I am currently reading Beirut Fragments
, a very interesting book, that recounts the story of a mother and her family amidst all the tragic events that befell our country from 1975 to 1990. When I finish it I will try to post a small review.I have posted a few links to several interesting personal accounts of the Lebanese civil war on the left side of my blog. Among them, Robert Fisk' "Pity the nation" is worthwhile. The rest are more historical in nature.
Let us hope that today hot heads will learn some of the lessons of last war…
16 comments :
Anyone, from any party, shooting on unarmed civilians, the army or other official security forces in the streets, should be arrested immediately and charged with the crime of trying to start a civil war.
The parties to which they belong should also be made immediately known for all Lebanese to judge by themselves.
To take another perspective, you might want to review some of the economic data from the previous Lebanese Civil War.
If you think $40-41 billion is a big debt now, just think of the tab after a new one ($60-100 billion?).
Not to mention, how costly privatizing the electricity and mobile phone sectors (best part of the new reforms!) will be after a civil war that sees much of the already in place infrastructure for these two industries obliterated (It would be even more difficult if you tried to keep them going as public utilities following a civil war).
And hiring people to fire guns isn't the best way to go about job creation.
To share a non-Lebanese native/ethnic view of Lebanon,
The first reference I can remember of Lebanon was in the 1990 movie "NAVY SEALS" (starring Charlie Sheen) at the end of the movie when the SEAL TEAM goes into Beirut hunting the main terrorist bad guy of the movie.
While the group is sneaking around, there's machine guns, mortars, and RPG's going off in every direction, like it's nothing unusual.
One SEAL says: "What is this place" and Charlie Sheen says:
"This isn't a place. This is HELL on earth!"
Now, if ending the stigma of Lebanon as a land of never ending wars between countless factions isn't motive enough.
Can't all sides come together in peace to work out their differences amicably in the hope that they will never again be the focus of another Charlie Sheen movie?
You know, the USSR really didn't collapse because of the economic failings of Communism and the stress of a four decade standoff with the US.
Gorbachev heard that Arnold Schwarzeneggar was filming a sequel to "RED DAWN" and decided, for the good of Russia, the country had to find a better political system before the movie hit theaters the following summer.
The Berlin Wall coming down when it did kept "RED DAWN II" from being viewed by audiences around the world.
To this day, Gorbachez says that stopping "RED DAWN II" was his most important contribution to humanity.
Happy Birthday Bob, I hope next year you'll celebrated anywhere you want in a peacefull and democratic Lebanon!!!
Lily
You didn't cite Arnold Shwartzy's "True lies", where, only by himself, he shoots and kills 3000 "arab terrorists", and people believe it!
No wonder americans were shocked the day they discovered that it was just the other way around when a few Saudi and Egyptian terrorists killed
3000 americans.
Ok Slavic Mike, continue to watch this kind of movies so you can discover the truth about our true arab terrorist nature ..., hilarious!
Sam
I believe that Mike was sarcastic :)
anyways i agree for many years this stigma of a war arvaged city stuck yo Beirut.
I remmeber on 9/11 when many commentators compared ground zero to Down Town Beirut.
Bob,
I was sarcastic too, I'm sure Slavic Mike has other sources...
Yeah, I figured a little humor was needed.
Aside from "True Lies", "Commando" is another all time great Scharzeneggar shoot'em up movie that has the hero with 100% shooting accuracy being able to wipe out hundreds of enemies armed to the teeth without having to reload once.
>No wonder americans were shocked the day they discovered that it was just the other way around when a few Saudi and Egyptian terrorists killed 3000 americans.
You've got an "apples to oranges" comparison going there.
Saying that it was "just the other way around" is inaccurate.
If those few Saudi and Egyptian terrorists strolled through downtown NY and shot up 3000 Americans THAN it would've been "just the other way around".
Those few terrorists took advantage of poor follow through of FAA security measures (the cockpits are always supposed to be locked) and an American public more concerned about enjoying their relatively peaceful lives, than terrorism.
In fact, terrorism up to September 10th, 2001 was considered acts carried out by the "Montana Militia" in the 1995 Oklahoma City Bombing (The main bomber, Timothy McVeigh was executed June 11, 2001, exactly three months before 9/11) and Ted Kycinski's mail bombs.
Foreign terrorism was considered to violent acts related to Ireland's I.R.A.
So some angry Arabs fly a plane into a very large building and the US finally got it's invitation to "Come on Down" to the Middle East to setup shop on a grander scale for some time to come because it was obvious the oil rich region wasn't going to resolve its overly religious authoritarian ways all by itself.
But yes, Americans were shocked. I personally was not, and couldn't believe it had taken so long. However, I was surprised at the culprit. I had my money on domestic "white supremacists" terrorists instead of foreign "islamo-fascist" terrorists.
And one of the reasons Americans were shocked had to do with the fact that after Middle Eastern terrorists failed to blow up the World Trade Center the first time around back in '93 with a U-Haul(or maybe it was a Ryder) truck bomb, the guy that rented the now destroyed vehicle actually came back for his deposit at the rental place.
So, yeah, given America's previous experience with less than brilliant jihadis, we were pretty shocked.
But of course, you guys (read: those that Sam sympathizes with) have obviously stepped up your efforts and efficiency to a higher caliber.
Ultimately, though, you'll go the way of the dodo not because of how inept or capable your paramilitary is or adherence to your goal, but simply because the values you're fighting for(theocracy and suppression of freedom to name a few) aren't sustainable causes.
The drive towards freedom throughout the world is ultimate direction.
If the US really only cared about oil, we would've bribed the environmental senators to drill our own Saudi Arabia stockpile in ANWAR and the rest of Alaska along with the 60 years worth of natural gas off the east coast and the other untouched oil deposits around Florida and the gulf.
Then we would've given the rest of the world the finger and said "worry about yourselves" and gone about developing our hybrids and (coming soon) plug-in hybrids and then onto our electric cars, completing our energy self-sufficiency.
Of course, the Sunni-Shiite sectarian monster would have engulfed the entire Middle East (started by the Saddam vs. Son war that would've taken place in April 2003) and spread up to Europe who would again ask us Americans to grab our guns and it we would've been brought into the current mess that way.
That's the thing about history, though.
Because we don't have access to some alternate timeline where the US decides not to invade Iraq and a massive conflict does or doesn't develope some other way with even more casualties remains speculation for the ages.
But that's obviously off topic.
So, here's to a prosperous Lebanese (and world) future where things like arguments of economic policy are hotly debated in blogs and cafe's taking the place of wars of religion fought with bullets and bombs.
"So, here's to a prosperous Lebanese (and world) future where things like arguments of economic policy are hotly debated in blogs and cafe's taking the place of wars of religion fought with bullets and bombs."
Amen to that my dear sam!! Amen to that!
In one of my graduate class we were studying democratization and why in some countries democratization by force worked fine (Germany and Japan after WW2) and in others it failed completely (Iraq comes to mind…)
According to my professor, Dr Theodor Hanf, who studied the subject extensively a main reasons for the success of foreign intervention and establishment of democracy was the fact that the invaded country has embarked on foreign aggression and failed at it! having to do with the feeling of defeat, guilt and responsibility of its people and their acceptance of the forein invasion.
In other words Germany invaded many countries and then it was defeated, so democratization succeeded. While Iraq did not embark on any foreign aggression or invasion so its people refused the forced democratization and change of regime!
So I asked him would the Iraq invasion and change of regime succeeded say if the US continued its drive to Baghdad in 1991? His answer was it would have had more chances than their latest invasion…
Another big if…
Slavic Mike,
>>instead of foreign "islamo-fascist" terrorists
The biggest threat to world peace comes from "Judeo-facists".
Sam
It is easy to just hurl accusation, what abotu trying to offer a real discussion with soem references and valid points?
Bob,
I have a really great reference:
the originel "project for a new american century".
The other is the "Greater Middle East project"
(actually it is the same one; the PNAC was really aimed at the Middle East to establish israel as the sole super power in the region but they wanted to keep the title "general" then they made it more specific (the masks fell off) and they changed the name because it sent alarm bells in China, the Russian federation and even the EU)
More on the German & Japanese democratization vs. Iraqi democratization:
The occupations of Germany & Japan came after a very large scale war that saw anywhere from 20-30 million dead, depending on if you're including the Soviet soldiers killed by their own military for not fighting and the 17 million or so Chinese massacred by the mainland invasion by the Japanese who used rocks as their primary weapon because "bullets were too good for the Chinese" according to the Emperor's military.
The '03 Iraq War lasted about five weeks, and because of the precision of the strikes, it avoided a great deal of the civilian casualties that took place during the '91 War which used a lot of cluster bombing from above like the Allied bombings of Berlin in WWII.
So, aside from the lack of guilt on behalf of the '03 Iraqi masses from them not recently waging an invasion on a neighbor, you also had to short a war that did more to build up anger and resentment, than let it be extinguished through a grueling and exhaustive war that made peace and stability a far more attractive option at the end of the conflict.
The other reason why German & Japanese democracy took hold was due to the threat of being gobbled up by the much hated Soviet Union who shared borders with both countries.
US General MacArthur's decision to keep Emperor Hirohito in power, devying President Truman's order, was a risky but brilliant decision.
MacArthur knew that if the Emperor was removed from power, there would be no tangible social system left in Japan, making it easy pickings for the Communists to swoop in and take over just like that did after the fall of the Czars in Russia back in WWI.
The US didn't have some non-threatening symbolic leader to keep in place (Ayatollah Al-Sistani only appeals to the Shia of Iraq) to keep a full slide into chaos from taking place. And to make things worth, unlike the Germans and Japanese who had completely different socio-economic customs compared with the Soviets, Iraq's Shia are religious brothers of their Persian counterparts in Iran.
That's not to say that many Iraqi Shia don't distrust and even despise the Iranians, but they certainly see them as better allies than enemies when compared to Saudi Arabia or Syria.
I'm on the fence of whether a '91 invasion of Iraq would have led to any better circumstances.
The US military would not have had the technology they have now, but neither would the insurgents, militias, et al.
The effort still might have handed Iraq to Iran and despite the "reformists" being in power in Tehran, they still funded HA in Lebanon, still blew up the Synagogue in Buenos Aires in 1994, still blew up Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, provided material support through HA for the African Embassy bombings.
Not to mention, after the first "Mogadishu-like" military episode, the US public would've turned sour and would've wanted out. Heck, the US public had soured on the first Gulf War near its end and that only lasted two months.
So all of that plus Iraq is made up of several different ethnic/religious groups that has created many obstacles to social/political/economic action in unison unlike Germany and Japan which had a rather consistent population makeup it makes for a big "if" indeed.
I'm hoping that the success of keeping Al-Qaeda from getting a foothold in Somalia to setup a new "Afghanistan", the recent push back against HA in Lebanon, followed by what I'm still hoping will materialize as the rumors say of a Saudi and GCC "Oil War" against Iran following the arrival of the second US Carrier Group to the Persian Gulf at the end of this month will be the beginning of a significant turning of the tide in this global struggle.
As for Sam’s "project for a new american century" in the Middle East, I’d counter that with Iran’s own “project for a new Iranian Century”:
“Abbasi was heard telling a crowd of Basijis about Iran's secret plans, which include "a strategy drawn up for the destruction and eradication of the entire Anglo-Saxon civilization."
“Abbasi has been among the highest ranking members of the Islamic regime’s terror operations for many years, acting as Khamenei’s foreign policy and defense advisor. Abbasi has had an active voice under not only Khamenei but also Rafsanjani and Khatami as well. The Martyrdom Brigades of the Global Islamic Awakening is controlled by Abbasi.”
http://regimechangeiniran.com/2007/01/was-revolutionary-guard-guru-h/
Please not that when it cites the name of the previous Iranian presidents "Rafsanjani and Khatami as well." It's telling you these plans date back to the early 90's meaning the current nuke program standoff and "Death To Israel" decries have been planned for some time now. Even without the '03 Iraq Invasion, Iran would've still brought us all to the current situation when their nuclear program had become known.
And despite how much you might like Iran's secret plan to do away with "Whitey", it would mean no more US or France and its abundant economies for you to run off to, or at least not with the freedoms you currently flout.
slavic Mike,
The african embassy bombings were done by al Qaeda, you know, the ones the US was funding, training, arming and calling freedom fighters when they were fighting the USSR, you created them: now you enjoy them!
The Lebanese have absolutely nothing to do with it (and we are glad we don't).
Bob,
>Of course, your totally right and unbiased, only 14 march shoot people,
>while Ha did not return fire
Correct
>and it was some stray “divine” bullets that killed three of our own ppl and
injured more than 30!!
Absolutely not. the three people killed in Beirut are:
Adnan shamas
Hassan Mortaba
Khalil Shuman
All are from the OPPOSITION and they were killed by the pro government militia.
But I'll go further by denouncing your expression "our own ppl", you see, for me, they are all MY people whether they are from the opposition or not. for me there is no thing such as "our people" and "their people", we are one people with different opinions and a lot of misunderstandings and suspicions. I prefer to see the best in others.
>As always it is all 14 march fault and HA are the angles no blame ever falls on them!!
Correct for now.
>Finally there is a big difference btw demonstrating and closing roads and burning tires.
Correct. I support Demos and burning tires but I don't support closing roads.
Sam,
>slavic Mike,
The african embassy bombings were done by al Qaeda, you know, the ones the US was funding, training, arming and calling freedom fighters when they were fighting the USSR,
you created them: now you enjoy them
-The actual fighting factions against the Soviets were either Afghans or foreign fighters.
The foreign fighters came to die for their religion.
The Afghans fought to drive the USSR from their land and live long peaceful lives afterwards with their families.
The US backed only the Afghan fighters and the foreign fighters went on to form "Al Qaeda" as their own weapons and finance group.
"Al Qaeda" or as it roughly translates into english "The Database" was formed for the most part towards the end and after the USSR vs. Afghanistan war of the 80's.
It was basically a shopping list of those fanatics throughout the Middle East and beyond that were interested in waging jihad.
Example: Samir in Riyadh loves the idea of martyrdom, so if Al Qaeda ever wants to do some jihadi work in Saudi Arabia, they need to give Samir a ring.
Following the defeat of the USSR, the US asked for its weapons back, but the Afghans said they planned to use them against Iran (when really they were rearming to fight the remaining Afghan communists and other factions).
It wasn't intended, but you could say that the US helped create Al Qaeda the same way the Nazi party created the Syrian Baathist Party that was modeled after the Third Reich Model (Source: "Saddam and the Third Reich" - History Channel).
>The Lebanese have absolutely nothing to do with it (and we are glad we don't).
I didn't insinuate that the Lebanese (the government or the majority of its people) were involved with the African Embassy bombing or Al Qaeda, but I am saying that HA was/is.
At the time it aired, I assumed you were still living in the US and would've caught it:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,244002,00.html
The special touched on HA's role with the African Embassy of providing technical support and training Al Qaeda fighters, but another special called: "Triple Cross: Bin Laden's Spy inside the US" (National Geographic Channel) went into great detail on the relationship.
It all revolved around a former Egyptian intelligence officer who came to the US after becoming disgruntled with the Egyptian government "moderation" in dealing with Israel and the West in general.
He scouted the African Embassy four months ahead of the bombing and was the point man for bringing Al Qaeda into south Lebanon for training by HA militants prior to the training camps in Afghanistan being in place.
Here's also and article talking about Al Qaeda's moves and tactical support from HA (they don't always get along of course)
Excerpt:
"A more complex political calculus governs relations between Hizballah and al-Qaeda operatives in Lebanon. Although they have cooperated logistically in the past, Hizballah has historically sought to monopolize the jihad against Israel in southern Lebanon."
Date of article: 2/6/06
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/
Sam
You mentioned three ppl what happened to the other? And you did not answer me when i stated the names of those killed on Tuesday from 14 March, WHO KILLED THEM???
Now it is clear that your information is biased and you do not want to see the other side of the situation. Just know that this behavior is causing the current problem in Lebanon, making blaming the other for all the mistakes...
Spare your witty remark, you know what I meant, but still if you care so much about every Lebanese i haven't heard a word out of you on those killed from 14 March. For you they don't even exist!! Just for once read or watch the media of the other side!!!
Finally, as you have just said we all have the right to decide our fate as Lebanese, so you do not have the right to promise to wage war against Israel without my accord! Cause believe me no one will accept another war by HA!!! So do not promise anything you cannot deliver (Bytheway r u in HA to be able to make such promise??)
Post a Comment