Lebanese Government Resigns Leaving A Void Many Would Like To Fill

First off, Iran time and again tried to lend a helping hand to non-Hezbollah officials about setting up national air-defenses for them directly, and repeatedly got turned down by hostile political parties, linked to either the GCC (Hariri & co) or the US/Europe. And as the rest of our exchange, no matter the topic, you forget what you don’t like and act like it doesn’t exist, I’m absolutely not surprised.

There is the news, it was as recent as last year : https://english.aawsat.com/home/article/1581831/iran-propose-providing-air-defense-system-lebanese-army

Second, as usual you keep on putting the entirety of the blame on Iran, but you never once ask why all these nice promises of global modernization of the National Lebanese Army by the likes of France, Germany, the UK and even Russia never actually materialize, that is strange. After the 2006, there were official plans to create a Lebanese air-force, comprised of half a squadron of Mig-29s and a few Mil Helicopters. Moscow was ready to provide. But oh the surprise, after staunch US/Israeli opposition to that plan. And go figure wh. If it was supposed to be a national Lebanese Air-force, why prevent its establishment ? everything was quite predictably dropped. Now I don’t see the Iran-haters like you asking those questions ever.

Here, some reading on Russia’s 2008 offer : https://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/18/world/middleeast/18lebanon.html

The very core of Hezbollah’s and its allies’ argument about the whole issue is that Iran is the only party available to Lebanon with the needed level of military prowess and hardware to deter or if need be repel a possible Israeli incursion on its land in the future. And to support that hey have the 2006 war as a fresh example that still resonates in many Lebanese minds. Considering the situation, why not break the status-quo by providing the Lebanese military with actual means to defend its airspace and prevent daily illegal and dangerous incursion by Israeli forces considering their skies as their own ? that’s a central part of the issue, nullifying it would provide two net advantages :

1 – kill much of Hezbollah’s both rhetorical and philosophical posturing and legitimacy built around such humiliating overflights that the Israelis have submitted the whole of the Lebanese population to

2 – Take away Israel’s most provocative and destructive practice designed at both unilaterally hitting Syrian targets from Lebanese skies and constantly harassing and terrorizing Lebanese inhabitants living around the separation line, with the non-stop sonic-boom they voluntarily trigger over farmlands that kill cattle and terrorize old farmers.

This way Iran and Israel can keep the war between themselves and themselves only, just like you claim you want of Iran and its wars. Why don’t they make the army more powerful than Hezbollah and easily kill its talking points , make it redundant or even less-effective ? why let it remain a shadow of a real army and allow Hezbollah to pose as the effective defense force ?

I’ll give you one reason : as much as Hezbollah is pretty much an Iranian proxy army equipped, financed and directed by Tehran, the Lebanese army, no matter how weak it is today, is also an indirect tool strictly submitted to Western and Gulf bidders influencing parts of Lebanese political life that aren’t sympathetic to either Hezbollah or its Christian and secular allies. It simply has way less capabilities than Hezbollah hence the relative absence of concrete effects in its actions.

Bottom line is : Enough with your selective indignation, look at both sides of the fence to finally become worthy of that nickname you chose on this site man.

I agree that both Israel and the U.S. are enemies of Lebanon. They want Lebanon to remain weak, just like they want any other Muslim country to be weak. Israel will even annex parts of Lebanon and try to turn the whole of Lebanon into another Gaza given the chance. They have demonstrated that distrust by gradually taking over Palestinian lands with the aim of annexing it all. But this still does not justify the existence of Hezbollah in its present form. Here are my reasons.

(1) Despite being infiltrated, the Lebanese armed forces can still be made powerful enough to stop any invasion or annexation by Israel. You can bet your last buck the Saudi and Emirati militarizes have been infiltrated by both America and Israel so they can keep taps on any emerging threat. But this infiltration doesn’t mean the Saudi and Emirati militaries will allow a U.S or Israeli invasion or annexation of their country without putting up a fight. So your argument that Hezbollah fears infiltration is not valid. Every military on Earth (including Iran’s) has been infiltrated. But that won’t stop the military fighting – when the infiltrator attacks it.

(2) You talked about an airforce consisting of about a dozen or so planes. You and I know that even if Lebanon possess 50 planes, it still won’t keep Israel at bay. Besides, planes are a costly means of defense. Iran doesn’t have modern advanced planes, but it’s well armed and has managed to deter attacks for years. Syria has some advanced Russian planes which Hezbollah doesn’t have. But Israel doesn’t feel deterred by the Syrian army. Yet Hezbollah (without an airforce) manages to deter Israel. So the lack of a small airforce like you suggested cannot be the reason for Hezbollah’s existence in its present form. Hence, that argument too is invalid.

There is another reason for Hezbollah’s existence in its present form. Either you haven’t figured it out, or you are deliberately concealing it from people. But I’m telling you it has everything to do with Shiite evangelism.

Both Hezbollah and Iran have been infiltrated by Israel. Look at the sabotage, raid on Iran’s nuclear archives, violent protests in Iran and Lebanon, Spy rings that Iran and Hezbollah have busted, Leaked info on Soleimani’s movement, and a lot more. But neither Iran nor Hezbollah can be defeated only by infiltration. And the Lebanese military is no exception.

Hezbollah can absorb into the Lebanese military and the military will still be strong enough to deter Israel with or without an airforce or infiltration.

“Bottom line is : Try going past your selective indignation, look at both sides of the fence to finally become worthy of that nickname you chose on this site man”. You can’t accuse me of being subjective here. I want you to follow the logic in my argument. You’ll know it doesn’t come from a subjective mind. I happen to see Iran’s long-term plan for the region. Hezbollah is meant for two purposes, one of with is to defend Lebanon.

“They have demonstrated that distrust by gradually taking over Palestinian lands with the aim of annexing it all. But this still does not justify the existence of Hezbollah in its present form.”

It does, precisely because Hezbollah, no matter what you may think of it ideologically, and in your case also theologically, since unlike me you still delve into religious wars and mindset today, it has proven itself on the ground, materially, and factually as the only force so far within Lebanese society with enough motivation and aptitude to provoke two key events for its country as a whole:

1 – It managed to consistently fight an asymmetrical war of attrition against a much more powerful occupying force along with its puppet proxy army the SLA for 17 long years. Ultimately it managed to inflict enough human, political, material and economic damage to the Israeli so that they literally packed and left their lands overnight in a carefully executed withdrawal. There were many, many groups and proxies present into Lebanon at the time and Hezbollah was only merely one of them. Iran was absolutely not that much involved either militarily or financially at the time (for close to 8 years of those 17 years, it had its hands full with Saddam’s forces and a total physical and financial ruin because of the destructive war they waged with them). Still, somehow, Hezbollah emerged as the single biggest, most organized and powerful element that proved decisive in gradually tipping the balance against Tsahal and even other Western forces occupying its soil under the self-proclaimed banner of an “international peacekeeping force”.

2 – A few years after, they managed to repel another Israeli invasion attempt and to the surprise of many and Israelis first in line, not only did Hezbollah fight on and managed to contain it asymmetrically without an equivalent conventional army at its disposal, Christian and secular parts of Lebanese society also rallied behind them along with their own militias and brigades. Not to mention the Lebanese army that shared its command temporarily to help in the war effort, namely to take down the INS Hanit, a then state of the art military corvette of the Israeli navy. To achieve that the Lebanese army shared targeting data with Hezbollah staff that directed an Iranian-made “Noor” missile to make the hit. A perfect example of successful cooperation.

This is one in many undeniable indicators break your rationale on the group being some kind of unwelcome, non-Lebanese, non-state parasite. Lebanese society as a whole considered Hezbollah and its Lebanese members like any other parts of their own and acted in concert with it to repel a common foe. Lebanese society after the war didn’t crumble, nor did Nasrallah ever try to use the momentum of the war and his group’s massive popularity to change anything in the diverse composition of the state. Institution remained, their balance too. So in the end, not only was it an efficient and determining fighting force militarily, it showed that it perfectly fits and function within a unified yet diverse sectarian and political composition of the Lebanese state. Hate it or like it, Hezbollah as it is, showed that it works just fine as part of Lebanese society.

(1) “But this infiltration doesn’t mean the Saudi and Emirati militaries will allow a U.S or Israeli invasion or annexation of their country without putting up a fight. So your argument that Hezbollah fears infiltration is not valid. Every military on Earth (including Iran’s) has been infiltrated. But that won’t stop the military fighting – when the infiltrator attacks it.”

What you say maybe true of real armies with popular support. And I never discussed their “willingness at self-defense”. Even exhausted Saddam and third-world Iraq in 2003 offered some kind of fight against advanced US columns. But you picked two of the worse examples possibly imaginable to defend your thesis. Indeed in the Saudi and Emirati case, the whole of the army structure, infrastructure, manpower, equipment and training facilities are literally managed, manned and controlled by US forces. They don’t need to “infiltrate” as they are practically the architects and true commanders of their army, and control their every move, joint and bolt, quite literally. Their jets for example have failsafe mechanisms preventing Gulf planes from targeting either other US planes or Israelis, this has been common knowledge for decades now.

For the same reasons, they don’t need to “keep tabs” on anyone since the KSA and Emirati bases have entire sections where local servicemen are banned from even entering. Plus, their top brass is directly vetted, recruited and then intertwined operationally with US officers, and nowhere within the Saudi or Emirati apparatus is there a place where the locals are acting or present alone in a given tactical room without American generals or other high-ranking staff providing oversight (and hence, de-facto surveillance). Existing US forces and garrison + air force assets present and controlled by the US are enough to decapitate the KSA/UAE military and political brass in a couple of days, and this is widely accepted by analysts on the topic. Technically they are a completely controlled, dependent entity utterly dominated proxy army in the hands of the US. In factual terms, Gulf military men are guests within their own country when it comes to military zones, exactly like Iran was in the Shah’s time.

And hits is exactly the kind of weak, puppet army both the IRGC in Iran, and Hezbollah in Lebanon never want to be.

(2) “Syria has some advanced Russian planes which Hezbollah doesn’t have. But Israel doesn’t feel deterred by the Syrian army. Yet Hezbollah (without an airforce) manages to deter Israel. So the lack of a small airforce like you suggested cannot be the reason for Hezbollah’s existence in its present form. Hence, that argument too is invalid.”

In which way does this response makes it invalid since you never addressed its core or missed it entirely? My point was not about the balance of power, it was about you never asking why other actors than Iran and all effort to gradually upgrade and increase capabilities of the National Lebanese Army. You keep on complaining about Iran not helping any other groups than Hezbollah. I asked you why other parties claiming the same like Europe, the US itself and even Russia keep on making empty promises and in the end never do anything to counterbalance Hezbollah’s capabilities that bothers them so much. You also failed to even mention that part of the issue.

Of course you also failed to mention the part where Iran was offering the Lebanese “state” some means of air-defense to at least deter Israeli overflights, or at least why it was refused or ignored.

As always, you willingly ignore anything of relevance that might go counter to your many arbitrary, factually empty and extremely biased view on the world, you don’t change.

“There is another reason for Hezbollah’s existence in its present form. Either you haven’t figured it out, or you are deliberately concealing it from people. But I’m telling you it has everything to do with Shiite evangelism.”

Again with the religious grandstanding. There you have demonstrated a level of incredible ignorance and backwardness last time we talked that cannot allow me to resume talking to a wall, I’m sorry, let’s keep that part of the discussion elsewhere. And I never “concealed” anything here, I repeatedly, my last post included, quite explicitly went in lengths to say why despite all the positive aspects I find of Hezbollah, they remained undesirable to the long term, as I oppose foreign influence everywhere, would it be Iranian, American, or Israeli. I said that considering the current geopolitical situation, Hezbollah was technically the best, or least bad solution to Lebanon’s worries on territorial integrity when it came to the purely military aspect. But as always, you see the truth you want. You are the one using this forum as a platform for outright proselytism and spreading false ideas both on the past and present to vilify Iran and a branch of Islam you don’t like and wish annihilated along with its people.

“Both Hezbollah and Iran have been infiltrated by Israel. Look at the sabotage, raid on Iran’s nuclear archives, violent protests in Iran and Lebanon, Spy rings that Iran and Hezbollah have busted, Leaked info on Soleimani’s movement, and a lot more. But neither Iran nor Hezbollah can be defeated only by infiltration. And the Lebanese military is no exception.”

Again I never said infiltration was tantamount to defeat, there you are a on a self-feeding tangent on something I haven’t said, but feel free to continue talking to yourself on that aspect. I simply explained that it what their justification not to work with outsiders was. They want to avoid getting their top officers and political members assassinated and provide space for Mossad’s malign actions precisely in the leagues that hurt other countries and organizations so bad. As it stands, Hezbollah is much more immune from internal threats and sabotage than even the IRGC is, they count on keeping it that way and with reason. It’s not a question of defeat, but effective self-defense, and you don’t understand the grand game in that.

“Bottom line is: Try going past your selective indignation, look at both sides of the fence to finally become worthy of that nickname you chose on this site man”. You can’t accuse me of being subjective here. I want you to follow the logic in my argument.

The “logic” in your argument always overlooks key aspects of every discussion in a way that suits a never-evolving narrative, I’ve talked to you long enough to know that trying to have an actually objective discussion is quite the vain effort. I simply don’t like to leave your many fallacious claims here unaddressed and present my own facts and rationale to counter them, not to have an actual dialogue.

“Hezbollah is meant for two purposes, one of with is to defend Lebanon.

National defense without which it cannot be assured and would invite foreign attacks, invasion and possibly even re-occupation. So long as for whatever reasons, a viable alternative to Hezbollah doesn’t materialize, like most of the Lebanese people, secular, Christian and Muslim alike, I’ll continue to morally support it as a credible military force respected and feared by Lebanon’s worst enemies.

You are really beginning to bore me with this lengthy posts that speak very little. Why do you lack the ability to stick to a particular line of argument? Are you doing this in the hope that people who are following this argument will get bored and stop so they won’t know the truth?

You claimed Hezbollah’s existence in its present form is justifiable for two reason: 1. That Lebanon has been denied an air force consisting of less than two-dozen planes 2. That the Lebanese army will be infiltrated should Hezbollah be part of it.

I categorically rejected these two claims because they are illogical.

1. An air force will not deter Israel from attacking Lebanon. Take Syria as an example. Syria possess more air power than what Lebanon was supposed to get to deter Israel, yet Israel bombs Syria at will. 2. Every military on this planet has been infiltrated, including the Iranian army. But infiltration does not neutralize deterrence. Despite infiltrating an army, you can’t attack that army overtly and not expect it to fight. So Hezbollah cannot claim that it continues to be independent for fear of infiltration. In fact, Hezbollah itself has been infiltrate.

Of all that I said, you could only find this “unexplained” statement to quote: “They have demonstrated that distrust by gradually taking over Palestinian lands with the aim of annexing it all. But this still does not justify the existence of Hezbollah in its present form.”

I have noticed a tactic and pattern in your argument. Whenever I make a strong argument you can’t overcome, you pick the vague parts and leave those that are very clear for all to understand. this way, you divert the attention of readers from the main points that show Iran’s guilt. For this, I’m pretty certain now you are a regime agent and a die-hard Shiite. Because that’s how Shiites argue generally. When cornered, they focus on vague statements their opponents make so that they confuse the readers or listeners and obscure the plain truth.

And yes, my argument and analysis of events have a religious dimension. Because you simply can’t divorce religion from what’s happening in the Middle East. The Al-Aqsa is a religious symbol, and so is Jerusalem. Khomeini and some top Iranian leaders hardly make a speech without a religious dimension. So how can you understand their actions if you don’t consider the religious factor?

“Tou are really beginning to bore me with this lengthy posts that speak very little. Why do you lack the ability to stick to a particular line of argument? Are you doing this in the hope that people who are following this argument will get bored and stop so they won’t know the truth? Why do you lack the ability to stick to a particular line of argument?”

Nobody but simple-minded haters like you get bored by my take, rest assured, and the support I receive on this site’s many threads even from detractors with whom I respectfully disagree are enough of a testimony to ignore your personal, isolated assessment. But nice attempt trying to deflect the core topic with ad hominem attacks, since as usual it is all your empty ideological posturing leave you with once I’ve taken the time to cover your many fallacious claims in a structured manner. You get upset because your parotting never adds any weight to your arguments, and quite the contrary they lose in credibility overtime as a given exchange drags on.

“1. An air force will not deter Israel from attacking Lebanon. Take Syria as an example. Syria possess more air power than what Lebanon was supposed to get to deter Israel, yet Israel bombs Syria at will.”

See ? just as I said a moment ago above. So let me get this straight. All you accomplished here is to again act like a broken answering machine and repeat once more what you said exactly in your last post, almost word for word. while totally disregarding every single claim I made to counter you on those very grounds. You behavior here borders insanity, I hope you realize that.

“2. Every military on this planet has been infiltrated, including the Iranian army. But infiltration does not neutralize deterrence. Despite infiltrating an army, you can’t attack that army overtly and not expect it to fight. So Hezbollah cannot claim that it continues to be independent for fear of infiltration. In fact, Hezbollah itself has been infiltrate.”

Same here. Identical claims as before, overlooking every bit of my responses without a modicum of a counter-argument anywhere. Congratulations on agreeing with yourself. You do seem to love listening to yourself, and only you. The bad news is, such behavior it will also only ever convince you, and no one else.

“Of all that I said, you could only find this “unexplained” statement to quote: “They have demonstrated that distrust by gradually taking over Palestinian lands with the aim of annexing it all. But this still does not justify the existence of Hezbollah in its present form.”

And you don’t even read my replies, and only repeat your initial points over and over as some sort of magic formula that is supposed to prove your logical edge over me. It doesn’t work like that. You seem lost.

“Whenever I make a strong argument you can’t overcome, you pick the vague parts and leave those that are very clear for all to understand. this way, you divert the attention of readers from the main points that show Iran’s guilt.”

I’ve seen many of your “opponents” on this site. And they all get irritated at the lack of logical sense in many of your replies, just as I do, and so because you do to them exactly what you do to me, which is overlooking 99% of our statements made while retorting to you and reformulate the same empty stupidities made before. Looping around fixed answers and ideas all you do, and what make you look like the fool you are.

“For this, I’m pretty certain now you are a regime agent and a die-hard Shiite. Because that’s how Shiites argue generally. When cornered, they focus on vague statements their opponents make so that they confuse the readers or listeners and obscure the plain truth.”

And for this, I’m now certain you live in pathetic delusions of the most typical kind, the worst cliches of laughable paranoia rather than mature thinking. If I may ask, how old are you ? I ask since that bickering hints at young person confusing passion with ideas, and ideological opposition with a personal fights. I should not even dignify you by answering anymore, I’m doing you a favor here, others will leave you in your bubble while laughing at your back, trust me.

You don’t even seem to realize other people than those dreaded Shiite infidels can not only destroy your proselytism and broken ideology and arguments that go with it, while being either a non-Mulsim or an outright non-believer like myself. I spent countless posts saying in length why I oppose BOTH Shiite and Sunni regimes as they happen to be two faces of the same anachronistic and backwards theocratic coin, and you either are intellectually deaf-blind or have a catastrophically short memory if you have already forgotten this. As the problem with your take is not even so much about religion, but basic logic itself. Your religious extremist is merely an aggravating factor in your larger inability to understand the world as it is and stick to centuries’ old mindset to explain it. And fail.

“And yes, my argument and analysis of events have a religious dimension. Because you simply can’t divorce religion from what’s happening in the Middle East. The Al-Aqsa is a religious symbol, and so is Jerusalem. Khomeini and some top Iranian leaders hardly make a speech without a religious dimension. So how can you understand their actions if you don’t consider the religious factor?”

The very struggle of Arafat initially was of an exclusively secular and nationalistic nature. Only with the introduction of Mossad-created Hamas did things take a sudden religious turn in the late 80s. Even the PA now is of secular nature, that’s for a reason. Hamas is a pariah willingly created to throw a rift between Palestinian factions and alter the founding of their struggle.

Anyway you contradict yourself, this is getting perfect. You seemed to agree that neither Saudi Arabia or Iran can pretend at being true representatives of Sharia or doing the work of God on Earth, as they are lying hypocrites, and this was one of the few points on which you and I seemed to somehow agree on in the past. What you show by saying this is your utter ignorance of the intimate links between theology manipulation and politics. Only in words are those houses opposed on religion, what are the true stakes are territory, influence and economy, and religion is only a tool used to federate the masses behind them as much as possible. This is the oldest ways of manipulation by corrupt leader.

As an atheist, I will always remind what Marx once said : Religion is the people’s opium. A drug for the soul that if used with mastery by a given regime can make millions do their bidding to the last bit in their place while the sit and rip the benefits over the ruin of war fought by others.

Insult me as much as you want from now on, I’m done with you both on moral, human and intellectual terms, you do seem like a quasi-delirius person doubled with a mediocre intellect. You never think for yourself, you parrot a set of dogmatic guidelines on every topic and seem absolutely immune to critical thinking, just like all religious dogmatics anyway, trading their intelligence for a higher being and mistaking politics with faith at every turn. I’ve seen it all before, but now I’m certain.

This discussion has lost track. I’ll attempt to get you back on track so maybe we can understand each other this time. I’ll ask just four questions I wish you’d give a straightforward answer, preferably listing the points or using paragraphs to separate points. Try to summarize your answer as much as possible. When you answer a question, you also tell me why. Feel free to ask me any questions too.

Here are my four questions.

1. Is Hezbollah’s existence as an independent (of Lebanon) army justifiable? If Yes, why? If No, why? 2. Do you think there is a “religion factor” to the Middle East’s crisis or not? If Yes, why? If No, why? 3. Was Hezbollah’s involvement in Syria authorized by the Lebanese government? If Yes, why? If No, why? 4. Does Hezbollah’s involvement in Syria has ramifications for the whole of Lebanon or Not? If Yes, why? If No, why?

Let’s bring some sanity to this argument. I believe there are people following it. Looking forward to your answers. I don’t block people no matter how annoying they are.

1. Is Hezbollah’s existence as an independent (of Lebanon) army justifiable? If Yes, why? If No, why?

==> I answered that in both technical and legal terms, and offered my moral take on it. Go read our previous exchanges. I am done repeating myself on this. Entire passages of my previous post touch upon that very topic, whether you agree or not with it in substance. Go read up, everything is there.

2. Do you think there is a “religion factor” to the Middle East’s crisis or not? If Yes, why? If No, why?

==> ditto the above. You know full well my take on religion in the region as a political tool today. You can find one (in many) occurrences of my answer in the very last post I made specifically related to the Palestinian national struggle, but also elsewhere.

3. Was Hezbollah’s involvement in Syria authorized by the Lebanese government? If Yes, why? If No, why?

==> Same here. I told you what I thought of Hezbollah, why I “philosophically” supported it short of a better or simply existing alternative, while criticizing it ideologically. Again, ALL there in MANY posts I took the time to structure and enrich.

4. Does Hezbollah’s involvement in Syria has ramifications for the whole of Lebanon or Not? If Yes, why? If No, why?

==> addressed in paragraphs common to point 3. And precisely centered on the Lebanese citizen, their reaction and support of Hezbollah’s border clean-up operations even recognized by Hariri’s bloc.

“I believe there are people following it. Looking forward to your answers.”.

But you already got all these answers throughout our many exchanges of views, no matter how tense or relaxed depending on times. And I sincerely believe people have left that exchange alone for quite some time already, since it goes in never-ending circles on irreconcilable views between the same people every time.

You did provide some views on these questions, bu mostly scattered and not precise. My reason for repeating these questions is that perhaps you’ll consider structuring it more precisely this time. You could just answer one at a time. To be frank, I can’t tell what exactly your position is on these questions. Yes, I have read your previous comments, and here’s what I think your positions are for each question.

For the first question, You did say you’d like Hezbollah to absorb into the Lebanese army, but you never said why. Your dominant position on this is that Hezbollah’s existence in the present form is justifiable. You gave three major reasons: 1. External forces (especially the U.S.) deliberately kept the Lebanese armed forces weak, mainly by undermining its air force. (I agree with this). 2. Iran offered to help Lebanon set up air defenses but the Lebanese government turned down the offer. (I assume this also to be true). 3. Hezbollah fears infiltration by the enemy. (This too is true). My position is that all the above three are NOT the reason for Hezbollah’s existence as it is. I did explain how, and I’m willing to go deeper on this if you want.

For the question regarding a “religion factor”, you and I disagreed on whose “religion-influenced” foreign policy is more destructive – Iran or Arabia? But we never discussed to what EXTENT religion influences decision-making in Tehran and Riyadh. I have a hunch you don’t seem to know much here. Because none of your previous comments even came close to explaining it.

As for the question regarding whether or not the Lebanese government authorized or supports Hezbollah’s deployment in Syria, I attempted to draw your attention regarding the divergence of interest between Hezbollah and Lebanon. I want you to provide proofs where the government of Lebanon openly authorized Hezbollah to fight in Syria – a war that does not concern Lebanon. I need that proof. You never provided it in your previous comments. Perhaps you’ll do so now. For an army (Hezbollah) to join a foreign war, the government of that country MUST have and EXPLICIT position on the deployment. Silence is unacceptable in such matters of great consequence for a country – in this case, Lebanon.

My last question was meant to highlight the danger that Hezbollah in its present form represent for Lebanon.

If you are not aware of Iran’s final goals regarding the middle east and the Muslim world, I’m willing to discuss this issue with you to a great length. I am not a propagandist or Iran hater just because they are Shiites.

The Iranian revolution of 1979 marked the beginning of the end of America, Israel, and all their puppet governments in the Middle East. Make no mistake, the Iranian regime WILL NOT go down alone. But the regime will go down. I haven’t a shred of doubt about this. The regime will not achieve its three major goals, which are:

1. Taking control of Mecca, Medinah, and Jerusalem. 2. Dominating and leading the Muslim world through control of Islam’s holy sites 3. Spreading Shiism in the Muslim world with the ultimate goal of exterminating the Sunni faith.

Everything Iran does is aimed towards achieving the above-listed points. I can proof this if you want, and even discuss it in length. No one taught me this. My research and observation of Iran led me to this conclusion.