FRIHOST • FORUMS • FAQ • TOS • BLOGS • DIRECTORY
You are invited to Log in or Register a Frihost Account!

What the hell is happening in Lebanon (Protests In Beirut)

   Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Discuss World News
 


theLOGANhole
They are still protesting for the government to stand down, and they want the Hezbollah government to take control of the senate.

Does anyone know if this is a majority of the population or a small minority.

What I read so far is that it is destroying the economy...Does anyone have any other insight to the situation.....

Some info from article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6162941.stm

""The protesters are vowing to stay put until the Western-backed government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora resigns.

The city centre has taken on the air of a permanent carnival, with tents set up for the protestors to sleep in and maintain a round-the-clock presence. ""
ibay
With the kind of confrontation they had with Israel this summer, this was expected as a result (or consequence?) of that. A civil war is also expected in Lebanon.

Last edited by ibay on Fri Sep 19, 2008 9:32 am; edited 1 time in total
palavra
theLOGANhole wrote:

Does anyone know if this is a majority of the population or a small minority.



nearly 30% of the population supports this event.
bangala
theLOGANhole wrote:
They are still protesting for the government to stand down, and they want the Hezbollah government to take control of the senate.

Does anyone know if this is a majority of the population or a small minority.

What I read so far is that it is destroying the economy...Does anyone have any other insight to the situation.....

Some info from article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6162941.stm

""The protesters are vowing to stay put until the Western-backed government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora resigns.

The city centre has taken on the air of a permanent carnival, with tents set up for the protestors to sleep in and maintain a round-the-clock presence. ""

It's a bit complicated. Lebanon has a unique type of democracy that was tailored to it by the French during their occupation. According to the Lebanese constitution, the government cannot be formed without participation of major constituents of the Lebanese soscity: ie. Sunni Muslims, Shiite Muslims, and Christians. The Shiites were not happy with the performance of the present government during its war with Israel, so they resigned. Therefore, according to the constitution, the present government is illegal and should resign immediately to allow for another one to be formed. Another point raised by the opposition is about the international court which is to be formed to investigate the recent assasinations in Lebanon. According to the opposition, the government should have consulted the president before forming the court. The pro government forces, however, do not approve the present president and are avoiding any contacts with him.
bangala
palavra wrote:
theLOGANhole wrote:

Does anyone know if this is a majority of the population or a small minority.



nearly 30% of the population supports this event.

It's hard to decide about the figure but it's definitely more than 30%.
Remember that the Shiites, who are the major force within the opposition, are around 40% of Lebanon. Other forces that are part of the opposition include Sunnis and Christians as well.
palavra
bangala wrote:
palavra wrote:
theLOGANhole wrote:

Does anyone know if this is a majority of the population or a small minority.



nearly 30% of the population supports this event.

It's hard to decide about the figure but it's definitely more than 30%.
Remember that the Shiites, who are the major force within the opposition, are around 40% of Lebanon. Other forces that are part of the opposition include Sunnis and Christians as well.

but some shiite groups do not support hizbullah.
S3nd K3ys
From what I can gather, hesbollah has duped that "30%" of people into thinking hesbollah has the people's better interest in mind, instead of their obsession with destroying Israel and Western Civilization.

They prolly stepped in with bread or something at a time of need and faked those poor people into thinking they were actually going to protect them, when in reality they will be using them for shields.

How sad indeed!
bangala
palavra wrote:
bangala wrote:
palavra wrote:
theLOGANhole wrote:

Does anyone know if this is a majority of the population or a small minority.



nearly 30% of the population supports this event.

It's hard to decide about the figure but it's definitely more than 30%.
Remember that the Shiites, who are the major force within the opposition, are around 40% of Lebanon. Other forces that are part of the opposition include Sunnis and Christians as well.

but some shiite groups do not support hizbullah.

You are right. Howeever, the only Shiite groups in Lebanon are Hizbullah and Amal and they are now both part of the opposition, as Shiites are the main sector that suffered during the recent war with Israel. Moreover, there are some individual Shiites that are active in other parties like the communists and the Arab nationals for example. Communists and Arab nationals are now demonstrating against the present government as well BTW.
palavra
who support mostly the present government?

-usa?
-french?
-israil?
bangala
palavra wrote:
who support mostly the present government?

-usa?
-french?
-israil?


USA, UK, and France had already declared their support to the present government. This support, however, is part of the problem. During the recent war with Israel, USA and UK supported Israel against Lebanon. The opposition criticized the present government for siding with Americans and British who were supporting a war against Lebanon. During that war, the US administration encouraged Israel to invade South Lebanon. Morever, the American representative rejected a resolution from the UN Security councel for a ceasefire. As a result, the present government was weakened further by their American friends and lost the support of the national and left groups in the country.
As for Israel, you cannot really say that it supports the present government. However, if they had the choice, they would difinitely favor it over the other side.
In addition to UK, France, and the US, Saudi Arabia, Joran, and Egypt have also declared thier support to the present government.
Moonspider
bangala wrote:
palavra wrote:
who support mostly the present government?

-usa?
-french?
-israil?


USA, UK, and France had already declared their support to the present government. This support, however, is part of the problem. During the recent war with Israel, USA and UK supported Israel against Lebanon. The opposition criticized the present government for siding with Americans and British who were supporting a war against Lebanon. During that war, the US administration encouraged Israel to invade South Lebanon. Morever, the American representative rejected a resolution from the UN Security councel for a ceasefire. As a result, the present government was weakened further by their American friends and lost the support of the national and left groups in the country.
As for Israel, you cannot really say that it supports the present government. However, if they had the choice, they would difinitely favor it over the other side.
In addition to UK, France, and the US, Saudi Arabia, Joran, and Egypt have also declared thier support to the present government.


I think it wrong to say the U.S. and U.K "supported Israel against Lebanon." That is a misrepresentation of the facts. The United States and Britain did not support Israel against Lebanon, because Israel was not at war with Lebanon any more than the United States was at war with Mexico in the early 20th Century when we sent in troops to pursue Pancho Villa. Israel was fighting a sub-national entity inside Lebanon that was attacking Israel, a sub-national entity supported by states hostile to Israel (and the government of Lebanon IMHO) which the Lebanese government has not the power to control (or destroy, as they should be as a political entity, once again IMHO.)

The United States and the United Kingdom supported Israel's war against Hezbollah.

The Lebanese government was right to side against Hezbollah because that group is a threat to the Lebanese constitution, IMHO.

Respectfully,
M
bangala
Moonspider wrote:
I think it wrong to say the U.S. and U.K "supported Israel against Lebanon." That is a misrepresentation of the facts. The United States and Britain did not support Israel against Lebanon, because Israel was not at war with Lebanon any more than the United States was at war with Mexico in the early 20th Century when we sent in troops to pursue Pancho Villa. Israel was fighting a sub-national entity inside Lebanon that was attacking Israel, a sub-national entity supported by states hostile to Israel (and the government of Lebanon IMHO) which the Lebanese government has not the power to control (or destroy, as they should be as a political entity, once again IMHO.)

The United States and the United Kingdom supported Israel's war against Hezbollah.

The Lebanese government was right to side against Hezbollah because that group is a threat to the Lebanese constitution, IMHO.

Respectfully,
M

I was not stating my openion, but facts! American themselves were publicly supporting Israel in that war. Ms Con Rice described the war as a birth of a new ME. In fact Americans were more enthusiastic for this war than Israelis themselves.
Hizbullah was part of the present government and they were both in a war with Israel. The Lebanese government complained to the UN to stop Israel's invasion but the US rejected this complain. Hizbullah was part of the Lebanese government and they were both defending their country. After war, however, situation has changed and Hizbullah accused the government of its bad performence during the war.
Moonspider
bangala wrote:
Moonspider wrote:
I think it wrong to say the U.S. and U.K "supported Israel against Lebanon." That is a misrepresentation of the facts. The United States and Britain did not support Israel against Lebanon, because Israel was not at war with Lebanon any more than the United States was at war with Mexico in the early 20th Century when we sent in troops to pursue Pancho Villa. Israel was fighting a sub-national entity inside Lebanon that was attacking Israel, a sub-national entity supported by states hostile to Israel (and the government of Lebanon IMHO) which the Lebanese government has not the power to control (or destroy, as they should be as a political entity, once again IMHO.)

The United States and the United Kingdom supported Israel's war against Hezbollah.

The Lebanese government was right to side against Hezbollah because that group is a threat to the Lebanese constitution, IMHO.

Respectfully,
M

I was not stating my openion, but facts! American themselves were publicly supporting Israel in that war. Ms Con Rice described the war as a birth of a new ME. In fact Americans were more enthusiastic for this war than Israelis themselves.
Hizbullah was part of the present government and they were both in a war with Israel. The Lebanese government complained to the UN to stop Israel's invasion but the US rejected this complain. Hizbullah was part of the Lebanese government and they were both defending their country. After war, however, situation has changed and Hizbullah accused the government of its bad performence during the war.


I'll stand by my opinion. I don't think any member of the Lebanese armed forces ever fired a shot at Israeli forces or territory. I'm not saying the United States did not support Israel, they did. So I am not disputing that at all and sorry if it sounded as if I was. I'm simply of the opinion that there was technically not a war between the state of Lebanon and the state of Israel. That is why I used the United States' pursuit of Pancho Villa as an analogy.

The United States supports Lebanon. And that is also why I believe it wrong to say that the U.S. and U.K. "supported Israel against Lebanon." The U.S. wants the democratic government of Lebanon to survive. However, the U.S. does not support Hezbollah. They are terrorists, as their actions have demonstrated, and a severe threat to the government of Lebanon.

Thus, I think it would have been more accurate to state, "the U.S. and U.K. supported Israel against Hezbollah."

Respectfully,
M
bangala
Moonspider wrote:
I'll stand by my opinion. I don't think any member of the Lebanese armed forces ever fired a shot at Israeli forces or territory. I'm not saying the United States did not support Israel, they did. So I am not disputing that at all and sorry if it sounded as if I was. I'm simply of the opinion that there was technically not a war between the state of Lebanon and the state of Israel. That is why I used the United States' pursuit of Pancho Villa as an analogy.

The United States supports Lebanon. And that is also why I believe it wrong to say that the U.S. and U.K. "supported Israel against Lebanon." The U.S. wants the democratic government of Lebanon to survive. However, the U.S. does not support Hezbollah. They are terrorists, as their actions have demonstrated, and a severe threat to the government of Lebanon.

Thus, I think it would have been more accurate to state, "the U.S. and U.K. supported Israel against Hezbollah."

Respectfully,
M


I'm sorry for my late response!
Please notice that you are still ignoring two facts here and I'm going to re-emphasize them again:
(1) Hizbullah was part of the government and his ministers were attending the government meetings during that war.
(2) The Lebanese government (not Hizbullah) complained to the UN against Israel invasion and USA used its veto to stop a UN ceasfire.

Quote:

I don't think any member of the Lebanese armed forces ever fired a shot at Israeli forces or territory.

This has been the case for long time, even when Syria was ruling Lebanon. It's simply because the weak lebanese army cannot be compared at all with the Israeli's powerful army. For decades, Israel has been fighting with guerillas only, such as communists, nationalists, and islamists. This doesn't indicate at all that the Lebanese government is not concerned about a fight that's going on in its land.
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Discuss World News

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2007 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.