1-They did accept the "idling" and more than that as we're living now in a totally bankrupt country where Aoun is the head of it and Aounists are still loyal, stalwart and still believing Aoun can score at least one goal in the net of the opposition. So that argument is moot.I'm replying mnel ekhir, that's for the last paragraph in your reply, which should conclude the debate.
Since the world is an endless network of infinite complexities in perpetual motion, there's no way anyone can accurately predict the outcome of any one of the numerous choices of action one has to pick from at any given moment. This is an irrefutable truth, not to be negotiated. But I do understand it is often tempting to squander judgements restrospectively, for example in your case on Aoun's alliance with HA, while you comfortably sit today with all the unfolded facts in hand, what in ancient medical books is known as Useless Delayed Intelligent Analysis. No shame in the disease, we all suffer from it in our daily lives every time we are to judge something outside our sphere of influence, like when we watch a football or an ishokey game and know exactly what the player should have done instead of doing what he/she did the second everything goes wrong. And the worst case of UDIA is when the judgment comes really long time after the event took place. Say 16 years. (shall I predict your next comment about the Aoun politics we're talking about is not a football game? )
Therefore, for you to recommend Aoun to have stayed in some undefined "middle", bouncing softly outside or on the periphery of the executive power, which means more or less biding his time for 16 years, does in no way guarantee you the desired happy ending you imagine; not in a million scenarios and with so many unknowns in between back then and now. Not when you don't even have enough data about how the others would have responded to his "man in the middle" role, and even less his own community, the self victimized, marginalized and that hungered for action. Would the others, the old partners in corruption and arms, have invented themselves another "scratch my back I scratch yours" ta3ayoush formula, and continued to coexist happily under the uninterrupted status quo where the corrupts keep renewing their vow to protect the armed militia in exchange for it turning a blind eye on the corrupts devouring el akhdar wel yebiss? Would Aoun's community have accepted the "idling" and no action for so long? What unknown mechanisms would have been triggered with such choice and under the then prevailing conditions?
We have no clue.
2-While the future is definitely unpredictable, it's not that hard to figure out that switching your entire rhetoric and principles by entering into a Maronite marriage with a fundamentalist foreign-funded highly-ambitious ultra-armed group will not wield great results for you. We're not discussing metaphysics here.