They ALL have their "higher Umma cause" don't they? That "cause" has been around for over a thousand years and shows absolutely no signs of going away.
Whatever, you do notice however that you are starting to serve me poems here, don't you?
If you stick to only Gambills article we'd probably have more constructive interaction.
Are the HA arms to "protect" from an Umma cause of the Sunni? Is that what you think Hezbollah is all about?
No, but apparently that is what you think i think Hizbollahs arms are all about. You seem to be not only able to misread and misunderstand what you read, but also much willing to project your misreading and misunderstanding of what you read on others.. Now for the sake of curiosity, where did i think that this is what Hizbollahs arms are about? Or for that matter where did you read that Gambill wrote that? Actually if you, again, read well Gambill , this is what he had to say among other things about Hizbollah:
Gambill said:As Hizballah recast itself as a national liberation movement, it effectively abandoned the pursuit of an Islamic state in Lebanon. Although Hizballah leaders called for ending the political system organized along the lines of religious community (a step which arguably could pave the way for an Islamic state down the road by first enshrining majority rule), they displayed far less inclination to root out "un-Islamic" influences in Lebanese society than even the most mainstream Sunni clerics (see below).
While Hizballah's "Lebanonization" (and Nasrallah's Clintonesque public statements) led many outside observers to predict that it would promptly lay down its arms and become a "normal" political party once Israeli troops withdrew from south Lebanon, such forecasts failed to recognize that these choices revealed little about the underlying intentions of Hizballah leaders--beyond a concern with attracting as large a popular base of support as possible within the Shi'a community and Lebanon as a whole. Since religiosity has not been a primary determinant of Shi'a popular support for Hizballah (as shown by Judith Palmer Harik's survey of Shi'a public opinion at the end of the civil war), secular discourse was favored to win non-Shi'a support. Since the goal of "national liberation" garnered broader appeal than other rationales for fighting Israel, nationalist discourse was favored.
Where do you see their shia Umma against the sunnis Umma here?
Do then the Sunni arms (I forget, what is the name of their "army"?) going to stay around to protect from the Umma cause of the Shia? Can't you see this is a vicious circle without end? It is going to be finally fought in Lebanon because the numbers are the most equal?
We agree on one thing only.
I try to discuss and you are only interested in "argue", but we have both lost patience. As I said before - I understand that it is very difficult and perhaps even impossible to look at these issues with any kind of "objectivity" when "political" concerns override everything. Fortunately, I don't have these "political" concerns.
I don't "defend" anyone, because they have all "messed up" and they are all "wrong". So here is one you haven't heard in a while from me ... There are NO good guys, they are ALL bad. Gambill and I agree that the present government has done a pretty miserable job (I would take it further than he did), but he understands a lot more of the Mid-East than I ever will (since I don't understand much at all), and he also delves into the reasons why some of these things occur .... AND .... the only answer to stop them. An answer you appear to disagree with.
Indeed foolishness, i would be a fool to not calculate with the remote possibility of myself being an idiot at some point in time, or every time i have to deal with universaly unpredictable humans. What you still failed to argue for (not discuss) is the following: You claim in your recurrent posts all over the place that the root of all evil is Hisbollah arms and according to Gambills analysis those arms are smartly declared by Hizbollah for other reasons than an Umma islamiyya cause, a claim supported by reality where very few of those arms, if any, were deliberatly engaged in lebanese sectarian warfare. Facing those arms you have the salafists whose only declared cause is the Umma islamiya. FPM does not fancy Hizbollahs arms even though they are not directly threatning the existence of other religious communities, and hence the MoU, a written, however not yet realised, thought of framework to find a suitable and satisfaying solution to those arms to both Hizbollah and others, and my question is: If some - read wahhabi-salafi sympathizers placed on key positions - claim in closed circles among like-minded that the salafis right to get armed is motivated due to Hizabollahs arms (which are neither declared as a threat against the sunnis nor are aimed at them) what will happen to those salafis arms if/when Hizbollahs arms are integrated into the army? The salafis declared cause is neither fear of nor a will to annihilate Israel nor liberation of their southern lands - however constructed or unreal that may sound to some - nor are they to bargain some lost domestic political rights with, but are plain and straight declared to establish the Umma with.
This is the saudi-hariri cancer Gambill does not explicitly name but actually is hinting at.
Am I the only one who noticed that Gambill never says a word about Hariri funding all these Sunni Islamists?
He names Madame Bahiyya and Siniora here:
Gambill said:The March 14 coalition's struggle to preserve Sunni unity amid Lebanon's escalating postwar political crisis widened the latitude enjoyed by Salafi-jihadists, as Hariri was understandably reluctant to enter into a confrontation with fellow Sunnis. The Siniora government therefore did nothing to reverse Jund al-Sham's pre-war seizure of the neighborhood of Ta'mir adjacent to Ayn al-Hilwah or to prevent it from terrorizing the inhabitants. The militants finally allowed the army to deploy in Ta'mir only after Bahiya Hariri (Sa'd's aunt) paid them off in early 2007
Read this V E R Y V E R Y V E R Y S L O W L Y
Gambill said:After the elections, the newlyâ€“elected parliament rewarded the Salafists with an amnesty law that freed 26 Dinniyeh militants and seven of the Majdal Anjar detainees still in custody awaiting trial. In addition, the government established a quid pro quo with Salafi-jihadists, allowing them to operate with minimal interference by the state so long as they did not carry out attacks in Lebanon itself, an arrangement openly acknowledged by pro-March 14 Lebanese and Saudi media
And this, Read it S L O W L Y:
Gambill said:While Absi presented Fatah al-Islam as an all-Palestinian movement, most of the hundreds of volunteers who answered his call over the next six months were Lebanese and a substantial minorityÂ were Saudis, Syrians, and nationals of various other Arab and Islamic countries. Astonishingly, this massive expansion took place with little interference from the government. Despite having been convicted in absentia for the Foley murder, Absi operated in the open, even playing host to journalists from the New York Times (which noted obliquely that "because of Lebanese politics" he was "largely shielded from the government
Also this, T A K E Y O U R T I M E
Gambill said:While there is little evidence to support claims by investigative journalist Seymour Hersh and others that March 14 leaders encouraged the growth of Fatah al-Islam and other armed Islamist groups as counterweights to Hizballah, the coalition was clearly reluctant to pay the hefty political premium of confronting a well-financed and provisioned Sunni jihadist group operating within the protection of a Palestinian refugee camp. It was not until Fatah al-Islam robbed its third bank in the Tripoli area and U.S. Assistant Secretary of State David Welch visited Beirut to press the issue in May 2007 that Siniora finally sent the ISF into action with a pre-dawn raid on a Fatah al-Islam safehouse.
That seems to be a "proven fact" on this forum, along with Hariri and the Future Movement being Wahhabis. This is called painting all with the same paintbrush, just as saying that all Shia are Hezbollah or all Christians are Maronite. None are true.
The escalation in sectarian bigotry in all of Lebanon is a very real concern and it is coming from all corners. It is the most disappointing from a political party that included "anti-sectarianism" into it's principles.
Maybe you are asking for filmed video tapes with plain confessions from Siniora or Hariri or one of their higher aids.. hummm.. let me check if i have some and i'll get back to you, fair enough?