Thursday, January 04, 2007
Dangerous overconfidence
The situation is alarming; there is little doubt about that. But every time I have a conversation with supporter of Hezbollah or its allies they have the same confident reaction: There will be no civil war.
I usual ask why, and I receive different replies, most of them unconvincing, like “the situation is not that dire, no one wants a civil war”, or the usual who against whom. If I insist on finding out the true reason, my interlocutor usually explains that there will be no civil war because no can stand against Hezbollah, and if the party of God really wanted to start a war it will be over in 5 minutes…
Overconfidence is very dangerous, especially in these situations. In this case it is overconfidence, because Nassrallah or at least his supporters are (once again) making the same mistakes Israel made in the last war: being overconfident of their own strengthen and underestimating their enemy.
Let me elaborate, this overconfidence of Hezbollah’s power compared to the rest of the Lebanese faction (potential military) strength stems from several factors: Hezbollah’s tactics, arms and experience.
Concerning the tactics aspect, Hezbollah (using guerilla warfare tactics and organization with modern arms) excels in a war against a regular army. However, against another guerilla these advantages will disappear, and civil wars are by definition fought between guerillas…
The same caveat also applies to the arm advantage. And anyways there are many “good doers” in the world, who would be more than happy to provide all Lebanese factions with any weapons they want overnight.
Regarding the experience aspect, I agree this is an advantage, but that factor does not significantly change the balance of power; at least not to the point that Hezbollah will be able to wrap up the battle in a few days of weeks. Throughout history many factions embarked on a civil war claiming their ability to rapidly reach conclusion, finding themselves years later still stuck in the same swap of death. (the example of the Palestinian-Kamla Joumblatt-leftist Lebanese coalition who made this mistake in 1975)
Hezbollah overconfidence is dangerous because it is based on false assumption, and because it will render the opposition blind to many pitfalls and potential clashes that might arise from their constant protests and possible future escalations.
Finally, this whole deadlock will not end until both parties are convinced that their actions will definitely lead to a civil war. Until then both parties will keep on raising the stakes, hoping to ensure the highest political gain.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
28 comments :
As always, over confidence or not, a civil war is always a bad thing.
Especially, since Lebanon is a main theater(along with Iraq and Palestine) in the Iranian Mullahs' play "How many bombs does it take to bring back the 12th Imam?" starring Ahmen Nijad, Nassrallah, Al-Sadr, and whoever hasn't been killed yet in the Hamas "government".
I'm wondering if patiently waiting them out for a few more months wouldn't be the best tonic to the situation.
To see what I mean, I'd suggest strolling over to http://www.iranpressnews.com/english/
for some cheerful news on the horizon.
Among the latest news from this Persian dissident site, you'll find a story with definitive proof of Iranian financial and armed support of both Shia and Sunni militants in Iraq against one another, namely the Iranian involvement in the Shiite Sammarah Mosque bombing back in Feb'06 which lit the fire to the current explosive sectarian strife in the country which is of particular concern as to how far the HA parent company has gone to instigate regional violence.
Along with this piece of news pretty much forcing every reluctant Western ally to take full and sober notice to the fact that Iran, after decades, can no longer go unchecked in it's pursuit of destruction, you'll find evidence of societal discontent growing by the day.
The stories that provide the most encouragement for the "waiting it out"
strategy being successful are 1) The letter of further protest by the student protesters who publicly took on Ahmen Nijad at the Poly Technic campus last month, 2) The story of Iran pledging one billion in aid to Iraq coupled with 3) the fact that in the midst of the Mullahs massive spending efforts abroad, 5.4 million Iranians (close to 8% of the population) lives on $1(US) a day, surviving only on rations of bread and yogurt [Source: Pres. Ahmen Nijad's own first deputy in a recent speech]
This is an obvious volatile mix with an escalation in lavish spending abroad and more and more repression, confinement, and poverty at home.
Similar circumstances led to the Shah's deposal in '79(although the Shah didn't spend nearly as much even when adjusted for inflation, and it was spent mostly on himself and his inner circle).
An authoritarian Iran devoured by it's people seeking freedom would leave HA without financial and military support. They wouldn't last a minute now that their big bad Iranian paymaster had been incapacitated. Syria would also be rendered harmless, since Iran is the only thing keeping Assad's government on life support.
I agree with the "over confidence" appraisal of HA on several fronts.
Within Lebanon, they haven't made much of a case for HA being more than a thorn in peoples' sides outside the poor Shiite communities (and I understand they don't garner a great deal of support from the affluent Shiite, either).
Another thing HA is overconfident in is it's "victory" against Israel. HA was up against a group of "hippy" leaders, more concerned with TV cameras than a strategic victory(successful military campaigns don't work well when you warn the enemy an hour or two in advance where you plan to bomb, send troops, etc.).
Whether a change in strategy would have led to more or less loss of civilian life is a matter of speculation, but HA would've sustained a far greater blow (although Nassrallah would have stayed safe hiding out in the Iranian embassy).
The point is, as mentioned by others, the "War Hawks" are back in charge in the Israeli government/military, and they've upgraded some things.
For starters, Katyushas aren't going to be nearly as big a threat the next go around. The US recently completed successful tests on a short range missile defense system designed particularly for rockets such as the Katyusha, that have a 10 mile or less radius.
The defense system is pretty clever. Instead of trying to pinpoint and hit the incoming missile/rocket(extremely difficult to do), it instead fires a cluster of explosive shrapnel in the missiles' flight vicinity wiping it out in a fog of fragmentary debris capable of piercing the Katyusha's solid steel exterior.
As far as speculation, I'm guessing they've analyzed the remnants of some of the C-102's HA(Iranian Republican Guard)'s fired against them in the summer war and deciphered how to defeat the RF-jamming device/frequency that allowed the missiles to go undetected as they struck targets such as that one Israeli blockade ship.
I'm also guessing they've gone back to the drawing board on how to deal with guerrilla fighters.
So, HA's advantage may have shrunken considerably as far as the Israeli front goes, in addition to the Lebanese one.
It's also blatantly obvious you would have full and tacit support of "good do-ers" at a moments notice if you asked for it.
You've been accused of being too cozy with Western governments for so long, you might as well reap some of the rewards of such a relationship.
And because the West has so many military units preoccupied in other regions, I'm sure they'd even let you do all the fighting, meaning a full ownership of the victory for yourselves instead of having the bruised ego that France continues to lug around to this day from the constant fact that they always need others to fight for them.
But again, I hope there is an alternative to the fight, there's definitely a great storm brewing and the fewer caught up in it, the better. But, again, I'm not on the ground, and can't get a true feel for the atmosphere.
Regardless, whatever the path, I'm confident the supporters of March 14th will ultimately prevail.
Bob I agree that many Lebanese are overconfident, many Lebanese but not Hezbollah. I don't know why you focus on this party. Let me challenge this part of your argument (Hezbollah's overconfidence) by pointing out that Hassan Nasrallah said (indeed underlined time and again) in his speeches that everybody would loose in a civil war, he even said in one of his speeches that "no party in Lebanon can win over another one in a civil war".
But again I don't know why this focus. The civil war started when they didn't exist. It is raging in Iraq where there is no Hezbollah but US interference and Palestine where there is no Hezbollah but US interference, in Afghanistan where there is no Hezbollah but US interference. The culprit is not Hezbollah but US interference to try to prevent any power to emerge in the Middle East except israel.
But to give you a different take on your main subject here I wouldn't say that a civil war can not start (indeed the US and israel will do their utmost to cause a civil war because they are failing to disarm the resistance) what I would say is something else:
The Lebanese opposition including Hezbollah will not START a civil war. La est toute la nuance mon ami et elle est de taille.
Sam
You know that no one starts a civil war. It just happens, out of overconfidence, out of small mistakes and most importantly out of a suffocating climate of escalating tension and mutual accusations that leads to hate and division.
Now let me correct a few facts. HA was not created at the start of the civil war, but they played a big role from 82 onwards. And contrary to their own propaganda dwelt into inter-fighting many times ( their famous war with their current allies Amal in 85-86, in Beirut, the Bekka and the south that caused many casualties, you have also their scuffles with the communist party and with the Palestinians…)
Concerning their overconfidence, just try to speak with some of their supporters in Lebanon and bring out the subject of civil war.
And finally although they say that they will not start a civil war. But all their actions, rhetoric and accusations are leading us to one. Et c’est la la vraie difference!
Mike
Change is coming to Iran, but it will take a long time. And I fear that once they have the bombe it will be harder to reach that democratic change.
And I am all for the waiting out strategy. But I think that the more they feel helpless the more violent they will get…
Meanwhile we have a battle in Lebanon that will determine its fate for decades to come. And although I share your confidence that we will prevail I fear the cost, or as they say “the butcher’s bill”
Bob, in the art of war, supposing that Hizbullah wanted to take military control over north beirut and keserwan, do you think that building a "barage" or a defensive wall of fire against him is effective? some might argue that it is not, and that the best way is to let him walk in freely then start the resistance after he settles in! shou awlak?
I know the scenario is far fetched but who knows...
P.S thank you for the support!
Bob,
In fact I'll go even further. Not only HA will not start a civil war, it will not participate in it.
Like Hassan N. said "You can kill a thousand Hammoud we will not respond".
But again you are focusing on HA and I don't know why. Is HA in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in Palestine?
YOU are the one that found the parallels with the Lebanese case (and you were right) I'm amazed you don't see the immediate logical conclusion: it is not a HA problem!
I'm not HA and I'm against this government and I will not participate to any civil war (to the extent of self defense).
Here let me comment on your:
"And I am all for the waiting out strategy. But I think that the more they feel helpless the more violent they will get…"
You are ytotally reversing the roles man.
This applies to the zionist entity and its proxies who are repeatedly getting helpless and violent, not to Iran. When is the last time Iran attacked anybody?
On the opposite, despite being attacked time and again, it is getting more and more democratic, more and more developped and technological and that is exactly why the neo-cons are afraid of it: it will become a model of technological and industrial development, power in the region precisely BECAUSE their leadership is independant from foreign interference and dedicated to their interests.
اقر رئيس وزراء العدو ايهود اولمرت في مقابلة مع صحيفة رومانية نقلها الموقع الالكتروني لصحيفة يديعوت احرنوت، ان الامين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصرالله هو اشجع رجل في العالم، ولا يهاب شيئا ويعمل للمستقبل بشكل شجاع ومحنك
Sam, so following HA logic, Hassan Nassrallah is a traitor and should be decapitated... isn't this what they do if a name of any of 14 march figures comes across ANY jew tongue???
SAM
Iran is getting more and more democratic????
where do you get your info?
try reading about what is happening to the Ahouaz Arabs! It is almost ethnic cleansing.
And what about Ali Khameni (who is not elected by the people) almost limitless power and veto abilities. What about his direct control over the Revolutionary Guard outside the government control? Should i go on?
Personally i am in contact with an Iranian dissent and maybe you should hear what he says about democracy in Iran and all the restriction he is faced...
I focus on HA and Iran because in my opinion they are the cause of most of the problems in Lebanon and the region at the moment...
Peace
Bob,
>>Iran is getting more and more democratic?
Absolutely, there are elections on local and national levels. It is far from being perfect but yes they came a long way since the US supported dictator-emperor Shah and are definetly on the right track.
>>And what about Ali Khamenei (who
>>is not elected by the people)
The Iranian supreme council has the exact same role as the supreme court in the US. The Supreme court is not elected either does that mean the US is not democratic.
>>Should i go on?
Please do!
>>I focus on HA and Iran because
>>in my opinion they are the cause
>>of most of the problems in
>>Lebanon and the region at the
>>moment...
Oh yeah? Lebanon's problems started in 1975 (some would say since 1943 but I won't go there)
long long before HA existed.
The real problem in my opinion is the constant US interference in our affairs in particular and the Middle East in general.
The main problem in the region is the zionist entity.
No justice no peace
To MMM,
What is a jew tongue?
Sam
quick correction: the supreme court in the US is elected by the people as the president nominate the judge and the Senate (the people representatives) vote to agree or refuse the nomination.
while in Iran only top clerics elect the supreme council.
Big difference. And there is many more but as you are picking and choosing from my answers (you totally ignored the points i raised in my last comment "what is happening to the Ahouaz Arabs! It is almost ethnic cleansing." And "What about his direct control over the Revolutionary Guard outside the government control")
So before I go one plz answer all the points I raised!
>>the president nominate the judge and the Senate (the people representatives) vote to agree or refuse the nomination.
In this case Iran is MORE democratic since the leader is chosen by the Council of Experts, the members of which are elected by the DIRECT vote of the people (not representatives like the US)
>>what is happening to the Ahouaz Arabs
Nothing compared to the native indians in the US not only in th past but today!
Nothing compared to the Palestinians!
Plus there is no link: many democracies went "almost ethnic cleansing" unfortunetly.
>>What about his direct control over the Revolutionary Guard outside the government control?
What does that have to do with democracy? it is a different system that's all.
When the leader (chosen by directly elected people) changes he is the new head of the guard, what's the problem?
At least Iran has a constitution unlike the zionist entity (because it would be forced to specify different rights for jews and non-jews)
Another one Bob? I'm ready!
Again the democracy in Iran is far from perfect (press freedom...) but it is a process you don't become a perfect democracy overnight. It took France 200 years to have the system it has today and it is still not perfect, in Lebanon we started 70 years ago and we still have a lot to do, they started 20 years ago while been attacked by the US and its allies.
Here, let me point out that you didn't seem bothered by the horrific pro-US dictatorships across the Middle East.
You didn't seem bothered by the US invading countries it wants in the Middle East or threatening people and countries that don't agree with them even when democratic. You didn't seem bothered by the ethnic cleansing of the palestinians that were 97% of historical Palestine at our doors but you seem concerned by the 3% arabs of Ahouaz that are not facing a fraction of zionist cruelty. You didn't seem bothered by the bloody Shah dictatorship.
You didn't seem bothered by zionists occupying others' lands (including Lebanon!!) or putting in prison around 300 hundred women and children!
No, for you all the problem is Iran and you're trying to do "la fine bouche" on its burgeoning democracy.
Give me a break man... people...
Sam,
Is the history text you study from "fill in the blank"?
>>Iran is getting more and more democratic?
The period of increased democracy in Iran, such as the local elections you cited, were put in place during Khatami and Rafsjani presidencies from the mid 90's to the early 2000's until around 2001-2003 when the reformists (Khatami's faction) failed to implement the true reformsit agenda in the face of the consertive and hardline factions which culminated in Ahmen Nijad's "election" by about 15% of the electorate.
Since 2005, Iran under the hardliners has become INCREASINGLY UNDEMOCRATIC. As I've stated in previous posts on this subject, the Guardian Council decides who is even allowed to run, removing 1,000's of names from the ballots, and they also have final authority on who, even if elected by the people, is even allowed to take office.
>>Should i go on?(Iran UN-democracy examples)
Allow me.
Among ignoring the peoples demands for the money being spent on HA in Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and South America; Sunni and Shiite militias in Iraq; Hamas in Palestine; and jihadis in Somalia(that have just been wiped out thanks to the Ethiopian military) which should actually be going to the Iranian people to help bail out there failing economy, combat inflation, homelessness, prostitution, drug addiction, etc. the mullah regime's Plutocracy (rule by the strong) has extended increasingly into the daily lives of the Iranian people.
Recent authoritarian actions in the "Second Cultural Revolution" taking place now include:
Students being suspended and expelled throughout the university system for their support of human rights, women's rights, democratic reforms, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and so on.
A special plain clothed police force that goes around confiscating cell phones to inspect and erase any content deemed un-Islamic or a threat to the regime.
Another special task force has been setup to keep women from wearing bright colors or any other forms of un-Islamic dress.
There are plenty of archives/news reports/first hand accounts of this sort of thing going on right now. So much so, I'm curious as to what sources you've been looking up that provide you with this "rosy" view of things in Iran.
"dictator-emperor Shah."
Arresting dissenters left and right, wiping out Iranian Kurds, Arabs, Afghan immigrants, appointing unqualified chronies to head major industries, purging professors from university's and replacing them, too, with cronies, squandering Iranian oil wealth on domestic and foreign military programs, all the while the people go unemployed, poverty stricken, and drug addicted in massive amounts, what are the Iranian Mullahs doing that makes them so different from the most brutal and oppressive dictators and emperors in history?
>>And what about Ali Khamenei (who
>>is not elected by the people)
You keep citing the US Supreme Court's 2000 decision to end the time given for additional recounts of the Florida ballots(since about 5 had already taken place, all confirming Bush as the winner) following 2 months of still not knowing who actually won the presidency between Bush and Gore.
The job of the US Supreme Court in that situation was to interpret the US Constitution's view of such a situation along with relying on US historical precedent, which there actually was.
A nearly identical case of "too close to call" took place in the 1880's with the eventual election of President Rutherford B. Hayes which came after 4 months of indecision.
This is the statute the US Supreme Court used as precedent to rule the way they did in 2000. Your attempt at comparing the Iranian Council of Experts' gerrymandering to the US Supreme Court's "deciding an election" (as you've interpreted it) only once in the over 200 years of American History(Congress decided the President Rutherford election) is simply BEYOND REACHING to make a comparison.
>>the president nominate the judge and the Senate
In Iran: (">"=elect)
People>Council of Experts>Supreme Guide
In US: (">"=elect)
People>Senate>Supreme Court Justices that are nominated by the President
The GIGANTIC difference is that the US Supreme Court is made up of nine judges that pass rulings in a majority which can appealed and reviewed later on.
The Supreme Court can only interpret the US Constitution and the value of laws passed by the US Congress(elected by the people), it doesn't set policy and IT DOES NOT HOLD 75% OF THE POWER IN THE COUNTRY LIKE THE "SUPREME GUIDE" DOES IN IRAN!
The US system with it's Legislative, Executive, and Judicial has checks and balances that prevent one from monopolizing power.
Iran has no such system.
>>Nothing compared to the native indians in the US not only in th past but today!
Native Americans (thanks much in part to their status as a sovereign people living on US land) is the wealthiest minority group per capita in the US due much in part to the gambling casinos they set up in states where gambling is illegal. A case in point is that the popular restaurant chain "Rock-Ola" is now owned by the Cherokee nation.
>>Nothing compared to the Palestinians!
If they would stop brainwashing their own people and suicide bombing everyone they saw, they would realize that the violence against them would stop if they pursued their goals using the tactics of those past oppressed people in South Africa's apartheid and India's occupation by the British and not the terrorism of Ireland's I.R.A. against the British that still to this day has not given them the sovereignty they demanded.
>>Plus there is no link: many democracies went "almost ethnic cleansing" unfortunetly.
You're going to compare events of centuries ago to what's taking place today?
>>What about his direct control over the Revolutionary Guard outside the government control?
It's a problem when he uses it as his personal weapon against those who don't agree with him. The Guard was involved in the 600,000 to 700,000 arrests of citizens that took place in 2006(Iran Governments own figures). That's 1% of the 70 million Iranian population. That Sam is the problem with direct control over the Revolutionary Guard.
>>I focus on HA and Iran because
>>in my opinion they are the cause
>>of most of the problems in
>>Lebanon and the region at the
>>moment...
Bob's right. The Iranians didn't start the fire, but they are certainly fanning the flames today. They are providing the vast majority of the money, training, weapons, intelligence, etc. for HA. Especially now since they're busy training Hamas militants for their upcoming war against Fatah in the coming months.
If Iran funding and overall meddling was to disappear suddenly, problems would still persist, but HA's support would crumble because they could no longer provide the money necessary for the handouts for its followers (Syria couldn't fill the void, since their cash flow has been greatly reduced).
Now, you blame the US and the "zionists" for everything, but as reports have continually pointed out coming from even the Saudi's that Iran is behind the conflict in Iraq funding /arming Sunnis factions such as Al-Ansar, Al Qaeda in Iraq, along with all Shiite militias against one another(the bulk remainder of the Sunni insurgency is made up of former Baathist military & intelligence along with the Saddam Fedayeen militia seeking to drive the Iranians out of Iraq).
It's actually a pretty smart strategy on the Mullah's part because, as they increase their investment in Iraq to win over the population, they can decrease the violence simply by slowly stopping their funding and providing weapons to the Sunni and Shia militias they support.
The big problem with is the Iranian people are well aware of these generation donations which are coming directly out of their pockets and they are becoming increasingly and increasingly angry about it.
Sam, again your knowledge of history is baffling when it comes to the civil war in Afghanistan.
Have you completely forgotten the over two decades of war taking place on Afghan soil involving the Soviets and later the Taliban and the Northern Alliance?
This is the longest period of relative peace Afghanistan has known in years with sporadic southern border fire fights compared to full on warfare between various factions.
As for Palestine, this is the one that you have complete blinders in regards to.
Prior to the kidnapping of the 19 year Israeli soldier by Hamas minions that sparked the whole summer conflict, Fatah's Abbas had finally mustered the leverage needed to create THE STATE OF PALESTINE. Hamas couldn't block it...politically. And so, the violence.
It is IRAN & SYRIA who can't afford the creation of the Palestinian state.
Iran and Syria's whole form of government and policies revolve around the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.
Iran's paramilitary foreign fighting unit, the Qod's ("Jerusalem in persian") Force along with the rallying cries and justification for spending so much of the peoples money on foreign conflicts would evaporate immediately.
Syrian's 40+ years of emergency authority would have to be lifted.
With no longer having to worry about the plight of the Palestinians, the Iranian and Syrian people would turn their focus entirely on their own governments and then Ahmen Nijad and Assad would evaporate immediately.
The US has no desire to see conflict in the Middle East because it hurts stock prices, tourism, trade, oil prices, etc. And although a few get really rich when oil prices go up, the long term effect on the economy is negative meaning everyone takes a hit, including those that originally made money off high oil prices.
The US is about commerce & making money and since the time for supporting dictatorships in the name of combating the Soviets is over, the new focus is on cleaning up the remnants that Cold War policies created. Authoritarian regimes like Syria and Iran will only continue to fuel terrorists. It is economic normalcy that will wipe them out.
Terrorism is only appealing as long as jobs and living conditions are deplorable. If these problems are largely solved, there is very little room left for fanaticism.
But not to paint the US as being purely about the dollar, its purpose is also a humanitarian one. The US gave the most money combining both the government and public contributions to the victims of the Indonesian tsunami back in '04. How much did Iran and Syria give to this country with the largest population of Muslims in the world? Answer: NONE
Which makes me also wonder about with all your concern for plight of Muslims, why no concern over the genocide in the Darfur where more Muslims have died at the hands of other Muslims than in all of the conflicts in the Middle East over the past 5 years. Where are you cries for justice in that situation?
As far as Nasrallah and HA being or not being the ones to start a civil war in Lebanon is a mute point.
When Iran yanks Nas's chain, he'll bite like he's been taught to.
His actions that sparked the Israeli-Lebanon war last summer and his subsequent hidiing out in the Iranian Embassy while the bombs dropped are proof of this.
And to say that Iran hasn't waged war against anyone is to ignore the '83 Bierut bombings, and the destruction of Kobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, to
name some of their less than recent attacks.
Iran knows it's no match for a modern military so it uses surrogates like its doing in Lebanon, Iraq, and coming soon to Palestine. The mullahs have taken a page from the old Soviet book by having others fight their wars for them while supplying money, guns, etc. when needed as was the case with the 50's Korean War and 60-70's Vietnam.
And to show that this ill view of Iran isn't just the work of a US-zionist-Saudi conspiracy, a persian iran dissident group recently gave a detailed explanation of the Qod's Force makeup and bases of operation.
Here's an excerpt:
6. The Qods Force has six major garrisons along Iran's borders with other countries. They are tasked with following up terrorist operations in the neighboring countries. They are:
a. Ramadan Garrison (First Corps) in Kermanshah (west). Mission: Iraq.
b. Nabi-Akram Garrison (Second Corps) in Zahedan (southeast). Mission: Pakistan.
c. Hamza Garrison (Third Corps) in Orumieh (northwest). Mission: Turkey.
d. Ansar Garrison (Fourth Corps) in Mashad (northeast). Mission: Afghanistan and Pakistan.
7. Terrorist Units.
In addition to the six garrisons, the Force has several other corps, including:
a. The Sixth Corps. Mission: Persian Gulf states.
b. The Seventh Corps. Mission: Lebanon and Syria.
c. The Eighth Corps. Mission: African States.
d. The Ninth Corps. Mission: Europe and the United States.
Bob,
I mentioned in a previous post my reasons for a recent regime change in Iran coming sooner than later:
1)UN stepping of Human Rights resolutions and eventual sanctions.
Since I posted that point, Iran has been censured:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4114621.stm
2)The West is supporting/coordinating with opposition groups within Iran.
Reports show the amount of hangings on the charge of "for crimes against the state" in Iran's northwestern Kurdistan and in the southwest region of Iran where the Ahouaz Arabs reside have been increasing recently, possibly a response to increased Western connections.
3) The Saudi's increasing their oil production to levels that are unsustainable for Iran's already frail economy to survive.
Oil is falling like a rock, now currently down to $55 a barrel in a time of year when it should be much higher. The current reason is probably an unseasonably warm winter throughout the world. But, it could also just be the excuse.
Regardless of the actual cause, this price drop hurts the Iranian economy a whole lot, especially now with so much uncertainty with the recent UN sanctions.
Another explosive issue to emerge is the recent reports of "supreme guide" Ali Khomeini having recently died from a long bout with cancer.
These rumors haven't been confirmed, and are probably not true(right this minute), but Khomeini's doctor reportedly told him he wouldn't live to see the new year, which is this upcoming March.
UN Sanctions on the nuclear issue, UN Censure on Human Rights(with more action likely to be taken soon), opposition groups growing bolder, oil prices dropping, and a power struggle over the successor to the current "supreme guide", this makes for quite a potent Witch's Brew.
It's speculation on my part as always, but I can't help but wonder how long a regime that breeds suicide bombers will survive, once the people decide they no longer wish to be ruled in such an intolerant way.
To make another point:
The Iranian Council of Experts and the "supreme guide" make up a religious legislative body and the US Congress and Supreme Court is a secular body.
Simple example of how important this is would be to compare the relative ease a Christian in the US can convert to Islam and the DEATH SENTENCE a Muslim in Iran recieves if he converts to Christianity. Big Difference.
Sam
What u said "the Council of Experts, the members of which are elected by the DIRECT vote of the people (not representatives like the US)"
is totaly wrong!!!
the members of the council of experts are NOT voted in by the people but by a select members of the clergy!!!
There is no universality (ie not everyone can vote) and this my friend is the first tenant of democracy
i forgot to tell you that what MMM meant was that when any Isreali guy praise Siniora and his goverment he is branded a traitor. so when you brought up the example of how they praised nassrallah the same shloud apply!
Bob,
I insist, YOU are totally wrong:
The concil of experts IS elected
directly.
I don't know where you are getting your info.
In an 12/2006 article in the guardian, here's the link:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,1978407,00.html
You can find this sentence
" Iran held local elections and polls for the influential Council of Experts."
I have other references if you need
(globalsecurity.org...)
Thanks for interpreting MMM's language. I didn't see any party saying Siniora should be hanged though, so I still don't see what MMM is talking about.
You know if it wasn't tragic you would be funny:
First the US say the problem in the Middle East is arafat (he's gone)
Then they say it's international terrorists (after calling them freedom fighters and arming them against the USSR )
Then they say it's Hamas (after israel favored its' inception)
Then they say it is Saddam
(after they helped him access to power)
Then they say it is the lack of democracy (but then punishes the peoples' choices)
Now it's Iran!
Ha ha ha, what's next?
Well Sam,
drop it dude you only see what you choose to see and understand what you want to (I guess we all do this from time to time, but you are doing it excessively). It shouldn't be on An-nahar or Assafir, etc... "headlines" for you to see that after july war was over, all HA did was accusing all march 14 figures of treason simply because Nasrallah is paranoid. So what do you think would happen if Olmert actually mentions seniora's name??? come on think of it for just a sec! How would Al-manar and NewTV exploit this thing?
>>what do you think would happen if Olmert actually mentions seniora's name???
The fact is... he did mention it!
I personally consider that asking HA do disarm in this point of our history as hi treason, but you have a right to have a different point of view.
so Sam if i get it right all our problems r USA 's fault?? they r the devils and Iran and HA will save us and clear all our problems??? is this what i can conclude from your discussion??
Lily
Come on Lily you know it is not that simple.
The problems in the region are multiple:
1- 500 of othoman rule
2- Followed by a decolonisation that happened in the worst conditions (France and England dividing the region into "ethnical" entities: Palestine for jews, Lebanon for Christians, Syria for sunnis...)
3- The creation of Israel is still a major problem because a Palestinian state was never created and/or the displaced were not allowed to return
4- Civil wars because of confessionalism and sectarian systems (some created and encouraged by the US like in Iraq)
5- and yes you are right last but not least the meddling of the new colonial power of our time: the US that is trying to control the "greater Middle East" that is slowly but surely becoming independant. Hence the problems in Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan, Lebanon, and the threatening of Iran that is fastly growing technologicaly developped and modern while refusing US and israeli hegemony.
you know sam we can make it simple and we can complicate it...i prefere it to be simple:
we r in big trouble so we need a solution???
what is it going to be??
1-violence
2- peace
in the first choice we will pay a high price deads , economical ,infrastructure....and a lot of TIME before we achieve our final goal.
in the second choice no deads ,no matirialistic damage and less TIME to achieve our final goal .
see how simple it can be....
and u know there r not other choices.
to get back to the usa, it is amazing how we lebanese in particular and arabs in general we always blame the usa and israelis on our problems, i think it is time for us to look at ourselves and think why we always have problems , may be it is our fault!!?? we should stop blaming others and only blame our selves for all our misery. i am not saying that usa israelis iran syria r angels and were harmeless but it is only our fault we let them manipulate us, it is our fault if we paly their game. it is so easy to blame it on others it is actually a relief. we should start thinking in that direction to save the country we r the responsibles we should fixe our ownselfs our own souls , let the hate toward usa and israelis and iran and all the others let it go, look into other lebanese and try to think why we r sooo diferent why we hate each other why we r not capable to get united ??why??
the way i see it is relegion!! our different relegion is standing in the way between us so the solution will come when the contry will be relegion free, this means when we will have civil marriage , civil inheritance low ect...when we will have the right to be human regardless of our relegion...this is democracy.
and to go back to our 2 big fighting parties: 8 of march and 14 of march, the first one is relegious party(majority of HA) and of course there is no way that it will accept civil marriage or civil laws and there is no democracy in relegion no way these r 2 opposits, relegion and democracy just don't meet. in relegion u have to obey the rules and u can't argue ! relegion should stay in our heart and shouldn't interfere in politics , i just don't anderstand how anyone can think that a relegious party can bring democracy into my country.!!!!
see it is simple !!!
Lily
Lily,
I so much agree with you!
I don't know why in Lebanon people mix religion with politics it doesn't make any sense to me. Plus in my case I have 4 different sects in my family and my wife (who is american) is from a fifth so I would have a problem right from the start!
We need civil mariage, we need civil inheritance laws and we need them badly you are absolutely right.
Now regarding March 8 and 14, I'm not ideological and I don't follow blindly politicians.
And you are also right that we always blame others for our problems (Syria, Iran, Arafat, US, israel...) I don't: I blame ourselves Lebanese. I don't blame the US or israel for looking for their interests, I blame the Lebanese for not following their interests and defending themselves.
And here is my point of disagreement with Bob: I think the biggest threat to our independance and development is israel and the US, he thinks it's Iran.
Now Hezbollah is a religious party but under the leadership of Hassan Nassrallah the essence of its message is political not religious (that was not the case under tufeili). Of course I hate the fact that most of the parties are grouped mainly by sect, we need to change our mentality and that is not an easy task. I supported Bashir Gemayel when he was fighting Syrian presence and the Arafat mafia (while the government was standing weak and corrupt) and today I support Hassan Nasrallah who has been fighting a brutal occupation and attempts to impose the israeli american diktat on Lebanon (while the government is even more corrupt). You see I don't care what religion people have I support real independance and I refuse to give in to any foreign blackmail, however violent and threatening it is. Today I think our 2 biggests problems are corruption and sectarianism and those are only our fault not foreign powers fault.
The march 8 forces have in their program deconfessionalising society (see the feuille d'entente between HA and Tayyar).
Also they are much less corrupt. Aoun's main program is fighting corruption.
On the other hand the leaders of March 8 are the same team that were "working" with Syria and have enriched themselves way beyond decency while creating a 41 billion dollar debt. Now the US is telling Siniora that he should give citizenship to 400,000 palestinians in exchange for their financial help!! Of course that would allow them also to restaure some sectarian balances so they can keep interfereing in our affairs... If we accept it would be our fault not the US: it is us who should decide and not let Siniora (or any other guy) accept whatever the US tells him to do.
Oops pleae read:
"On the other hand the leaders of March 14 ..."
instead of:
"On the other hand the leaders of March 8 ..."
>Sam said...
>
>Oops pleae read:
>"On the other hand the leaders of >March 14 ..."
>
>instead of:
>"On the other hand the leaders of >March 8 ..."
That's what they call a "Freudian Slip"
Sam,
You've gotta be getting dizzy jumping back and forth from one contradictory opinion to another.
First off, the current "supreme guide" Ali Khomeini is the one who appointed Nasrallah as his religious rep in Lebanon back in the mid 1990's.
This screams of both his tacit foreign ties and his religious motivations.
Two things which are the polar opposite of what you're supposed to be arguing for: 1) leaders without foreign ties and 2) secular leadership.
And going back to one of my earlier posts, when you complain about corruption by government and claim that HA is the solution, WHAT ARE YOU BASING THIS ON?!
Other than slogans, HA has NOT put out any agenda on how they're going to do things differently. And if they're not going to do anything differently, how will THEY avoid being corrupt too?(Other than Iranian payouts, but that goes back to your pet peeve about foreign influences.)
Of course they say they won't be corrupt, what party ever runs on a "Corruption Platform"?
Steve: "Who you voting for Joe? I'm leaning towards the Hoogie-Boogie's. They're promising to privatize long held public utilities to foster growth, competition, and jobs"
Joe: "Well Steve, I've heard about them, but I'm really excited about the "Oggle-Boggles". They're promising to siphon all the tax money they can get a hold of and build a large nuclear arsenal to blow up neighbors whose choice of music they find greatly displeasing."
Steve: "Wow! They sound great. I'm switching my vote!"
Just because you don't hear about HA corruption, doesn't mean it doesn't exist and judging by their operations, whistle blowers don't stand a chance of seeing the light of day.
And HA gets so much money from Iran, they don't need to be corrupt. You see how they operate six months from now when Iran has been weakened from all opposing sides so much that they can't maintain their $100 million payouts to HA, how "clean" Nasrallah really is.
"I support Hassan Nasrallah who has been fighting a brutal occupation and attempts to impose the israeli american diktat on Lebanon"
What "brutal occupation"? The UN troops?!
And what exactly is this "israeli american diktat"?
Are you afraid we'll make you wealthy by sending you all of our manufacturing and service industry jobs like we've done with China and India?
Perhaps its theft, such as how we've outright stolen some of Europe's most popular tv game shows and reproduced them here in the states to high ratings.
Of course, you'll mention Iraq and I'll mention that Saddam was a less than wonderful guy who, at the time of the 2003 invasion, was a few weeks away from being wacked by his oldest son Huday, whom Saddam tried to kill on multiple attempts, one of which left him partially cripled.[Sources: Playboy article on the last day's of Saddam's sons taken from interviews with their girlfriends and others, along with other various published articles] And then Iraq's headlines would've been:
-"Saddam and Son go to war against one another"
-"Shiite strong man Al-Sadr leads revolt creating third front in bloody conflict"
-"Al Qaeda rumored to be aiding Huday in war against father, Saddam"
-"Iran suspected of funding Sadr's Shiite Army against Saddam"
-"WHERE IS THE US, THEY NEED TO DO SOMETHING TO STOP THIS BLOODY WAR THAT HAS DESTABILIZED THE MIDDLE EAST!"
[And yes, feel free to weigh in on this front, I saw one of your posts earlier on the "Irak" subject, but let it slide do to the other pressing topic at the time.]
As far as your claim that the US assaulted Iraq, Afghanistan and now Iran for fear of their move towards modern technology.
Iraq's infrastructure much like Iran's has laid fallow and unserviced for years, with it's leaders opting to divert funds towards military applications.
And despite Iran's failing energy situation which they claim to need nuclear power for, they could be remedying the situation at one tenth the cost of nuclear power by using standard infrastructure upgrades.
Going the route of Natanz & ArAk facilities to fix their ailing energy situation is like using an atom bomb to wipe out an ant hill(pardon the relevance of the pun).
And the notion of the US fearful of Afghanistan's modernity doesn't hold weight since the US is really their only source of modern technological access(the country has a TV set for 1 out of every 10,000. Although this ratio may be shrinking given the improved Afghan economy).
But really, what will the US (and Israel) do to Lebanon other than flood you with capital, tourism, jobs, and of course aiding in the creation of sustained PEACE?
Before you respond, consider that even formerly post war occupied country's such as Germany and Japan are doing just fine and despite their aid to the US on the united front against Iran, we don't often agree and on occasion give each other the finger--peacefully.
And also, what degree does the increased Islamophobia(that has replaced Anti-Semitism) in Europe and where you're living now in France impact your views on Lebanon and the Middle East in general?
Despite your status as an Athiest, does not your Lebanese heritage invite the anti-Muslim rage anyways?
Are your views reactionary in protest of the veiled scorn and disapproval you receive from the majority of the Caucasian French population?
I'm just curious.
Views are often formed as a result of personal experiences.
And there's gotta be some other motive other than logical thought that has brought you to the conclusion of choosing to stand against those who FORMERLY supported Syria by supporting a group that CURRENTLY supports Syria(and Iran).
To Slavic Mike
Why are your messages so long?
Try to focus on one to 3 ideas at a time otherwise you make it impossible to have a dialog.
Here are a few answers:
It is israel that doesn't want peacenot the arabs, what would you say to someone who tells you: "I'll take your house but let's have peace"
Concerning HA: just read the report from the Near East Policy institute (pro israeli) and it clearly states that HA's decision making is independant.
Concerning France: it is one of the most tolerant and wonderful countries on earth, I can see you have never been there: stop listening to Foxnews and come visit! I have never met any scorn though a lot of french don't even know that I have a Lebanese background. Actually when I tell them they like me even more!
Sam ,
I also do have mixte marriages in my family, i actualy come from one, my mum is from different relegion than my dad and i am atheist too, we also have different nationalities, like we have german spanish and french women married to my cuzin , brother and uncle. but i guess in every lebanese family we will find different sects and relegion and natinalities, and that is one of our qualities as lebaneses.
but to go back to Ha ,u say it is a religious party but the essence of his message is political, this can't be because politics and relegion shouldn't meet and because his true message is relegious. when most of their women r veiled and his leader wear relegious clothes the message is clear and is relegious no matter what they say , it is your actions that count not what u pretend or say.....
how can i beleive in theories when in real life Ha use force to implement its ideas and its laws?? my best friend whose hobbie is photography and who doesn't belong to any party, decides to go to riad el solh square for some pictures when three guards of HA approach her and forebid her from taking any, she says it is my country and there is no law against taking public pictures u have no right to stop me , they said we r the law and u r not welcome go away.....where is democracy???do u see any here ...i only see force and violence!!!
these squares r public ones they belong to me , u and all the lebanese and no one has the right to take them away from us , no one has the right to camp there!!! they have the right to demonstrate , to say their point of view, but after that they have to go home and act peacfully, and find a away within the law that will change the governement ...this is defenitly not the way to do the change they want.... and if they decide to stay, at least have the decency to be serious and respectfull, don't turn the square into a huge and endless kermess!!! have u seing the barbecue the nargueily the kark tormoss sellers and the souvenir sellers??? what is that?? passing by in my car my 7 year old son asked if this was a kermess, and i thought waouh he is right !!!!
as for the feuille d'entente , how can i trust such a theorie when nothing in reality comes and prove it....where is the real and physical "entente" when in the camp site Ha has his own square (riad el solh) and Tayyar has a different one (martyr)?????
as for corruption , i agree we r a corrupted society but the opposition has 57 deputy and what have they done in the year and a half they were in the governement?? has anyone of them proposed any solution for our economical problems???for restoring anything??? have any of them proposed any idea about dealing with our debts??? u know it so easy to criticis and much much harder to find solutions!!! anyone can criticises but few r those who can realy help, and i don't see anyone from the opposition has even proprosed a way for our salvation.
we had a hole , now the opposition is digging a bigger hole !!! is this the help they r proposing ?????
Lily
Lily,
You say: "it is your actions that count not what u pretend or say....."
Amen!
(What remains of) this government is the same team that has been in power for the last 14 years and what are their actions: a 41 billion dollar debt, unbearable corruption, a dead economy and no jobs.
That is what counts indeed!
>>has anyone of them proposed any solution for our economical problems???
YES! the top priority is to attack corruption. That's on the top of the opposition's agenda (Some of the people in the Hariri mafia will have to explain to judges where and how they got their 100s of millions of dollars)
Fighting corruption is only possible with a clean government in place, not with the same people that have been clinging to power for the last 14 years and created the problem in the first place.
Sam,
>Why are your messages so long?
My messages are long because there's a lot of ground to cover. By covering every piece of an argument, it cuts down on the time that would be spent otherwise going back and forth over each little detail.
But I will say, Lily's answers to your claims often remove my need to reply.
She certainly hits the nail on the head and does a great job of providing on the spot coverage of the situation.
So, if you want me to write less, I suggest you encourage her to write more.
>It is israel that doesn't want >peacenot the arabs, what would you >say to someone who tells you: "I'll >take your house but let's have peace"
Your definition of Israel "not wanting peace" is their refusal to be wiped off the map or scattered for the umteenth time like they were before, by the Romans, et al.
It's kind of funny that you mention what I would do if someone took my house and expected me to deal with it because the first house I lived in now has an onramp to a freeway on top of it, and the second house, which was my favorite, we had to sell to others because we couldn't afford to live in it anymore.
And despite my anger over the situation, I didn't resort to strapping a bomb to my chest and charging at the new owners.
Now their was compensation for the sale of the house, something the Palestinians have arguably not received (excluding the decades of Israeli monetary aid to Palestine) and if they want anything serious to happen on the returning of land, compensation, etc. I again suggest they adopt the tactics of those citizens who opposed South Africa's Apartheid AND NOT THE TACTICS OF THE I.R.A!
>Concerning HA
The post after this "Futile charge!" has a similar theme to this issue and I'll post my reply there along with my response to your comments regarding France, which I have not been to, but I do know those who have, along with those who are originally from there and despite things like the dogs defecating wherever they please, I hear more good things than bad. I'm sure I would enjoy my visit if a future opportunity were to arise.
My traveling experience actualy pertains to most of North America with all 50 states, all Canadian provinces (plus 1 of the three territories), and down into Mexico a little.
See you over at "Futile charge!"
Post a Comment