, didn't prove me wrong there. In fact, you didn't even address it.

You make yourself look more stupid and pedantic with every post. I merely said that the name was changed (in keeping with the times) you accused me of not knowing why the name was "Martyr's square"...which really has nothing in particular to do with what I posted. It was in effect a derail.

This whole confrontation is a derail, and you are an ass.

How 'bout you start another thread if you have a burning desire to f**k with me, and let this one go back to topic???

-z

[Cleon]

So what, exactly, did you prove me "decisively and objectively WRONG" about?

(BTW, you might not want to post when you're having a fit. It doesn't reflect well on you.)

[BPSCG]

Originally posted by Hutch
Concur, I'd also mention the 1848 Revolutions, Hungary in the 1950's and Checzoslovakia in the 1970's. But you say 'help' the Lebanese people--care to expand on that a bit?I was thinking along these lines...

http://library.thinkquest.org/17940/texts/images/hbomb.jpg

Nahh, probably upset the bedwetters...

Don't know what all the options are, though it might be useful if we claimed we were having trouble figuring out where the boundary is between Iraq and Syria (all that sand), and destroy a few terrorist havens inside the border. I read somewhere (can't find the source, dammit) that there are a lot of economic pressures we haven't applied yet.

[Jocko]

Originally posted by BPSCG
I was thinking along these lines...

http://library.thinkquest.org/17940/texts/images/hbomb.jpg

Nahh, probably upset the bedwetters...

Don't know what all the options are, though it might be useful if we claimed we were having trouble figuring out where the boundary is between Iraq and Syria (all that sand), and destroy a few terrorist havens inside the border. I read somewhere (can't find the source, dammit) that there are a lot of economic pressures we haven't applied yet.

We may not even have to lift a finger. Check dis sh*t (http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/03/03/saudi.syria.ap/index.html) out.

So Iraq opposes, Iran supports, Saudi opposes... is anyone else picturing a John Woo film's climactic showdown scene, with about a dozen guys all pointing guns at someone else' head, waiting to see who flinches?

[Cleon]

On reflection, I realize I was baiting rikzilla and being a jerk. For that, I apologize.

A word of explanation, if I may.

The people that Martyr's Square commemorates were heros in every sense of the word. They were hanged for trying to liberate their peoples from Ottoman rule.

It bothers me, to say the least, to see that commemoration being discarded for the conservative cause du jur. I say that despite the fact that I sympathize and agree with the protestors to a large extent. They want to get foreign occupiers out of their country--more power to 'em.

To me, the situation is analogous to the massive anti-war protests a couple years back. Can you imagine if some people decided, during the course of those protests, to call the Washington Monument the "Peace Monument?" People here would be decrying the audacity--and rightly so! And I say that despite the fact that not did I agree with, hell, I participated in some of those demonstrations. I would still be revolted if such a thing occurred.

Of course, the situation is not identical, merely analogous. The situation in Lebanon is much more volatile--and much more complex than people here want to recognize. My biggest fear right now is that another civil war will break out. That would be disastrous for the Lebanese, no matter who wins.

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by Cleon
On reflection, I realize I was baiting rikzilla and being a jerk. For that, I apologize.
accepted.

please excuse my offensive words to you as well.

A word of explanation, if I may.

The people that Martyr's Square commemorates were heros in every sense of the word. They were hanged for trying to liberate their peoples from Ottoman rule.

It bothers me, to say the least, to see that commemoration being discarded for the conservative cause du jur. I say that despite the fact that I sympathize and agree with the protestors to a large extent. They want to get foreign occupiers out of their country--more power to 'em.

To me, the situation is analogous to the massive anti-war protests a couple years back. Can you imagine if some people decided, during the course of those protests, to call the Washington Monument the "Peace Monument?" People here would be decrying the audacity--and rightly so! And I say that despite the fact that not did I agree with, hell, I participated in some of those demonstrations. I would still be revolted if such a thing occurred.

Of course, the situation is not identical, merely analogous. The situation in Lebanon is much more volatile--and much more complex than people here want to recognize. My biggest fear right now is that another civil war will break out. That would be disastrous for the Lebanese, no matter who wins.

It wasn't "conservatives" that proposed a name change. It was the Lebanese people. Perhaps it was just a temporary and emotional urge,...but American conservatives have nothing to do with it. We merely observe it like everyone else...and applaud it as being indicative of the strength of the feelings of a people who are only just beginning to realise their freedom.

See Cleon, this is not analogous to the Vietnam era "peace" movement in the least. For one the various "peace" movements have never enjoyed majority support. You are mistaking the vocal minority of "useful idiots" for the American majority. They weren't and still aren't. *(please see Nov 2, 2004 for more info)

If a popular majority movement in the USA (or anywhere else for that matter) wished to rename a venerable monument,...then would you not agree that it is their right to do so?

Cleon, what's happening in the Arab world may have been precipitated by the actions of a conservative Republican US president....but it's really neither conservative nor liberal. It's freedom in an embryonic stage. It's an event that transcends the argument entirely.

-z

[Cleon]

Originally posted by rikzilla
accepted.

please excuse my offensive words to you as well.


Done.



It wasn't "conservatives" that proposed a name change. It was the Lebanese people. Perhaps it was just a temporary and emotional urge,...but American conservatives have nothing to do with it. We merely observe it like everyone else...and applaud it as being indicative of the strength of the feelings of a people who are only just beginning to realise their freedom.

See Cleon, this is not analogous to the Vietnam era "peace" movement in the least. For one the various "peace" movements have never enjoyed majority support. You are mistaking the vocal minority of "useful idiots" for the American majority. They weren't and still aren't. *(please see Nov 2, 2004 for more info)

If a popular majority movement in the USA (or anywhere else for that matter) wished to rename a venerable monument,...then would you not agree that it is their right to do so?


Ah, but see, that's exactly my point. During the recent anti-war movement (can't speak for Vietnam, wasn't around at the time), you among others kept pointing out that Bush's approval rating was high--even while hundreds of thousands of people were marching on Washington, NYC, and cities around the country (world as well, but that's beside the point).

In the case of Lebanon, it is not clear that this is a majority sentiment. Pro-Syrian forces are a majority in the Parliament--and this is an elected body, Syrian influence or no.

This is why I keep bringing up the specter of civil war. Lebanon is not united on this question, or any other for that matter. This country is sharply divided along every line you can possibly imagine--ethnically, politically, religiously. Assuming that any one group, no matter how vocal and visible at the moment, speaks for "the people of Lebanon" is a dangerous mistake to make.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Skeptic
You're quite right, BPSGC, but you're missing the point: what people are celebrating here, as in Iraq, is NOT the fact that Iraq or Lebanon ARE ALREADY in fact free and democratic--they aren't, at least not yet--but that all this gives the lie to the dumb-asses who kept telling us how Arabs don't want / are not ready for / are constitutionally unable to create / etc. a democracy.

This "progressive" viewpoint--Arabs enjoy tyranny because they always lived under it--is essentially the same thing as saying that blacks enjoy slavery because they always lived under it. Lebanon and Iraq disprove it.

You make it up as you go along, don't you?

[demon]

Rik:
"The Arabs' Berlin Wall has crumbled
Mark Steyn puts the current events in the Arab world into context"

Steyn:
"But some of us - notably US deputy defence secretary Paul Wolfowitz - thought things would go a lot better than that. Wolfowitz was right, and so was Bush, and the Left, who were wrong about the Berlin Wall, were wrong again, the only difference being that this time they were joined in the dunce's corner of history by far too many British Tories. No surprise there. The EU's political establishment doesn't trust its own people, so why would they trust anybody else's? Bush trusts the American people, and he's happy to extend the same courtesy to the Iraqi people, the Syrian people, the Iranian people, etc.

Prof Glenn Reynolds, America's Instapundit, observes that "democratisation is a process, not an event". Far too often, it's treated like an event: ship in the monitors, hold the election, get it approved by Jimmy Carter and the UN, and that's it. Doesn't work like that. What's happening in the Middle East is the start of a long-delayed process. Eight million Iraqis did more for the Arab world on January 30 than 7,000 years of Mubarak-pace marching."


The bombing of Baghdad has changed the mood of the Middle East, I wouldn`t deny that. Why? Well crudely put it`s the "You're next" fear.
Steyn, like yourself is celebrating the efficacy of state terrorism as a political tool here. Is Damascus not literally terrorised by what it has seen in Iraq?

We have yet to see any democracy in Iraq or a government capable of representing its people...what we can see however, is that there is no security and plans to establishment of 16 permanent US military bases in which the people of Iraq have no choice. An active insurgency that claims dozens of lives every day. Indisciminate bombing by the occupiers that kills dozens. Murder, torture and rape are still routinely used by US authorities despite the Abu Ghraib show that it was cleaning its hands. A large part of the population is suffering from PTSD brought about by the invasion. The events in Lebanon and Syria are unconnected to the events in Iraq except that they are caused directly by US-Israeli agitation in those countries in an attempt to destabilise the Assad reshime so that Israel can meet its own strategic objectives. There is no mysterious pro-democracy "wind of change". The people of the middle east would love to have democracy so that they could show two fingers to the corrupt imperialists that are bent on destroying their home and stealing their resources. I don't see any sign of that happening any time soon.

Steyn, like a lot of others seems to regards this as a game where tens of thousands of lives are expendable as long as the cause is "noble". War crimes are only committed by others not our armies according to these disciples of western political thought. Who decides what is noble? Did anybody ask the people of Iraq if the war was noble. Just because a few thousand people demonstrate in Lebanon for withdrawl of Syrian troops, that makes it OK to murder tnes of thousands of Iraqi's in retrospect? I fear an epidemic of this insane attitude.

Those who argue that this delusory "democracy and freedom" in Iraq was costly of human lives but tis the cause, the cause....
Too costly maybe? Yes "we" can argue the toss in passing judgement from our lofty, Western moral high ground. We are obviously qualified to make that judgement. We can argue that the 9-11 attacks were too costly in human lives - but, you know, it's arguable.

Vastly wealthy journalists in their London and New York offices can carefully balance the incinerated babies against the gains. "What do you think?" "Hmm, not sure, it's arguable - it's 60,000 incinerated people, 40,000 blasted beyond recognition. It's hard to say."

We could also argue that it's an obscenity, a vast war crime comitted by Bush and his Neocon Murder Ink. We have the Nurumberg rulings to support us here.

Incidently, one of the things I most admire about Mark Steyn is how he never lets facts stand in the way of a good rant - I'm not sure how Ba'athism and Pan-Arabism led to 9/11 but I guess it's so self evident Steyn doesn't need to offer any evidence. In Justin Raimondo's glorious phrase "G.W. Bush's sock puppets are hailing their own hallucinations". Interesting that Steyn thinks 'Little Green Footballs' is a worthwhile site since it must be one of the nastiest, most rascist around.

Here's Juan Cole with a slightly different take on events in Lebanon:

"Walid Jumblatt, the embittered son of Kamal whom the Syrians defeated in 1976 at the American behest, said he was inspired by the fall of Saddam. But this sort of statement from a Druze warlord strikes me as just as manipulative as the news conferences of Ahmed Chalabi, who is also inspired by Saddam's fall. Jumblatt has a long history of anti-Israeli and anti-American sentiment that makes his sudden conversion to neoconservatism likely a mirage. He has wanted the Syrians to back out since 1976, so it is not plausible that anything changed for him in 2003."

[demon]

We'll see how effective demonstrations are at getting Israel out of Lebanon after the inevitable invasion.

The cedars of Lebanon, drinking all that water that would be so much better off being diverted to Israel. Once Syria withdraws, it'll be a matter of months before there's a manufacutured incident or series of incidents to bring about an Israeli attack and occupation. Then we'll be able to test the "wind of change" thesis - see how effective the Colour (and Tree) revolutions are at bringing about an Israeli withdrawal. See how effective putting thousands of Lebanese on the streets is then.

[Cleon]

I wanted to give this thread a slight bump because right now, CNN is covering a massive pro-Syrian rally in Beirut (link (http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/03/08/lebanon.syria/index.html)).

This proves my point; Lebanon is much more divided on the question than conservatives are making it out to be. It's a mistake to think either of these crowds speaks for the "Lebanese people" simply because we may sympathize with that particular demonstration.

Syria is pulling back, but things in Lebanon could get very bad very quickly.