All the condemnations of Isreal occupying so called Palestinian land.Yet i have heard no such condemnation of Syrian occupation in Lebanon.
Why is this and what is the difference between the two??
Syrian foirces were INVITED by Lebanese authorities to help protect the nation from zionist Israel and its expansionist policy. Big difference.
Syrians and Lebanese are brothers, muslims, they do not commit atrocities like the Israeli occupation forces.
** No dead links allowed.**
syrian occupation of lebanon
oh my dayz that is so desperate braveone 
Syria is protecting the lebanon from outright invasion by the nazi israelis!
AK47,
I just realized that we just agreed on this issue!
That is surely a first.
Syria is no threat to Lebanon. They are there to defend the small state of Lebanon.
Re: Syrian occupation
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Braveheart: *
All the condemnations of Isreal occupying so called Palestinian land.Yet i have heard no such condemnation of Syrian occupation in Lebanon.
Why is this and what is the difference between the two??
[/QUOTE]
Braveheart, you prolly have also never heard of US occupation of Afghanistan :D. Well you did now.
Braveheart:
It seems that the only Muslims who think that Syria is in Lebanon to protect Lebanon against Israel are the Muslims who don’t live in Lebanon. Since 2000, virtually all organized groups in Lebanese society want the Syrians to leave. This is an occupation that has lasted for 25 years and it is time for it to end.
Here’s some excerpts from an interesting study group.
“Each benefit reaped by Syrian occupation is balanced by a heavy price levied on Lebanon, devastating many aspects of Lebanese society and the lives of its citizens. Foremost on the list of damages are human rights abuses, ranging from illegal wire tapping to torture and disappearance. Syria has methodically gone about enforcing control over what were once respected government bodies and societal institutions. Lebanon’s democratic foundations and its diverse political landscape have all but crumbled as a result of Syrian tampering with parliamentary elections and other rampant forms of corruption. The Lebanese military is gradually becoming relegated to an appendage of its Syrian counterpart stripped of both its patriotism and ability to effectively stand alone. The independent media in Beirut was a rarity in the Arab world and so its downfall is particularly disheartening. Other subjugated institutions include the Lebanese judiciary, schools and labor unions which are all shadows of their former selves having been forced to bow to Syrian manipulation.”
the same way that most pakistanis and afghanis want US to leave the region.
when the big boys are playing, the small boys don't get a voice..
just happens that Syria and Israel are the big boys around Lebanon.. and US is the big boy in Pak/ Afghan.
I also do remember that most philipinos wated to, and most south koreans, and now a lot of Japanese want america to leave their shores and end their bases there..
Many of Philipine bases were closed, but korean and japanese bases are still there.
and lets not forget the American Occupation of Guantanamo Bay, Cuba... i wonder how many americans were surprised to find out that America has a huge base there.. not a very publicised fact before the talibans were incarcarated there.
Myvoice the opening title of the website says it all: The Middle East Forum: Promoting American Interests. Thus the site can not be taken as an objective source on the fairs of the middle east. Syria was invited into Lebanon and they have yet been asked to leave.
All the claims made at the website can not be backed by hard solid proof. If that were possible, this would be a different story. Also has anybody heard of any social group in lebanon officially requesting the Syrian army to leave?
It wpould be great if all countries stopped intefering and occupying in other people's lands. The US should start the ball rolling by getting out of Saudi Arabia and letting its corrupt government fall.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Imdad Ali: *
It wpould be great if all countries stopped intefering and occupying in other people's lands. The US should start the ball rolling by getting out of Saudi Arabia and letting its corrupt government fall.
[/QUOTE]
Thats not gonna happen anytime soon everyone knows you let the americans in and they are never leaving ask the phillipines thought they finally got rid of uncle sam and guess who comes back again under the guise of war on terror yeah right
Here are some more interesting observations about the illegal Syrian occupation of Leabanon.
"Do you know that two thirds of our people in occupied Lebanon live under the poverty line?
Do you know that in 1990, Lebanon’s debt was less then one billion dollars and currently it exceeds thirty-four billion dollars and that most of this money was embezzled and ended in Syrian officials’ pockets?
Are you aware that Lebanon’s free decision making process is confiscated completely by Syria?
Could any country in the world be considered independent when one third of its population have been forced to emigrate and not allowed to return?
Have you read any of the hundreds of reports issued annually by international human rights organizations on atrocities inflicted on the Lebanese?
Do you know that there are hundreds of Lebanese innocent citizens detained in the notorious Nazi-like Syrian jails without any trial or specific charges? Do you know that some of these unfortunate Lebanese have been in detention for more then 25 years and that their families know nothing about their whereabouts? Do you know that the puppet Lebanese regime turns a blind eye on the Lebanese detainees in Syria and ignores their case completely?
Do you know that the Beirut regime infringes on the country’s constitution on daily basis when it hands over Lebanese citizens to the Syrian Intelligence Forces, who transfer them to Syrian jails?
Do you know that the President, the MP’s , the Ministers, the PM, the house speaker and the majority of the Lebanese officials are appointed directly by the Syrian regime?
Do you know that the three parliamentary elections that took place since 1990 were forged and merely orchestrated by Syria?"
Here’s another link on the issue of Syria and the Politics of Arbitrary Detention in Lebanon.
http://www.meib.org/articles/0101_l1.htm
The more I read and learn about the occupation of Lebanon by Syria, the more I go back to Braveheart’s initial questions about why there is no outrage expressed about it. Syria is administering and trashing this country and there are darn few people who even want to admit that it is happening.
Tsk Tsk myvoice, stupidity can only go so far. I have a few points to make.
Neither of your links are credible. There is no doubting that so i wont waste my time giving reasons.
Your first link provides no solid facts at all. Read the article, it is a bunch of fancy english without any concrete facts. I see just vague references to this assassination and that corrupt person. But i see no hardcore facts about how the Syrian's have violated the country.
Now questions for you:
- Elections in Lebanon were free and fair were they not?
- The man elected won by popular majority did he not?
- Has the constitution of lebanon been changed? If you had any inking of the countries system you would know right away that your claims are false.
- Has the day to day activities and the decisions of the govt changed?
Oh yeah please take off your rose tinted glasses before you answer the questions.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by CM: *
Tsk Tsk myvoice, stupidity can only go so far.
[/QUOTE]
Really? How far do you think it will carry you?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by CM: *
I have a few points to make.
Neither of your links are credible. There is no doubting that so i wont waste my time giving reasons.
Your first link provides no solid facts at all. Read the article, it is a bunch of fancy english without any concrete facts. I see just vague references to this assassination and that corrupt person. But i see no hardcore facts about how the Syrian's have violated the country.
Now questions for you:
- Elections in Lebanon were free and fair were they not?
- The man elected won by popular majority did he not?
- Has the constitution of lebanon been changed? If you had any inking of the countries system you would know right away that your claims are false.
- Has the day to day activities and the decisions of the govt changed?
Oh yeah please take off your rose tinted glasses before you answer the questions.
[/QUOTE]
You really must think of some replies that address the merits of what people say rather than relying upon your stock reply of "links not credible" when faced with information you don't like. I personally found the questions asked by what appears to be a Lebanese person to provoke thought which will encourage me to look for more information on what I view more as "accusations" than facts.
As to the second source you don't like, I have found the Middle East Intelligence Bulletin to publish highly credible facts on many different issues. This particular document is very well supported with research and factual information. Perhaps you believe the MEIB just plain made up the existence of Committee of Parents of Lebanese Detainees and Other Lebanese human rights groups, such as MIRSAD and SOLIDE, which have worked in conjunction with International human rights groups to bring international attention to the plight of Lebanese detainees in Syria. I guess your own intellectual curiosity about these issues is completely satisfied because you don't think the MEIB is credible.
In answer to your questions, the Lebanese are an occupied people and no I do not believe that they have a representative government that was freely and voluntarily elected by them. They are as good as slaves to their Syrian Master whose main interest is to control and exploit any and all resources that rightly belong to the Lebanese people. If any western non-Muslim country was doing to Lebanon what they Syrians are doing to Lebanon, you'd be the loudest protester in the bunch. But for some unexplainable reason, this occupation you support.
Answer question 3 please
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by CM: *
Answer question 3 please
[/QUOTE]
In getting around to answering that question, let me pose a few of my own. What difference does it make whether or not a written Constitution is changed? What matters is whether and how the provisions of a written document (be it a simple law or a Constitution) are implemented and enforced.
Several decades ago, I learned of many archaic laws that were never repealed and still existed as laws of the land. For instance, some state didn't permit you to drive a car after sundown within certain city limits unless you walked in front of it waiving a lantern. Today, some states still have sodomy laws on the books that are simply not enforced. A constitutional provision guaranteeing freedom of speech means nothing if people speaking out against government policies are routinely jailed. Provisions guaranteeing free elections mean nothing if the elections are, in fact, rigged.
If "Lebanese students who oppose Syrian occupation are continuously arrested, beaten, intimidated and forced to sign affidavits stating they abstain from participating in any political activity" as charged, does it make a difference whether the Lebanese constitution or laws have been rewritten at the behest of the Syrian Master?
If Lebanese citizens are handed over routinely to the Syrian Intelligence Forces in violation of the constitution and then transfered to Syrian jails as charged, do you think it is relevant whether the written Constitution has been changed at the direction of the Syrian Master?
Now, to directly answer your question, I don't know when the current version of the Lebanese constitution was adopted or if any of the provisions have been amended, modified, changed or altered during the 25 years of Syrian occupation.
Hey didnt Bush Sr. ok the syrians entering lebanon and didnt jr say the election were free and fair? What say oh rose tinted one?
This article is welcome news possibly portending the end of the Syrian occupation of Lebanon. It’s quite interesting that the Syrian withdrawal is tied to a “conciliatory gesture toward the West” in anticipation of the invasion of Iraq. Just the threaqt of the attack seems to be having some positive influence on the region.
BATROUN, Lebanon (Reuters) - Syrian troops in north Lebanon began pulling out Wednesday, the first step in the planned withdrawal of some 4,000 soldiers from the country Syrian forces first entered early in the 1975-1990 civil war.
Tuesday’s announcement that Damascus would redeploy some of its roughly 20,000 troops in Lebanon surprised observers as similar moves in the past two years were preceded by a buildup of Lebanese domestic pressure or a rise in tension with Israel.
Analysts said the move would be widely welcomed in Lebanon.
It also won cautious praise from the United States amid regional tension over the Iraq crisis. “It has been a longstanding policy of ours to have Lebanon free of all foreign forces… We would welcome the move, if in fact they’re gone,” a U.S. embassy spokeswoman said.
One witness on the northern border said he saw several trucks loaded with troops and others carrying armored vehicles cross into Syria. Other witnesses saw soldiers and vehicles gathering in the Batroun area, north of Beirut, from where most of the redeployment is due to take place.
A senior Lebanese army source said about 4,000 troops were due to leave in the next five days taking equipment, including tanks, in line with the 1989 Taif agreement that helped end Lebanon’s civil war.
He said more troops might leave in the near future, but gave no details.
“They came to Lebanon, and now they are leaving. But if they go, they are going in form only,” one resident said. “Syrian-Lebanese cooperation remains on all aspects just as it was. I am sure sending away a number of soldiers will not change this.”
Some analysts said the withdrawal might be intended to pre-empt any new anti-Syrian feeling in Lebanon, mainly among Christians, at a time when Syria is keen to ensure support in the Arab world with a U.S-led war looming on its Iraq border.
“This has nothing to do with the regional situation, especially in Iraq… It has nothing to do with the international situation as a whole,” the senior Lebanese army source told Reuters. “We decided that there is no need for some troops here in Batroun.”
IRAQ REPERCUSSIONS
Syria has expressed fears that the repercussions of any U.S.-led attack on Iraq would be felt across the region. The United States lists Syria as a sponsor of “terrorism.” “Perhaps with the state of things in the region (over Iraq) a conciliatory gesture toward the West…might be worthwhile at this stage. There is no tactical reason for it,” one military analyst said.
Some Syrian troops were moved inside Lebanon last April, apparently to make them less of a target for any Israeli retaliation for attacks on Israeli positions in the disputed Shebaa farms area by Lebanon’s Syrian-backed Hizbollah group.
Syria withdrew 6,000 troops from Beirut and surrounding areas in 2001 in what was seen as a concession to Christian-led resentment at its political and military domination of Lebanon.
A witness said Syrian troops had already left one post near Batroun, where “Yes to Assad,” a reference to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, was scrawled on a wall.
“I am happy to return to my family, but at the same time I will miss Lebanon, where I have spent years,” said a Syrian soldier as he prepared to leave.
Asked if he thought the pullout had anything to do with the Iraq crisis, he said: “By God, anything is possible.”
Trucks and troops were seen gathering near an old airfield after leaving other posts near Christian-dominated Batroun, where anti-Syrian sentiment often runs high. There was no immediate sign of Lebanese forces taking over the posts. (Additional reporting by Cynthia Johnston)
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=2252881