|
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
Well to say the least you are taking a very western view.
I'd like to clarify some things-
Members of any military are Militant -
see definition of word not slanted propaganda to attack not fascist totalitarian states attacking grass roots movements -
Militant means
# Fighting or warring.
# Having a combative character; aggressive, especially in the service of a cause |
Come on man! You're just back tracking and it's obvious!
When people use the term "militant" they are usually referring to non-state groups, not to state aparatus. If you meant to say "army" in your first post say so, otherwise you're confusing the army with all the various non-state militant groups in the country
| quote: | | I disagree I still beleive the French and other nations are better trained and have better equipment and support than the Lebanese Army. If this is not the case let me know because I've seen the Lebanese equipment, and I've seen the UN's Expeditionary Force Nations equipment and I think that they are far more formidable and better trained than the Lebanese army. |
The UN isn't there to fight (or even defend). I don't think they have a mandate to enter into any combat situations, if they do, they certainly aren't manned/equipped to do so. They are there primarily as an observer mission. This isn't like the UN forces in Bosnia that were peaceenforcers. They won't become involved in ANY fighting that happens in Lebanon. They might have some nice weapons (ie guns that actually fire) but they lack the numbers to stand up to any of the militias or the Lebanese (or indeed Israeli) army
| quote: | Also - no the Lebanese President does not need to be Maronite.
That is part of the problem - when you always have a marontite president and a sunni PM obviously the Shiites are going to feel oppressed. It is religious discrimination and institutionalization of religion with the state. It is against UN fundamentals of religious tolerance and the premise of Free Democracy |
Until there is a new agreement signed then the President of Lebanon will always be Maronite Christian. The National Pact agreed by all parties at independence states this (altho it is "unwritten", that might confuse those used to American style "written" constitutions but I'm British and our whole constitution is "unwritten" so I am aware that unwritten constitutions are perfectly legally binding).
Altho I completely agree that this system is maybe not so democratic, but then Lebanon is an exception and there needs to be some kind of safeguards in place to prevent one sect gaining control of everything or we'd never see the end of civil war there.
I think the perfect scenario would be years of political reconciliation where all the groups began to see themselves as Lebanese first and foremost, then maybe it wouldn't matter which sect was elected to which positions. However, there are too many meddling outside influcences - from Israel and America, to Syria and Iran - to allow things to simmer down right now...
|