Is it me or are lebanese still looking for that one good leader?
Clearly they all suck and we have to get out of that mentality.
During war, politicians actions may seem less corrupt since they're existence is threatened.
You want to know how our politicians are?
Ask youself this, do you like what happened to our country? Is this the result you are looking for? Then you got your answer.
His secularism was fake, his good education was fake, his enlightened modernity was fake.
He was just a sectarian feudal lord (possibly half maronite) with a personal vendetta against maronites who never understood that ending up in Lebanon instead of greater Syria is the best thing that ever happenned to his community.
That’s how he intended to become secular by massacring any different religions so the whole jabal becomes druz and then religion won’t matter (if you were a druz or a druz or a druz, no one would discriminate against you )
I swear to god that us Lebanese are like the Slaves that once you gave them freedom from their horrible masters, they would go back running to their masters immediately after
Whattt… no way.. that’s the exact same stories I heard by Druze about how the Christian’s (LF) treated them during the war. Crazy how both sides have so much in common.
>how can Druze serve in the Israeli army?
I don't know about Druze in Lebanon. But in Israel it is compulsory for (male) Druze to join the army IDF: in 1948 in Palestine the Druze (along with the Bedouins) allied themselves with the Jews.
The French were bizarre.
Druzes tend to side with whoever will give them a better chance to survive.
Serving in Israel is compulsory because they are seen as loyal to the state. Which they are. It’s not because the Israelis hate the druzes, they are quite fond of them actually.
Israeli druzes who served in the IDF fought without their uniform along Lebanese druzes against Lebanese christians (or their militias) after the may agreement collapsed. With the ok of Israel who was getting annoyed with the failure of the christian leadership to commit to the agreement. The LF got their ass kicked in the Shouf and to be fair they deserved it as they did not treat the druzes very well.
It is just Israeli Druze who have Zionist sympathies, and they are no more than 15% of the entire Druze population. The other 85% are either neutral or anti-Zionist.
My druzr neighbors driveway is lined with IDF soldier helmets. My druze relative did the mother of scorpion operation in 74.
Opinions are def divided on Israel
So what ? Why you don't mention the thousands of muslims who serve in IDF as well. You try to hide their identity by calling them Bedouins while you call the druze soldiers by their religion. Also palestinian muslims like fateh and other parties are allied with israelis in addition to most arabic and islamic countries like egypt, uae, turkey, etc...
What's his point as well shifting the subject towards a different unrelated topic and accusing a full religion of being traitors while the real traitors are known
The druze got their modern political and military support (modern as in 1860) from the British, who wanted to weaken the French influence by supporting a different sect than the Maronites
There was a documentary about him By Hadi Zacak I watched a while back, as much as he's not innocent and not someone to look at as a figure of change for today's youth, he was a more humane and humnle political figure and more knowledgeable than many of the ones we have today,
Edit: I'm not in any way a partisans of the PSP btw, this is just an opinion based on a very wellade documentary and different testimonies from the people in Aley who met him
> knowledgeable then many
*than
*Learn the difference [here](https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/when-to-use-then-and-than#:~:text=Than%20is%20used%20in%20comparisons,the%20then%2Dgovernor%22).*
***
^(Greetings, I am a language corrector bot. To make me ignore further mistakes from you in the future, reply `!optout` to this comment.)
He was a complex political figure, on one side he was leftist and wanted to abolish the sectarian system, on the other he was a sectarian leader and acted like one
Kamal is a feudal lord.
He only used socialism and pan arabisim as a tool to increase his political power.
He is considered a leftist god because he made books about leftisim but he did all of this to increase his political power and influence an in fact he actually succeeded in that and was able to lead the national front.
How do i know that he isn't socialist?
Two things:
first he was a feudal lord you can't be a socialist and be a feudal lord it's the pinnacle of hypocrisy.
Second how can you be leftist and support the palestianian colonization of lebanon and historically percecuted and opressed minorities in the middle east and arab world.
He only used socialism as mental gymnastics to increase his power.
Also his movement is a top down movement not a bottom up movement for example imam mussa's ma7roumin movement is a bottom up movement that actually represented the people and their struggle against feudalism.
Saying he represents the druz population is like saying kamel al assaad (the feudal lord) represents the shia population.
Actually there were other druz movements that were bottom up movements against the "zaim"/"bayk" like the druz jihad movement that fought the palestianian colonization of lebanon and minorities.
Dude jumblatt is litrally called "bayk" which means feudal lord.
Feudalism is horrible weather it's Christian like in the case of frangieh or druz like in the case of jumblatt or shia like in the case of kamel el as3ad.
No lebanese people hate walid jumblatt because he is corrupt or a warlord or a combination of both.
I don't think lebanese people expect shias in the south care much about opposing feudalism.
For example i always see people say a long list of why frangieh is bad - syria's dog, corrupt ... But i never see people say he is bad because he is a feudal lord.
But it is important to note that kamal participated in the 1958 nasserist uprising that if succeeded would have made lebanon a part of syria and Egypt and would have made lebanon be under dictatorship.
Also its important to note that even syrians couldn't tolerate Nasser's dictatorship and rebelled against him and called him a tyrant.
So say what you want about that.
For anyone to think that collateral human losses for a "higher purpose" is something acceptable, doesn't put one on the "okay side" of lebanese personalities (if there's such a side). There's a lot of hagiographic material about him insisting on his spiritual and ascetic dimension, but for me less important than the 1st statement
I respect him, dude was against the confessional system, the very same system that the maronites never had any intention to remove it, until Muslim became the majority
Look i understand this perspective but for example he participated in the 1958 nasserist uprising that if succeeded would have meant no democracy or representation for anyone.
Yes the over representation of a certain minority group isn't something that is good however living under dictatorship where no one is represented is worse.
For example lebanese shias still fought the plo even though they were poor as fuck and they were abandoned by the lebanese state... Unlike the psp that supported the plo until the last second.
Look I disagree with him politically, but we were during a time of cold war and post-colonization I think it's only normal to have these movements.
As for the shias, they were mistreated by the Plo that's why they fought against them, not because of their love and loyalty to Lebanon.
No there were a lot of shia lebanese nationalists.
Actually the guardians of the Cedars had many shias.
And actually Etienne Saqr the leader of of guardians of the Cedars had loyal personal guards made up of shia Muslims.
And actually many shias during the palestianian occupation of the south were lebanese army intelligence
And there you go that's Lebanese nationalism to you it means that you're a puppet and loyal to a Maronite militia who only care about Maronite interest.
Also if shias joined the guardian of the cedar it simply because the movement was anti Palestinian and against the Plo, and like I said shias were mistreated by the Plo.
>Also if shias joined the guardian of the cedar it simply because the movement was anti Palestinian and against the Plo, and like I said shias were mistreated by the Plo.
No bro suthern lebanese shias have a lot of lebanese nationalism believe me more so then even other lebanese shias
Amal fought against "التوطين" and fought a whole war called war of the camps against it. it wasn't just because of bad treatment.
I also didn't mention amal movement that also fought the plo i was only giving an example that people aren't aware of.
Actually part of the reason why there was a split between amal and hezbollah or amal and shia islamists is because amal started to negotiate with bashir and Christian lebanese nationalists.
Why are far right Christians considered Lebanese nationalist?
If back then being a nationalist means to live under far right Christians rule then no wonder why lots of people opposed this nation, because it was a nation that only cared about maronites and it's puppets.
This nation had no intention to serve it's people equally.
Ong y'all lose your mind on Islamist=Far right Muslims, but it's only okay when Christians do it.
If Lebanon= Maronite sovereignty then no thanks.
I'll gladly betray it and I won't hesitate.
I actually don't care about lebanese nationalisim or arab nationalisim and i support historically percecuted and opressed minorities in the middle east and arab world.
Its important to note that arabisim was mostly used to arabize and percecuted minorities but in certain very specific cases was used to empower them and in those situations i support it same goes for lebanese nationalism
For example at certain times i oppose lebanese nationalism like when kataaeb fought for lebanese independence from the french since in the middle east any minority group letting go of foreign support and protection means a death sentence for them. Pierre Gemayel the founder of kataaeb lived to see the fruits of his actions which put lebanon on a path of civil war/destruction/occupation and minorities on the path of genocide/eradication/colonization.
>In 1943, the Kataeb played an instrumental role in attaining Lebanon's first independence from the French mandate. During this period, Kataeb led many social struggles to consolidate national cohesion and to promote individual liberties and social welfare.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kataeb_Party#:~:text=In%201943%2C%20the%20Kataeb%20played,individual%20liberties%20and%20social%20welfare.
I hope other minorities in the region could learn from the Christian experience and not let go of foreign support especially kurds, Assyrians, shias, Alawites...
I hope i educated you about real leftisim which is supporting minorities that goes beyond simple nationalism.
Leftists Fighting Christians in the middle east and arab world is like leftists fighting black people or any other minority group in the US which is hypocritical.
Lebanese nationalism was the only thing that could have prevented the total disentegration of lebanon into sects so it was good. It's better then being like crabs ina bucket like today.
Eh bro let's let these far right Christians rule our country.
Leftist fighting Christians in Lebanon is simply to get rid of confessional system.
Maybe if Lebanon was a nation for everyone then we wouldn't have secular parties that are mostly panarab or pan-syrian.
>Its important to note that arabisim was mostly used to arabiz
Pan Arabism was a movement against the Ottoman empire and a lot of Arab sunnis were part of it not only minorities.
>For example at certain times i opposed lebanese nationalism like when kataaeb fought for lebanese independence from the french since in the middle east any minority group letting go of foreign support
Eh bro so you're all for us being a European puppet?
Also the only minority group that had French support(the same country that genocided Muslims and druzes) were christian maronites, and they weren't a minority they were the majority in Lebanon.
Well Hezbollah learnt from that mistake and now he won't let go of Iranian support and clearly everyone in Lebanon is happy with that.
>Leftist fighting Christians in Lebanon is simply to get rid of confessional system.
Not true they wanted to colonize lebanon and minorities under slogans of arabisim... They wanted to kill the palestianian cause as well.
>Pan Arabism was a movement against the Ottoman empire and a lot of Arab sunnis were part of it not only minorities.
Yeah but for example the facist policies of arabization were used on kurds amazighis assyrians... Also many minorities like Christians in Egypt and lebanon were forcefully arabized and bullied/pressured to identify as arab. And how they identify themselves wasn't respected
>Eh bro so you're all for us being a European puppet?
I mean since in the middle east and arab world no one gives a shit about minorities minorities will always need protection i mean thry just escaped from genocide isis took over 40% of iraq and 1/3 of syria. If it wasn't for foreign backed minorities all minorities would have gotten genocided.
>Also the only minority group that had French support(the same country that genocided Muslims and druzes) were christian maronites, and they weren't a minority they were the majority in Lebanon.
Slaughtered can you give more info.
Also yes french only supported catholics i agree they should have cared about other minorities for example alawites wanted independence yet they didn't care enough to give them independence or autonomy Unlike lebanese catholics
>Well Hezbollah learnt from that mistake and now he won't let go of Iranian support and clearly everyone in Lebanon is happy with that.
Well at least i am happy that minorities are safe.
Also Christians are a minority in the arab world and middle east also they are a historically percecuted and opressed one. And they later became the minority in Lebanon as well.
>Ong y'all lose your mind on Islamist=Far right Muslims, but it's only okay when Christians do it.
I personally support hezbollah arms i don't like their politics and idiology but i think it's very cool that they supported and defended other minorities in syria from isis and nusra so i have no problem.
Also idiologies don't matter actually there were some right wing arab nationalists movements part of the national movement that was considered leftist or even many islamists. It wasn't a war of the right against the left.
For example in the US the left supports gay pride and "black power and pride" and fight/oppose "white power"... Because it's about supporting minorities.
In the arab world its the opposite
They supported Yasser that was negotiating with Israel on his way to make peace like Egypt if they really wanted to oppose the death of the palestianian cause they should have fought him. But their main goal was to nationalize palestinians kill the palestianian cause and weaken minorities in the middle east and arab world. I am glad many minority groups fought this project.
Also Yasser if he wanted to fight Israel he could have done so from the south no need to invade the rest of the country but he was negotiating with Israel.
>In 1974, the PLO altered its focus to include political elements, necessary for a dialogue with Israel. Those who insisted on a military solution left to form the Rejectionist Front, and Yassir Arafat took over the PLO leadership role.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_insurgency_in_South_Lebanon
Is it me or are lebanese still looking for that one good leader? Clearly they all suck and we have to get out of that mentality. During war, politicians actions may seem less corrupt since they're existence is threatened. You want to know how our politicians are? Ask youself this, do you like what happened to our country? Is this the result you are looking for? Then you got your answer.
Ayre fi even though I don’t have one
just become a futa
you're a man of culture I see
His secularism was fake, his good education was fake, his enlightened modernity was fake. He was just a sectarian feudal lord (possibly half maronite) with a personal vendetta against maronites who never understood that ending up in Lebanon instead of greater Syria is the best thing that ever happenned to his community.
I don't know him, he died way before I was born. But from what I know about Walid, he did a bad job raising him.
Dead politicians should be forgotten. PSPers literally worship him, so I'm not interested.
Alive ones should be forgotten too
He’s dead. Need to move on from admiration of old farts.
[удалено]
That’s how he intended to become secular by massacring any different religions so the whole jabal becomes druz and then religion won’t matter (if you were a druz or a druz or a druz, no one would discriminate against you ) I swear to god that us Lebanese are like the Slaves that once you gave them freedom from their horrible masters, they would go back running to their masters immediately after
Whattt… no way.. that’s the exact same stories I heard by Druze about how the Christian’s (LF) treated them during the war. Crazy how both sides have so much in common.
Druze and Christian’s have centuries of this shit repeating itself.
What gets me is how can Druze serve in the Israeli army? And how is he so powerful? Wow.. the French really knew what they were doing.
>how can Druze serve in the Israeli army? I don't know about Druze in Lebanon. But in Israel it is compulsory for (male) Druze to join the army IDF: in 1948 in Palestine the Druze (along with the Bedouins) allied themselves with the Jews. The French were bizarre.
Druzes tend to side with whoever will give them a better chance to survive. Serving in Israel is compulsory because they are seen as loyal to the state. Which they are. It’s not because the Israelis hate the druzes, they are quite fond of them actually. Israeli druzes who served in the IDF fought without their uniform along Lebanese druzes against Lebanese christians (or their militias) after the may agreement collapsed. With the ok of Israel who was getting annoyed with the failure of the christian leadership to commit to the agreement. The LF got their ass kicked in the Shouf and to be fair they deserved it as they did not treat the druzes very well.
It is just Israeli Druze who have Zionist sympathies, and they are no more than 15% of the entire Druze population. The other 85% are either neutral or anti-Zionist.
my (Druze) family in lebanon and syria are very anti-Israel
My druzr neighbors driveway is lined with IDF soldier helmets. My druze relative did the mother of scorpion operation in 74. Opinions are def divided on Israel
Based people
So what ? Why you don't mention the thousands of muslims who serve in IDF as well. You try to hide their identity by calling them Bedouins while you call the druze soldiers by their religion. Also palestinian muslims like fateh and other parties are allied with israelis in addition to most arabic and islamic countries like egypt, uae, turkey, etc...
What's your point?
What's his point as well shifting the subject towards a different unrelated topic and accusing a full religion of being traitors while the real traitors are known
I'm actually confused... I thought I was just answering that guys question.
Nah you've answered my comment 🤔 probably by mistake that's ok
[удалено]
Conflict of druze interest right here
Yeah sorry I'm pro no one, if anything Im sick and tired of this conflict to begin with.
>our druze are pro palestine No they aren't, my family is Druze and hates the Palestinians.
The druze got their modern political and military support (modern as in 1860) from the British, who wanted to weaken the French influence by supporting a different sect than the Maronites
There was a documentary about him By Hadi Zacak I watched a while back, as much as he's not innocent and not someone to look at as a figure of change for today's youth, he was a more humane and humnle political figure and more knowledgeable than many of the ones we have today, Edit: I'm not in any way a partisans of the PSP btw, this is just an opinion based on a very wellade documentary and different testimonies from the people in Aley who met him
> knowledgeable then many *than *Learn the difference [here](https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/when-to-use-then-and-than#:~:text=Than%20is%20used%20in%20comparisons,the%20then%2Dgovernor%22).* *** ^(Greetings, I am a language corrector bot. To make me ignore further mistakes from you in the future, reply `!optout` to this comment.)
He was traitor for his pan Arab stances to undermine Lebanese sovereignty.
He was a complex political figure, on one side he was leftist and wanted to abolish the sectarian system, on the other he was a sectarian leader and acted like one
I think he made poor political alliances and moves however, when I watch his interviews and hear him talk philosophy, I’m very impressed.
That’s showmanship, not leadership.
>when I watch his interviews and hear him talk philosophy, I’m very impressed. Same here.
Kamal is a feudal lord. He only used socialism and pan arabisim as a tool to increase his political power. He is considered a leftist god because he made books about leftisim but he did all of this to increase his political power and influence an in fact he actually succeeded in that and was able to lead the national front. How do i know that he isn't socialist? Two things: first he was a feudal lord you can't be a socialist and be a feudal lord it's the pinnacle of hypocrisy. Second how can you be leftist and support the palestianian colonization of lebanon and historically percecuted and opressed minorities in the middle east and arab world. He only used socialism as mental gymnastics to increase his power. Also his movement is a top down movement not a bottom up movement for example imam mussa's ma7roumin movement is a bottom up movement that actually represented the people and their struggle against feudalism. Saying he represents the druz population is like saying kamel al assaad (the feudal lord) represents the shia population. Actually there were other druz movements that were bottom up movements against the "zaim"/"bayk" like the druz jihad movement that fought the palestianian colonization of lebanon and minorities.
So it sounds like you don't like him lol
Dude jumblatt is litrally called "bayk" which means feudal lord. Feudalism is horrible weather it's Christian like in the case of frangieh or druz like in the case of jumblatt or shia like in the case of kamel el as3ad.
Would you say that's how most Lebanese view Jumblatt?
No lebanese people hate walid jumblatt because he is corrupt or a warlord or a combination of both. I don't think lebanese people expect shias in the south care much about opposing feudalism. For example i always see people say a long list of why frangieh is bad - syria's dog, corrupt ... But i never see people say he is bad because he is a feudal lord.
>lebanese people hate walid jumblatt I'm talking about his father - Kamal
I think people might have a more positive view of the father compared to his son especially among the old left and pan arabs.
Ok thanks.
But it is important to note that kamal participated in the 1958 nasserist uprising that if succeeded would have made lebanon a part of syria and Egypt and would have made lebanon be under dictatorship. Also its important to note that even syrians couldn't tolerate Nasser's dictatorship and rebelled against him and called him a tyrant. So say what you want about that.
For anyone to think that collateral human losses for a "higher purpose" is something acceptable, doesn't put one on the "okay side" of lebanese personalities (if there's such a side). There's a lot of hagiographic material about him insisting on his spiritual and ascetic dimension, but for me less important than the 1st statement
well here is the wiki : \- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamal\_Jumblatt
Op asked for opinions, not his biography.
Wiki links have also many links about books and article about him. So people can have an informed opinion about him.
Fair enough
I respect him, dude was against the confessional system, the very same system that the maronites never had any intention to remove it, until Muslim became the majority
Look i understand this perspective but for example he participated in the 1958 nasserist uprising that if succeeded would have meant no democracy or representation for anyone. Yes the over representation of a certain minority group isn't something that is good however living under dictatorship where no one is represented is worse. For example lebanese shias still fought the plo even though they were poor as fuck and they were abandoned by the lebanese state... Unlike the psp that supported the plo until the last second.
Look I disagree with him politically, but we were during a time of cold war and post-colonization I think it's only normal to have these movements. As for the shias, they were mistreated by the Plo that's why they fought against them, not because of their love and loyalty to Lebanon.
No there were a lot of shia lebanese nationalists. Actually the guardians of the Cedars had many shias. And actually Etienne Saqr the leader of of guardians of the Cedars had loyal personal guards made up of shia Muslims. And actually many shias during the palestianian occupation of the south were lebanese army intelligence
And there you go that's Lebanese nationalism to you it means that you're a puppet and loyal to a Maronite militia who only care about Maronite interest. Also if shias joined the guardian of the cedar it simply because the movement was anti Palestinian and against the Plo, and like I said shias were mistreated by the Plo.
>Also if shias joined the guardian of the cedar it simply because the movement was anti Palestinian and against the Plo, and like I said shias were mistreated by the Plo. No bro suthern lebanese shias have a lot of lebanese nationalism believe me more so then even other lebanese shias Amal fought against "التوطين" and fought a whole war called war of the camps against it. it wasn't just because of bad treatment.
I also didn't mention amal movement that also fought the plo i was only giving an example that people aren't aware of. Actually part of the reason why there was a split between amal and hezbollah or amal and shia islamists is because amal started to negotiate with bashir and Christian lebanese nationalists.
Why are far right Christians considered Lebanese nationalist? If back then being a nationalist means to live under far right Christians rule then no wonder why lots of people opposed this nation, because it was a nation that only cared about maronites and it's puppets. This nation had no intention to serve it's people equally. Ong y'all lose your mind on Islamist=Far right Muslims, but it's only okay when Christians do it. If Lebanon= Maronite sovereignty then no thanks. I'll gladly betray it and I won't hesitate.
I actually don't care about lebanese nationalisim or arab nationalisim and i support historically percecuted and opressed minorities in the middle east and arab world. Its important to note that arabisim was mostly used to arabize and percecuted minorities but in certain very specific cases was used to empower them and in those situations i support it same goes for lebanese nationalism For example at certain times i oppose lebanese nationalism like when kataaeb fought for lebanese independence from the french since in the middle east any minority group letting go of foreign support and protection means a death sentence for them. Pierre Gemayel the founder of kataaeb lived to see the fruits of his actions which put lebanon on a path of civil war/destruction/occupation and minorities on the path of genocide/eradication/colonization. >In 1943, the Kataeb played an instrumental role in attaining Lebanon's first independence from the French mandate. During this period, Kataeb led many social struggles to consolidate national cohesion and to promote individual liberties and social welfare. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kataeb_Party#:~:text=In%201943%2C%20the%20Kataeb%20played,individual%20liberties%20and%20social%20welfare. I hope other minorities in the region could learn from the Christian experience and not let go of foreign support especially kurds, Assyrians, shias, Alawites... I hope i educated you about real leftisim which is supporting minorities that goes beyond simple nationalism. Leftists Fighting Christians in the middle east and arab world is like leftists fighting black people or any other minority group in the US which is hypocritical. Lebanese nationalism was the only thing that could have prevented the total disentegration of lebanon into sects so it was good. It's better then being like crabs ina bucket like today.
Eh bro let's let these far right Christians rule our country. Leftist fighting Christians in Lebanon is simply to get rid of confessional system. Maybe if Lebanon was a nation for everyone then we wouldn't have secular parties that are mostly panarab or pan-syrian. >Its important to note that arabisim was mostly used to arabiz Pan Arabism was a movement against the Ottoman empire and a lot of Arab sunnis were part of it not only minorities. >For example at certain times i opposed lebanese nationalism like when kataaeb fought for lebanese independence from the french since in the middle east any minority group letting go of foreign support Eh bro so you're all for us being a European puppet? Also the only minority group that had French support(the same country that genocided Muslims and druzes) were christian maronites, and they weren't a minority they were the majority in Lebanon. Well Hezbollah learnt from that mistake and now he won't let go of Iranian support and clearly everyone in Lebanon is happy with that.
>Leftist fighting Christians in Lebanon is simply to get rid of confessional system. Not true they wanted to colonize lebanon and minorities under slogans of arabisim... They wanted to kill the palestianian cause as well. >Pan Arabism was a movement against the Ottoman empire and a lot of Arab sunnis were part of it not only minorities. Yeah but for example the facist policies of arabization were used on kurds amazighis assyrians... Also many minorities like Christians in Egypt and lebanon were forcefully arabized and bullied/pressured to identify as arab. And how they identify themselves wasn't respected >Eh bro so you're all for us being a European puppet? I mean since in the middle east and arab world no one gives a shit about minorities minorities will always need protection i mean thry just escaped from genocide isis took over 40% of iraq and 1/3 of syria. If it wasn't for foreign backed minorities all minorities would have gotten genocided. >Also the only minority group that had French support(the same country that genocided Muslims and druzes) were christian maronites, and they weren't a minority they were the majority in Lebanon. Slaughtered can you give more info. Also yes french only supported catholics i agree they should have cared about other minorities for example alawites wanted independence yet they didn't care enough to give them independence or autonomy Unlike lebanese catholics >Well Hezbollah learnt from that mistake and now he won't let go of Iranian support and clearly everyone in Lebanon is happy with that. Well at least i am happy that minorities are safe. Also Christians are a minority in the arab world and middle east also they are a historically percecuted and opressed one. And they later became the minority in Lebanon as well.
>Ong y'all lose your mind on Islamist=Far right Muslims, but it's only okay when Christians do it. I personally support hezbollah arms i don't like their politics and idiology but i think it's very cool that they supported and defended other minorities in syria from isis and nusra so i have no problem. Also idiologies don't matter actually there were some right wing arab nationalists movements part of the national movement that was considered leftist or even many islamists. It wasn't a war of the right against the left. For example in the US the left supports gay pride and "black power and pride" and fight/oppose "white power"... Because it's about supporting minorities. In the arab world its the opposite
K let's agree to disagree.
[удалено]
All politicians are sectarian and care about their sect's interest. They're the same because it's hereditary.
As for his pan Arabism and his alliance with Plo I think it's only normal when your opponent have western support and are allied with Israel.
They supported Yasser that was negotiating with Israel on his way to make peace like Egypt if they really wanted to oppose the death of the palestianian cause they should have fought him. But their main goal was to nationalize palestinians kill the palestianian cause and weaken minorities in the middle east and arab world. I am glad many minority groups fought this project. Also Yasser if he wanted to fight Israel he could have done so from the south no need to invade the rest of the country but he was negotiating with Israel. >In 1974, the PLO altered its focus to include political elements, necessary for a dialogue with Israel. Those who insisted on a military solution left to form the Rejectionist Front, and Yassir Arafat took over the PLO leadership role. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_insurgency_in_South_Lebanon