HA and its supporters - Discussion of Wilayat Al Faqih

L

Lebanese_uk

Active Member
As a shia I do hope Hezbollah becomes a more liberal and less religious party...

If Amal came under better leadership (nobody respects Berri) then it could threaten Hezbollah and force the hezb to liberalise... The reason for Hezbollah's creation was the corruption and pro-syrian politics Nabih Berri forced on Amal when he became leader.
 
  • Advertisement
  • 4U2IMI8

    4U2IMI8

    Well-Known Member
    As a shia I do hope Hezbollah becomes a more liberal and less religious party...

    If Amal came under better leadership (nobody respects Berri) then it could threaten Hezbollah and force the hezb to liberalise... The reason for Hezbollah's creation was the corruption and pro-syrian politics Nabih Berri forced on Amal when he became leader.
    I'm sure a lot of Shi3a share your outlooks and hopes. That's why they follow someone "nobody respects", and a "non liberal" hizb. You should join Sayyed AlAmin, or Mr. As3ad they're "liberal", and "greatly respected" by the Shi3a in Lebanon.
     
    Abufijli

    Abufijli

    Well-Known Member
    Lebanese_uk,

    Why would you hope to mutate Hezbollah instead of replacing it with someone else to represent you? More liberal and less religious just don't go too well with Hezbollah simply because they are fundamentally against what Hezbollah stands for. If you are worried about corruption and pro-Syrian politics, there are a lot of Shiite people who could fight that other than HA/Amal, how about Habib Sadek, or Saadallah Mazraani for example?

    Back to the topic of the thread, I believe Hezbollah's best interest is to see the Syrian regime stays until at least after the Iraqi crisis is solved (which won't happen in the near future). The gamble of March14 is to topple the Syrian regime through the international tribunal. March14 believe that Hariri was an untouchable and is determined to teach the Bachar's regime a tough lesson. This is the reason behind the divisions and polarization in Lebanon today. We're still living the consequences of the assassination of Rafik Hariri. Those who killed him knew what they were doing.
    there are alternatives in the shiaa scene, you have mr Al Asaad who is "very Liberal", and Sayyed Ali Al Amin who is more liberal and "Flexible" (ma3 lwa2ef) :biggrin: so there is no need to hope for a more liberal party on the shiaa scene
     
    mount_amel

    mount_amel

    Well-Known Member
    I'm sure a lot of Shi3a share your outlooks and hopes. That's why they follow someone "nobody respects", and a "non liberal" hizb. You should join Sayyed AlAmin, or Mr. As3ad they're "liberal", and "greatly respected" by the Shi3a in Lebanon.

    Who are "greatly respected" ?
    I think all of above you mentioned are trying to take the Shiats back to the feudal era in Mount Amel and Beeka'. Assaad Family , Al Amin family ...

    Hizbollah represents the Shiats , the extremley fanatic , moderate and the liberal shiats. All shiats have one demand .. Share the executive decision in the country that they are part of it.

    Salam
     
    4U2IMI8

    4U2IMI8

    Well-Known Member
    Who are "greatly respected" ?
    I think all of above you mentioned are trying to take the Shiats back to the feudal era in Mount Amel and Beeka'. Assaad Family , Al Amin family ...

    Hizbollah represents the Shiats , the extremley fanatic , moderate and the liberal shiats. All shiats have one demand .. Share the executive decision in the country that they are part of it.

    Salam
    You misunderstood. I was being sarcastic.:surrender:
     
    Mey

    Mey

    Well-Known Member
    Hizbollah represents the Shiats , the extremley fanatic , moderate and the liberal shiats. All shiats have one demand .. Share the executive decision in the country that they are part of it.

    Salam
    Mount, long time no see :smile:

    I do not disagree, HA represents most Shiaa, but please let us not include all Shiaa in there. Some Shiites feel represented by other parties like FPM, Amal, SSNP, Communist Party, 14 Feb movements, FM, etc...

    HA is the largest representative, they have the Shiite seats (with Amal of course), but remember there are Shiites who voted for Aoun in Jbeil and Zahle and in Baabda (regardless of HA position) and there are Shiites who voted for Hariri in Bekaa regardless of HA, so technically speaking, they are NOT the sole representative, they represent the majority, yes, but they do not represent all the Shiites, you need to still give the others their individuality, their own opinion, you need to acknowledge their existance.

    As for HA support, true HA has the majority of Shiite support, however we have to stress that this support is not ideological, but rather circumstancial.

    I can claim that the majority of Shiites do not believe in an Islamic state, and many those who SUPPORT HA, have seculars between them, communists, etc.. who support HA for the current circumstances (resistance, services, etc..)

    Now to answer the question, HA would find difficulties if another regime comes in place of Baath in case that regime was not an ally to HA because simply it will cut off their weapon supply. So militarily yes HA will suffer, but politically HA is a Lebanese party with HUGE support from Lebanese population so basically, they will still be here, and present strongly on the political scene.
     
    AlGhaliboon

    AlGhaliboon

    Active Member
    As a shia I do hope Hezbollah becomes a more liberal and less religious party...

    If Amal came under better leadership (nobody respects Berri) then it could threaten Hezbollah and force the hezb to liberalise... The reason for Hezbollah's creation was the corruption and pro-syrian politics Nabih Berri forced on Amal when he became leader.
    Salam,

    what's wrong with a religious party? (nothing)

    what's wrong with a non-liberal i.e. conservative party ? (nothing)

    what's wrong with the Shi3a supporting such a party ? (nothing)

    have the Shi3a lost anything by supporting Hezbullah? or gained? (no, we have gained, thank to Hezbullah our lands were liberated and "Israel" has been defeated twice)

    what has Hezbullah done for the Shi3a, and what have other "Shi'ites" and Shi'ite parties done to improve the lot of the Shi3a? (see above, and no other party/individual other than Imam Musa al-Sader has done for the Shi3a what Hezbullah has done).

    do the people support Hezbullah because they have no alternative? (no, they have lots of alternatives, including the secular FPM).

    has Hezbullah proven it can survive without Syrian support and even in the face of Syrian hostility? (yes, 100%).

    does Hezbullah take its "oxygen" from Iran? (no, no and no! we survive on our own, we have a wide array of investments and networks, anyone who wishes to portray us as living on Iranian aid is desperately trying to fool oneself).

    Mahyar,

    on what bases do you say that support Hezbullah is on a circumstancial bases noto ideological?

    and are you saying that the alleged support for other parties is ideological and not circumstancial just because they are "not Shi'ite" parties?
     
    Mey

    Mey

    Well-Known Member
    what's wrong with a religious party? (nothing)
    That is of course your opinion and you are entitled to it, others (like myself) might disagree, and see that a religious party IMHO opinion can be taken as a party to rule Lebanon in the future because Religion is not common between us all, and I do not think that it could work with Lebanon as an Islamic state (I know you have a different opinion)

    what's wrong with a non-liberal i.e. conservative party ? (nothing)
    Again that is your opinion, IMO a liberal party is much better.

    what's wrong with the Shi3a supporting such a party ? (nothing)
    Definitly nothing, they are entitled to their opinions.

    have the Shi3a lost anything by supporting Hezbullah? or gained? (no, we have gained, thank to Hezbullah our lands were liberated and "Israel" has been defeated twice)
    Win and lost, again its a matter of what we want and a matter of perspective.

    what has Hezbullah done for the Shi3a, and what have other "Shi'ites" and Shi'ite parties done to improve the lot of the Shi3a? (see above, and no other party/individual other than Imam Musa al-Sader has done for the Shi3a what Hezbullah has done).
    True, and that is why HA has lots of supporters amongst the Shiite community, although IMHO, HA capitalized on the situation and took advantage of the need of the Shiite community to spread HA ideology, yes we needed schools, but not necessarly schools that teach religion for example.

    do the people support Hezbullah because they have no alternative? (no, they have lots of alternatives, including the secular FPM).
    Well the alternatives are not up to par currently and FPM is a new party and it is definitly gaining ground, give it time.

    has Hezbullah proven it can survive without Syrian support and even in the face of Syrian hostility? (yes, 100%).
    Yes true but that was because it still had Iran and the situation was in chaos back then, we cannot exclude the strong impact on HA in case the Syrians because hostile now (remember you need a path for weapons and with the strong embargo on Lebanon, Syria is the only gateway)

    does Hezbullah take its "oxygen" from Iran? (no, no and no! we survive on our own, we have a wide array of investments and networks, anyone who wishes to portray us as living on Iranian aid is desperately trying to fool oneself).
    True HA has established a strong base, but again, you cannot neglect the Iranian aid, it plays a major role, imagine if HA could not supply the damaged families with money to rebuild, we cannot fool ourselves to think that this would not have affected, the money paid is huge and Iran is helping a lot, and of course I thank the Iranians for helping rebuild.


    on what bases do you say that support Hezbullah is on a circumstancial bases noto ideological?

    and are you saying that the alleged support for other parties is ideological and not circumstancial just because they are "not Shi'ite" parties?
    They support that party for their circumstances, resistance, protection, services, but they disagree with its ideology of an islamic state. The majorty of Shiites are like the haidar women from bednayil, she gave HN a "3abeye" as a gift and said that as long as there is no Islamic State, we support HN.

    I know MANY Shiites who go party and get drunk, and they support HA ! What are you telling me they support HA ideologically ?

    I have seen many communists (who support HA), are you telling me these are people who believe in an islamic state ?

    I know MANY leftists who support HA now, are you telling me they believe in an Islamic state ?

    CIRCUMSTANCIAL SUPPORT !

    Many adore the notion of resistance, they find it in HA, they do not have to believe in an ISLAMIC STATE to Support HA !

    This is what I meant by CIRCUMSTANCIAL, akeed you do not believe that the MAJORITY of SHIITES believe in Wilayat al Faqih :) (I am sure many do not understand what is Wilayat AL Faqih and how is it applied)

    In case of other parties, it depends, many FPMers support FPM not ideologically also but also circumstancially, many support FPM because of its current stands with HA, many support FPM for the wrong reasons (because they think its a Christian movement for example), they are not aware of the complete principles nor do they care to be.


    HA would be truly Lebanese only if it would seize its ties with Syria and Iran
    They are Lebanese regardless of any ties, we cannot give identity based on what we like or what we want. They are Lebanese, they enjoy Lebanese support, they are a Lebanese registered party. They believe what they are doing is in the best interest of Lebanon, they may not see the interest of Lebanon as you see it, it all depends on how we look at things.
     
    AlGhaliboon

    AlGhaliboon

    Active Member
    That is of course your opinion and you are entitled to it, others (like myself) might disagree, and see that a religious party IMHO opinion can be taken as a party to rule Lebanon in the future because Religion is not common between us all, and I do not think that it could work with Lebanon as an Islamic state (I know you have a different opinion)
    the issue was placed in terms of not intentions/motives but of the very nature of parties.

    Again that is your opinion, IMO a liberal party is much better.
    perhaps but if one is sure that if people have the alternative they will choose the liberal one, why the need to remove/liberalize religious/conservative parties? i guess deep inside people know that the natural choice will not lie with the liberal party but with the religious one, as can be seen in what happened in Algeria and how the army refused to accept the democratic choice of the people in voting for the Front Islamique du Salut.

    True, and that is why HA has lots of supporters amongst the Shiite community, although IMHO, HA capitalized on the situation and took advantage of the need of the Shiite community to spread HA ideology, yes we needed schools, but not necessarly schools that teach religion for example.
    uh, not true. if H.A ceases its services today, people would support other parties? i don't see that happening. also H.A has not capitalized on anything, its raison d'etre is the occupation, corruption of the statesmen, and subjugation of the Shi'ite community. well they are not religious schools meaning they are regular schools that also have religioun classes as all private schools have theology / religion classes, i don't see why you should single out Hezbullah for this?? also if people don't want their children to receive such an education they are more than free to send their kids to public schools.

    Well the alternatives are not up to par currently and FPM is a new party and it is definitly gaining ground, give it time.
    not really, if support for other parties would be based not on circumstantial basis but on ideological lines, fpm should receive the support of the majority of Shi'ites even now. no matter how old a party fpm becomes over the years it will have only marginal membership from the Shi'ite community. you can quote me on that one. Hezbullah support is not about needs/services, it's pretty insulting to say this. you forget that Hezbullah actually sprung from the people, and when it was born it did not offer any services, but people still joined its ranks and fought against israel, and all the Shi3a were supportive of H.A.

    Yes true but that was because it still had Iran and the situation was in chaos back then, we cannot exclude the strong impact on HA in case the Syrians because hostile now (remember you need a path for weapons and with the strong embargo on Lebanon, Syria is the only gateway)
    so you are saying that H.A without weapons will not survive? and please, do take into consideration what is happening in Gaza, a tiny strip of land surrounded by an avowed enemy and a collaborator (with israel) regime southwards. you also underestimate our intelligence, the Palestinians can build Qassams in their homes.... it's not exactly rocket science if you get the pun. i guess you'd have to actually ban all weapons ownership and crack the black market if such an embargo is to have any effect on the ability to get guns and ammunition.

    True HA has established a strong base, but again, you cannot neglect the Iranian aid, it plays a major role, imagine if HA could not supply the damaged families with money to rebuild, we cannot fool ourselves to think that this would not have affected, the money paid is huge and Iran is helping a lot, and of course I thank the Iranians for helping rebuild.
    H.A can pay everyone and rebuild. but as long as Iran is willing to lend support, H.A does not feel the need to overstretch its financial contribution. I guess most people have no idea about the extent to which H.A sustains itself.

    They support that party for their circumstances, resistance, protection, services, but they disagree with its ideology of an islamic state. The majorty of Shiites are like the haidar women from bednayil, she gave HN a "3abeye" as a gift and said that as long as there is no Islamic State, we support HN.
    whoever disagrees with the Islamic State is free to do so, but there are many who believe in it, more than you can imagine, and those who are members of the huge party network are convinced.

    I know MANY Shiites who go party and get drunk, and they support HA ! What are you telling me they support HA ideologically ?
    with all due respect i don't see how those "many" are a representative sample of the Shi'ites. the same argument is made in the west about the Iranian revolution and how it is a minority-imposed regime, etc., but so far we have not see any evidence of this, in fact we see the contrary. so these few Shi'ites who get drunk are comparable to the few remnants of the Shah's regime in "exile" who are making every effort to topple the government and bring back a U.S-backed Shah regime in Iran.

    I have seen many communists (who support HA), are you telling me these are people who believe in an islamic state ?

    I know MANY leftists who support HA now, are you telling me they believe in an Islamic state ?
    the comparison does not hold. compare the communists' support for the LCP for example, are you saying their support of the LCP is "circumstantial"? these people support the LCP for example based on ideology? but the Shi3a do not support H.A based on ideology only circumstantial issues? I see where you're going with that.

    Many adore the notion of resistance, they find it in HA, they do not have to believe in an ISLAMIC STATE to Support HA !

    This is what I meant by CIRCUMSTANCIAL, akeed you do not believe that the MAJORITY of SHIITES believe in Wilayat al Faqih :) (I am sure many do not understand what is Wilayat AL Faqih and how is it applied)
    for the record H.A ideology is not just about Wilayat al-Faqih!!!!

    In case of other parties, it depends, many FPMers support FPM not ideologically also but also circumstancially, many support FPM because of its current stands with HA, many support FPM for the wrong reasons (because they think its a Christian movement for example), they are not aware of the complete principles nor do they care to be.
    many, not most. many is a vague concept. what do you mean by "many"? i am talking about hwo representative these "many" are.
     
    Mey

    Mey

    Well-Known Member
    perhaps but if one is sure that if people have the alternative they will choose the liberal one, why the need to remove/liberalize religious/conservative parties? i guess deep inside people know that the natural choice will not lie with the liberal party but with the religious one, as can be seen in what happened in Algeria and how the army refused to accept the democratic choice of the people in voting for the Front Islamique du Salut.
    We are not removing or forcibly liberalizing HA, we wish they would change (those people wishing so are liberal people), others who believe in a conservative religous party (for example you) do not wish that, I don't see the undemocracy of my act.

    As for deep inside issue, that is totally not true. It depends, in some societies liberal parties win, in other societies conservative parties win, it is the choice of the people. I would never defend the action of the army, I find that you are somehow alluding that I would resort to any means to prevent a conservative party. NO only democractic means.

    uh, not true. if H.A ceases its services today, people would support other parties? i don't see that happening.
    Not necessarly today directly, but after a while yes the impact would change, over the time. My friend support does not come only from resistance, their is hunger, provisions, etc...

    Services are a major catalyst for support, you admitted it yourself by saying who worked for the Shiite community more than HA. So basically after a time, if the services cease, yes the support (other than those who ideologically follow and believe) will dwindle.

    also H.A has not capitalized on anything, its raison d'etre is the occupation, corruption of the statesmen, and subjugation of the Shiite community.
    I agree, you can review my posts about this issue earlier, there was corruption from the state, neglect, and that helped in the growth of HA, I do not disagree. However what HA did is that it did not directly help the state and the government but HA created its own services, fine, they can do that within the legal procedures, but had HA wanted the state to do it, they would have helped the state, let them donate that money to the state on condition it be used for 1 and 2 and 3.

    HA MPs have been in Bekaa for more than I can remember, yet still I have not see any plans (mashroo3) to rennovate Baalbeck (my home town), this is just an example.


    well they are not religious schools meaning they are regular schools that also have religioun classes as all private schools have theology / religion classes, i don't see why you should single out Hezbullah for this?? also if people don't want their children to receive such an education they are more than free to send their kids to public schools.
    Well Madares Al Mahdi and Al Mustafa do teach regular classes yes, but the ideology taught at this schools IMO helps to raise the children VERY PRO HA. I have relatives in those schools, they repeat HA slogans in class that are recited to them by their teachers. This is IMO not right because we are raising the children to a certain stance from the beginning and that could not help on the long run (of course my opinion because you might agree with this)

    As for other choices, you should know if you are from the South or Bekaa the limitations of the Public schools and how much more expensive Private schools are. Public schools in Lebanon need a lot of improvement and this is another responsibility that the government must handle.


    not really, if support for other parties would be based not on circumstantial basis but on ideological lines, fpm should receive the support of the majority of Shi'ites even now. no matter how old a party fpm becomes over the years it will have only marginal membership from the Shi'ite community. you can quote me on that one.
    No you see, I lived in Dahyeh in the past and I worked in 2005 elections for FPM and I have been from those who were anti-FPM and I have been secular since Childhood. However I was anti-FPM although ideologically I discovered I am 100 % FPM (I did not know it), the problem is the image I had of FPM, I thoguht FPM was a sectarian movement, I thought Aoun was an Israeli agent, you see that was what I was taught in my childhood, so basically FPM's ideology as I saw it back then was different than my ideology (secular), but when I discovered the truth, I supported FPM.

    You see MOST Shiites are not aware of FPM, I still remember before Aoun came back, a woman called Manar TV and she was crying, she was scared that when Aoun will come back he will bring the Israelis back to Lebanon ! I am serious, people were not aware, things are improving and with time when FPM will be able to project its true image without any propaganda, trust me the support for FPM will definitly increase.

    Hezbullah support is not about needs/services, it's pretty insulting to say this. you forget that Hezbullah actually sprung from the people, and when it was born it did not offer any services, but people still joined its ranks and fought against israel, and all the Shi3a were supportive of H.A.
    Part of it is about needs/services, if you neglect that, it means you are neglecting a major constituent of why people choose to follow parties, and no HA is not different. Every party springs from the people, FPM sprung from the people also. Yes we all endorsed HA because they fought the Israelis, we earlier also endorsed SSNP for their resistance, and the Commies too, you see the common value ? Resistance.

    Are you going to convince me that if HA did not resist but only called for an Islamic state, they would have enjoyed the same support now ? No and you can quote me on that one.

    so you are saying that H.A without weapons will not survive?
    You are twisting my words here :smile: I did not say that, I said that HA will always survive, however without Syria and Iran it will be MUCH harder, I specifically said :

    "HA would find difficulties if another regime comes in place of Baath in case that regime was not an ally to HA because simply it will cut off their weapon supply. So militarily yes HA will suffer, but politically HA is a Lebanese party with HUGE support from Lebanese population so basically, they will still be here, and present strongly on the political scene."

    and please, do take into consideration what is happening in Gaza, a tiny strip of land surrounded by an avowed enemy and a collaborator (with israel) regime southwards. you also underestimate our intelligence, the Palestinians can build Qassams in their homes.... it's not exactly rocket science if you get the pun. i guess you'd have to actually ban all weapons ownership and crack the black market if such an embargo is to have any effect on the ability to get guns and ammunition.
    This is exactly the suffering I am talking about. Compare the situation in Gaza to the situation in South Lebanon, with support from Iran and Syria HA was able to get LONG range missiles not pity Qassams, and come on, it makes a difference. YOu can get guns and ammunition from the black market, but not Zelzal :smile:

    H.A can pay everyone and rebuild. but as long as Iran is willing to lend support, H.A does not feel the need to overstretch its financial contribution. I guess most people have no idea about the extent to which H.A sustains itself.
    Yes now with the organizations, the donations, I have no doubt that HA has money, however you cannot neglect that HA receives sums from Iran on a regular basis, whether this sum qualifies as Khomos or whatever, it is there for HA to use as they see fit. And as you said as long as Iran is willing to lend a hand, HA are more comfortable so yes, Iran does help them in this sense.


    whoever disagrees with the Islamic State is free to do so, but there are many who believe in it, more than you can imagine, and those who are members of the huge party network are convinced.
    You used the many here :smile: I understand your usage though and I hope you do understand mine :smile:

    Yes of course it is your right to agree or disagree with the Islamic state, and I do know that in Lebanon you have many people who agree with it, I have no doubt that the members of HA and their families do agree with it.

    It is only natural that a member in any party agrees on the ideology, supporters might or might not. HA has thousands of members but millions of supporters, and here the HUGE SUPPORT for HA plays its role, not all those supporters are ideologically convinced.

    with all due respect i don't see how those "many" are a representative sample of the Shi'ites. the same argument is made in the west about the Iranian revolution and how it is a minority-imposed regime, etc., but so far we have not see any evidence of this, in fact we see the contrary. so these few Shi'ites who get drunk are comparable to the few remnants of the Shah's regime in "exile" who are making every effort to topple the government and bring back a U.S-backed Shah regime in Iran.
    Ok, but that was an example to show you that there are people who SUPPORT HA, yet do not believe in the ideology of HA, NOT ALL supporters of HA believe in their ideology.

    The example you gave does not hold, I am not giving you an example of anti-HA people, I am giving you an example of SUPPORTERS of HA who do not agree on the ideology.

    the comparison does not hold. compare the communists' support for the LCP for example, are you saying their support of the LCP is "circumstantial"? these people support the LCP for example based on ideology? but the Shi3a do not support H.A based on ideology only circumstantial issues? I see where you're going with that.
    You see you seem to be misunderstanding my point and you do not see where I am going with my post. The comparison holds perfectly, I am talking about support not membership. Do you know that Haifa supports HA ? That Julia Botros supports HA ? DO they believe in ideology ? Why is it so hard for you to understand my point ?

    My father is a huge supporter of HA, yet he tells me the moment they start to work on implementing an Islamic state, I will oppose them, he supports them now for certain reasons and he votes for them now, and so do many others.

    Look at the major blunder you did:

    I am talking about Shiite support for HA, you tell me for the example to hold, I should compare the Communist support to Communism !

    This is a huge mistake, you are claiming that Shiite to HA is the same as Communist to The Communist Party, and this is definitly false. Some Shiites do not believe in the principles of HA, nor do they feel themselves related to the idea of an Islamic state, while communists believe in Communism (the principles of Communist Party)

    for the record H.A ideology is not just about Wilayat al-Faqih!!!!
    Yes but it is a MAJOR part of the ideology, I am not talking about fighting corruption and so on, I am talking about the system of state, the way of governing, the Islamic state and the principle of Wilayat Al-Faqih, and these are things A HUGE number of HA SUPPORTERS (not members) do not agree on.

    many, not most. many is a vague concept. what do you mean by "many"? i am talking about hwo representative these "many" are.
    I use the many just like you used it above, it is based on experience, reading, analyzing, I have not gone down and did a survey and neither did you, but we speak from our personal experience, our encounters, the analysis we draw from certain incidents and situations. I come from a background that is close to that state so I know what I am talking about thats all :smile:
     
    Abufijli

    Abufijli

    Well-Known Member
    I support Hezbollah on most issues but I may disagree on some issues, such as Wilayat Al Faqih, but the fact that they follow these guidelines will not be a problem unless they affect me directly, so far I have seen nothing but good from these people, so I am willing to hear what they say and I will use my judgement to accept or reject their ideologies. these issues that we may have with a party's direction or ideology are not critical.

    As for fighting corruption, HA has recently joined the government, before that they chose to stay away from governing the country for many reasons, but they do have great experience in local councils and this experience has shown that they are un-corruptable. That is why they have strong support in the community.
     
    S

    SeekNirvana

    Well-Known Member
    These ties do not dictate on Hezbollah anything, there is no evidence to suggest otherwise. So where is the problem?
    Abufijli, (wen mikhtfeh kint)

    The decision whether to participate in the 1992 elections was forwarded by HA to Iran (Ayatollah Khamenei), and only after his approval, HA decided to run. Do you believe that this has changed? and what are the "important" issues that HA would require the approval of Khamenei for?

    Regards,
     
    mount_amel

    mount_amel

    Well-Known Member
    Mount, long time no see :smile:

    I do not disagree, HA represents most Shiaa, but please let us not include all Shiaa in there. Some Shiites feel represented by other parties like FPM, Amal, SSNP, Communist Party, 14 Feb movements, FM, etc...

    HA is the largest representative, they have the Shiite seats (with Amal of course), but remember there are Shiites who voted for Aoun in Jbeil and Zahle and in Baabda (regardless of HA position) and there are Shiites who voted for Hariri in Bekaa regardless of HA, so technically speaking, they are NOT the sole representative, they represent the majority, yes, but they do not represent all the Shiites, you need to still give the others their individuality, their own opinion, you need to acknowledge their existance.

    As for HA support, true HA has the majority of Shiite support, however we have to stress that this support is not ideological, but rather circumstancial.

    I can claim that the majority of Shiites do not believe in an Islamic state, and many those who SUPPORT HA, have seculars between them, communists, etc.. who support HA for the current circumstances (resistance, services, etc..)
    Mahyar ,

    I am not a supporter for Hizbollah's ideology, but i do agree with the party on many issues which means that Hizbollah represnt me as a shiat and as a lebanese. As you said Mehyar , we support hizbollah for the current circumstances.

    On the main subject , who cares about the syrian regiem changing or not !
    Hizbollah dosent get its legitmacy from Syria anymore , its the lebanese shiats who decide its legitmacy.

    Hizbollah is trying to balance powers in lebanon as much as It can along with the Tayyar Party. The current goverment is acting like Mosolini's or Hitler's ! They are trying to not let anyone to effect thier decisions as long as they are getting it from Awkar.
    They think that Democracy is Majority rules ! This is wrong , the minority must always have an affect and must alwyas share the decision.
    In lebanon's case we are talking about a whole sect and also a big percent of the christians (70%) that are put out from the executive branch !

    Do you think if , please correct me if i am mistaken, the syrian regime goes down or changes that the lebanese opposition (probably the opposition nowadays are 70% of the population if not more) will be effected by this change ?

    If yes .. 3alaikon el 3awad 3ala heik balad
    If no .. which is most likely , the plans for the opposition to oust the "Lipton" Goverment will go smooth like it is now ..


    Salam
     
    mount_amel

    mount_amel

    Well-Known Member
    Abufijli, (wen mikhtfeh kint)

    The decision whether to participate in the 1992 elections was forwarded by HA to Iran (Ayatollah Khamenei), and only after his approval, HA decided to run. Do you believe that this has changed? and what are the "important" issues that HA would require the approval of Khamenei for?

    Regards,
    Lets forget about the 1992 till 2000 .. Hizbollah had different political calculations at that time since our south was occupied.
     
    Mey

    Mey

    Well-Known Member
    I am not a supporter for Hizbollah's ideology, but i do agree with the party on many issues which means that Hizbollah represnt me as a shiat and as a lebanese. As you said Mehyar , we support hizbollah for the current circumstances.
    Thank you for your post, and AbuFijli's one who also showed his disapproval with Wilayat Al Faqih. This only stregthens the hypothesis that supporters of HA not necessarly believe in Wilayat Al Faqih or Islamic state. That is the point that I wanted to stress for Al-Ghaliboon and I believe the majority of HA supporters are like you and like Abu Fijli.

    On the main subject , who cares about the syrian regiem changing or not !
    Hizbollah dosent get its legitmacy from Syria anymore , its the lebanese shiats who decide its legitmacy.

    Do you think if , please correct me if i am mistaken, the syrian regime goes down or changes that the lebanese opposition (probably the opposition nowadays are 70% of the population if not more) will be effected by this change ?
    I personally agree that HA are somehow independent politically from Syria, but I think their weapons supply is definitly not. If you notice I stressed that they will still be a huge political party even if the Syrian regime changes, but their military wing will be affected definitly if the neighbouring regime will not allow passing of weapons as explained in my last post to Al-Ghaliboon.

    Lets forget about the 1992 till 2000 .. Hizbollah had different political calculations at that time since our south was occupied.
    I think your answer with all do respect fellow compatriot, does not satisfy my hunger not mkhoury's one if I may speak in his name.

    The statement of Abu Fijli is also not so accurate with HA not getting signs of action from Syria and Iran.

    Yes Syria has no political impact ideologically on HA, but the same is not for Iran.

    And for those on the opposite political side (Stella for example), you also need to differentiate between Syria and Iran with respect to HA. They are definitly not the same. While Syria can be seen HA's equal and not controller (IMHO), the relationship between Iran and HA is much bigger than financial aid and military support.

    You see mount amel, HA believes in Wilayat Al Faqih, and this is the main problem and the problem of seculars with HA. You say the period of 92 - 2000 was different, how is it different if HA believed in Wilayat Al Faqih back then and still does now. This concept of Wilayat Al Faqih greatly affects HA's independence in a way, because HA believe that they should follow the general policy as described by Waly Al Faqih (Khamen2i). HN in an interview said that Waliy Al Faqih decided the general policy but does not go in details.

    Waliy Al Faqih, is practically like the Khaleefa of the Muslimeen (Shiites in this case) and this goes beyond religion only because Waliy Al Faqih sees the general masla7a of the Islamic Umma and knows what is best, and thus he directs in a way the decision of HA.

    If HA now abadnons the concept of Wilayat Al Faqih Al 3amma (total wilayat al faqih which states that Waliy Al faqih controls Religion and state) and start adopting Wilayat Al Faqih Al khassa (or Al Nisbiya) which only pushes Waliy Al Faqih to decide religious issues and has no effect on political issues in a state, then trust me I personally would have no problem and all those coimplaining will not have a case.

    But as cited by my friend mkhoury from Naim Qassem's book, HA was split on participating in the elections in 1992 and it was based on Waliy Al Faqih request that they did.
     
    Dry Ice

    Dry Ice

    Legendary Member
    Abufijli, (wen mikhtfeh kint)

    The decision whether to participate in the 1992 elections was forwarded by HA to Iran (Ayatollah Khamenei), and only after his approval, HA decided to run. Do you believe that this has changed? and what are the "important" issues that HA would require the approval of Khamenei for?

    Regards,
    Some argue (Amal Saad Ghorayeb) that such decisions are only taken when the Lebanese leadership of Hezbollah is split (and in that case it certainly was) therefore requiring Wali Al Faqih's arbitration; nevertheless it's true.
     
    nizaryahya

    nizaryahya

    Well-Known Member
    Some argue (Amal Saad Ghorayeb) that such decisions are only taken when the Lebanese leadership of Hezbollah is split (and in that case it certainly was) therefore requiring Wali Al Faqih's arbitration; nevertheless it's true.
    Not really. there question asked to khamenei was very general and not related to only lebanon. it was a doctrine query (very different from a decision making) on whether an islamic party can work under non-islamic laws and if yes what are the guidelines for that work.

    The decision to go for the elections was taken internally and only one person voted against and it was sheikh Sobhi Tfaili who later left the party.

    Note that in these elections HA had an alliance with Pierre Dakash (FPM) in Baabda Allay against the Syrian will and with the communists in Southern Lebanon until the second alliance was broken with syrian threats of a blood bath between Amal and HA.
     
    Mey

    Mey

    Well-Known Member
    Some argue (Amal Saad Ghorayeb) that such decisions are only taken when the Lebanese leadership of Hezbollah is split (and in that case it certainly was) therefore requiring Wali Al Faqih's arbitration; nevertheless it's true.
    Hmmm I was not aware that only in case of splitting however it is still religious interference from a head of a state (Iran) in the internal affairs and politics of a party belonging to another state. This raises questions based on the first benefit of actions. Anyways once I finish Khomeini's book on the system of Wilayat Al Faqih in Iran, we can understand more on the obligation of Shiites (who believe in Wilayat Al Faqih) outside Iran under the umbrella of Waly Al Faqih.


    Not really. there question asked to khamenei was very general and not related to only lebanon. it was a doctrine query (very different from a decision making) on whether an islamic party can work under non-islamic laws and if yes what are the guidelines for that work.
    True, in the book of Qassem, he discusses this dilemma that HA fell into, and yes they did consult Waliy Al Faqih as a general policy.

    However my concern Nizar, is that I as a secular person, cannot accept a religious figure (who is the head of the state) to issue general policy guidlines even if religious to fellow compatriots.

    The duty of Waliy Al Faqih is to preserve and look after the good of the Umma, what if the good of the Umma (islamic) does not coincide with the good of the society (which is decided by the society's democratically elected government). What if Waliy Al Faqih sees things differently than my government, Waliy Al Faqih can interfere in this matter and give directions to HA and HA being believers in Wilayat Al Faqih will comply no ?
     
    Dry Ice

    Dry Ice

    Legendary Member
    Not really. there question asked to khamenei was very general and not related to only lebanon. it was a doctrine query (very different from a decision making) on whether an islamic party can work under non-islamic laws and if yes what are the guidelines for that work.
    So if Al Wali Al Faqih tells the Lebanese leadership of HA that such a move would have been non-islamic, that wouldn't have been tantamount to decision-making?

    A very thin line you're debating there Nizar; when such an influencer of a decision has veto powers, it is to be considered decision-making.
     
    حسن

    حسن

    New Member
    So if Al Wali Al Faqih tells the Lebanese leadership of HA that such a move would have been non-islamic, that wouldn't have been tantamount to decision-making?
    Avec des si, tout le monde pourrait mathématiquement être le pape...

    Revenant à tes suppositions insidieuses, qui relève plutôt du débat byzantin:
    1. Fadlallah est Libanais et est une référence pour les shias (comme Khamenei)
    []
    4. C'est la majorité qui viole la constution et non pas notre Grande Résistance Nationale
    5. Khamenei est pour certains chiites l'équivalent du pape pour les catholiques. A quoi çà sert de leur faire des procès d'intentions?

    A very thin line you're debating there Nizar; when such an influencer of a decision has veto powers, it is to be considered decision-making.
    Que veux-tu dire, que les Libanais shias sont irresponsables, ne méritent pas d'être considérés en adultes et ne doiven pas être traités à égalité avec les autres.
    Je te félicite pour ce genre de réflexions...
     
    Last edited by a moderator:
    Top