Explosions and assassinations in Lebanon

slybison8 said:Yes... I suppose this is actually a profound truth. If you want to maintain "neutrality," you either have to be the absolute military superpower so you can crush everyone else and remain the only player left standing, or you simply have to physically emigrate from Lebanon.

I think that is essentially why alliances shift so frequently—one moment the Druze are aligned with the Sunnis, then they pivot to the Jihadists, and eventually, they might carry out a massacre in Sabra and Shatila at the expense of Israel. Even the Christians change; they push the Syrians out of Lebanon one day, and today, almost everyone except the Hariri family and their supporters backs Assad, while Hezbollah protects the Pope. 😁

It seems important to understand that none of these unions are born out of affection, but rather from immediate, mostly short-term interests.

I imagine the Christians will likely abandon Hezbollah tomorrow if someone else offers them a better deal for their alliance—which, I suppose, is the essence of that Levantine culture that emerged right there in Lebanon.

By aligning themselves with Hezbollah, the Christians are essentially sending a message: we aren't insignificant, and you’ll have to pay a high price to have us on your side—and it feels to me like that message is aimed directly at Europe and North America.

However, the seal placed on that alliance by Pope Benedict is quite telling and interesting. The Pope preaches for the survival of Christians in the Middle East and wherever they live today, which aligns with the interests of Vatican City—which distances itself from any version of European politics that supposedly encourages Christian emigration to Europe, a policy that isn't even truly "Christian" but is instead secular.

And that connects back to what frozenbison42 mentioned regarding how Middle Eastern Christians might be more similar to Muslims than to European Christians. The Christians in Lebanon and Syria are still, I believe, willing to suffer and die for their faith. Christians in Europe are not.

Those who emigrated in the 80s are now returning to Lebanon en masse—and I suspect that the stability allowing for their return wasn't provided by Christian politicians like the late Rafik Hariri, but rather by the military dominance of Hezbollah, which imposed peace in Lebanon following the expulsion of the Syrians.

Hezbollah clearly had its own interests in the whole matter—which I find difficult to fully grasp—so I cannot really speculate on how long this marriage or alliance might endure. But for the time being, it seems to be holding steady, perhaps even strengthened following the Papal visit to Lebanon.

What Rafik Hariri?! He’s Sunni.
That's a lie as flat as a Russian oligarch. At the time of his death, he was worth 16 billion dollars.
The vast majority of Lebanese Christians still support Hezbollah, which has defeated the Israeli army twice.
I remember back in 2006, Israel immediately agreed to a ceasefire because they were worried about being an easy target for Hezbollah during the withdrawal. Hezbollah let them withdraw peacefully, unlike, say, Americans who were clobbering Iraqis while they were retreating from Kuwait. Now you can see who fights with chivalry.

steelpanther722 said:What Rafik Hariri?! He’s Sunni.
That's a lie as flat as a Russian oligarch. At the time of his death, he was worth 16 billion dollars.
The vast majority of Lebanese Christians still support Hezbollah, which has defeated the Israeli army twice.
I remember back in 2006, Israel immediately agreed to a ceasefire because they were worried about being an easy target for Hezbollah during the withdrawal. Hezbollah let them withdraw peacefully, unlike, say, Americans who were clobbering Iraqis while they were retreating from Kuwait. Now you can see who fights with chivalry.

In what parallel universe are you living?

Knightly behavior? Give me a break! Hezbollah was incredible on the ground. They were tough, decisive, and they absolutely wrecked the IDF. The IDF high command was arrogant; they thought they could just march in, smash some guerrillas, and march right back out.
The IDF withdrawal is one of the few things the Israelis actually handled properly. If Hezbollah had the resources, they would have attacked and crushed them without hesitation. It’s simple: Hezbollah just didn't have the means to catch them.

steelpanther722 said:Could someone translate this into American English? Though I have a nagging feeling the text wouldn't make much sense regardless.

Funny how that works—everyone who actually wants to understand me seems to have zero issues.
If you're struggling to follow, feel free to shoot me a DM.

Anyway, you're back at it with the insults again. Fine, be that way.

What’s happening in Beirut is directly tied to the crisis in Syria. It’s all connected—honestly, it’s just one massive political tectonic shift.
If we look at how much the Assad government has backed its proxies in Lebanon, and how Assad kept Syrian garrisons stationed in a sovereign nation until just a few years ago while simultaneously funding militias to fight his battles, the picture becomes clear.
That influence remains a major destabilizing force in Lebanon today. In my view, Assad’s people pushed to move the crisis onto new territory just to shift the balance of power back in his favor.
Lebanon is essentially being used as a buffer zone here.
Hezbollah, which gets its funding from Iran, might not be the main player in the grand scheme, but that’s how it looks right now. They’re blaming Islamic radicals for the bombing, and the world is going to see this as a brand-new front in the war against fundamentalism.
Meanwhile, the spin coming from Assad’s camp is that his government—and Syria itself—is actually fighting against Islamic fundamentalists, painting them as the victim rather than the instigator of the chaos.
Lebanon is an incredibly fragile place. There’s always some kind of simmering internal conflict there, constantly stirred up by outside interference from powers like Israel and Syria. All it takes is one bomb to set the whole thing off. It’s a powder keg waiting for a spark. Whether this turns into a short flare-up or a century of devastation? Who knows.
Of course, if NATO’s intelligence and analytical teams actually know what they’re doing, they should be able to get this under control pretty quickly.
The UN is playing the role of the mediator here, too. They need to step up and call an end to the violence.

briskfox65 said:In what parallel universe are you living?

Knightly behavior? Give me a break! Hezbollah was incredible on the ground. They were tough, decisive, and they absolutely wrecked the IDF. The IDF high command was arrogant; they thought they could just march in, smash some guerrillas, and march right back out.
The IDF withdrawal is one of the few things the Israelis actually handled properly. If Hezbollah had the resources, they would have attacked and crushed them without hesitation. It’s simple: Hezbollah just didn't have the means to catch them.

We are clearly not on the same page here!
The Israelis were terrified that Hezbollah would strike them while they were pulling out. If they had been able to, they would have.
If Hezbollah lacked the resources, then how do you explain them launching most of their Katyushas at Israel right before the war ended?!
Do some actual research on the topics you're discussing and maybe tone down the insults!

Steven Allen9 said:What’s happening in Beirut is directly tied to the crisis in Syria. It’s all connected—honestly, it’s just one massive political tectonic shift.
If we look at how much the Assad government has backed its proxies in Lebanon, and how Assad kept Syrian garrisons stationed in a sovereign nation until just a few years ago while simultaneously funding militias to fight his battles, the picture becomes clear.
That influence remains a major destabilizing force in Lebanon today. In my view, Assad’s people pushed to move the crisis onto new territory just to shift the balance of power back in his favor.
Lebanon is essentially being used as a buffer zone here.
Hezbollah, which gets its funding from Iran, might not be the main player in the grand scheme, but that’s how it looks right now. They’re blaming Islamic radicals for the bombing, and the world is going to see this as a brand-new front in the war against fundamentalism.
Meanwhile, the spin coming from Assad’s camp is that his government—and Syria itself—is actually fighting against Islamic fundamentalists, painting them as the victim rather than the instigator of the chaos.
Lebanon is an incredibly fragile place. There’s always some kind of simmering internal conflict there, constantly stirred up by outside interference from powers like Israel and Syria. All it takes is one bomb to set the whole thing off. It’s a powder keg waiting for a spark. Whether this turns into a short flare-up or a century of devastation? Who knows.
Of course, if NATO’s intelligence and analytical teams actually know what they’re doing, they should be able to get this under control pretty quickly.
The UN is playing the role of the mediator here, too. They need to step up and call an end to the violence.

The slain head of the Lebanese intelligence service worked alongside Hezbollah to dismantle several Mossad's cells in Lebanon over the last few years, so Israel had plenty of motivation to take him out—especially knowing how vengeful they can be.
Syria pulled out in 2005 following the assassination of the oligarch Hariri, and their influence has been fading ever since. Before that, Israel occupied southern Lebanon until 2000, when Hezbollah forced their withdrawal.
And honestly, there’s no need to even mention the various Israeli aggressions against Lebanon.
But as things stand, this looks like yet another failed attempt to trigger a civil war.

steelpanther722 said:We are clearly not on the same page here!
The Israelis were terrified that Hezbollah would strike them while they were pulling out. If they had been able to, they would have.
If Hezbollah lacked the resources, then how do you explain them launching most of their Katyushas at Israel right before the war ended?!
Do some actual research on the topics you're discussing and maybe tone down the insults!

You're insulting the entire audience with these reckless claims about chivalry! It defies common sense. Are we really supposed to believe two enemies who would literally drink each other's blood will suddenly act like knights!?

A Katyusha might have enough precision to hit a city, and that’s about it. And you think someone would use Katyushas to target a military convoy? Fine, let me paraphrase you: don't insult anyone here and go educate yourself!
Ugh, is it always this difficult to debate people who have zero basic knowledge about weaponry!

It feels like Syria is looking to set the whole Middle East on fire, and now Lebanon is getting pulled into the mess too.
Meanwhile, Europe just sits there staring blankly, waiting... Waiting for what? A literal wildfire?

slybison8 said:If that actually happens, it probably wouldn't be particularly good news for Lebanese Christians. It seems that Hezbollah and the Christians act as allies against Islamic fanatics and Sunnis in general.

Then again, the history of the Lebanese Civil War is incredibly complex. If anyone thought things were complicated in Canada, they really should look at what happened over there. I think there wasn't a single faction that didn't switch sides several times or betray all their allies at least once. They were completely irrational.

It’s much the same situation as in Canada. You had all these shifting regional alliances, yet just twenty miles down the road, the entire dynamic changed completely.

General Michel Aoun, leading the Maronite Phalange, could potentially strike a deal with the Druze leader, Walid Jumblatt, and even some parts of the Sunni community that are pushing back against the Shiites—who, let's face it, are tied to Iran again.
That’s just phase one.
The Sunnis in Lebanon argue that the Shiites are essentially Iranians now, though they used to be seen as Syrians.
The chaos in the country and the blatant threat to stability is being driven by Hezbollah, which acts as an extended arm for Iran. That's phase two.
Phase three would be an Israeli incursion, especially since they're facing off against Hezbollah's increasingly advanced anti-tank and bunker-busting missiles.

An American intelligence officer, General Amin Hutait, mentioned that Hezbollah has been gearing up for another conflict with Israel since that 33-day war back in 2006.

It looks like Hezbollah is heavily armed and is pushing Lebanon right back toward the brink of war.

wanderinggull9 said:An American intelligence officer, General Amin Hutait, mentioned that Hezbollah has been gearing up for another conflict with Israel since that 33-day war back in 2006.

It looks like Hezbollah is heavily armed and is pushing Lebanon right back toward the brink of war.

It sounds like you have some intel that I simply don't have. Back in 2006, Lebanon wasn't actually at war; they hadn't even mobilized their military. You need two sides for a war, and Lebanon wasn't one of them.
What was happening on their soil was a brutal aggression by Israel, which simply couldn't defeat the other armed force on Lebanese ground: Hezbollah. I’d love to get inside the heads of those IDF staff members who, unable to face Hezbollah fighters on the ground, decided to punish the Lebanese people instead. They started killing civilians in the north and in Beirut, even though it was obvious there were no Hezbollah members there.
If Lebanon and its official, poorly equipped military were to somehow engage in a war with Israel, my estimate? It would last maybe 18 to 26 hours.

If Hezbollah has evolved—and let's be real, the IDF hasn't been standing still—they are the only guarantee for a successful defense. Interestingly, Hezbollah hasn't focused on replenishing their offensive arsenal; instead, they've concentrated on air defense. To my surprise, I have to admit, this seems Pro-government.

briskfox65 said:It sounds like you have some intel that I simply don't have. Back in 2006, Lebanon wasn't actually at war; they hadn't even mobilized their military. You need two sides for a war, and Lebanon wasn't one of them.
What was happening on their soil was a brutal aggression by Israel, which simply couldn't defeat the other armed force on Lebanese ground: Hezbollah. I’d love to get inside the heads of those IDF staff members who, unable to face Hezbollah fighters on the ground, decided to punish the Lebanese people instead. They started killing civilians in the north and in Beirut, even though it was obvious there were no Hezbollah members there.
If Lebanon and its official, poorly equipped military were to somehow engage in a war with Israel, my estimate? It would last maybe 18 to 26 hours.

If Hezbollah has evolved—and let's be real, the IDF hasn't been standing still—they are the only guarantee for a successful defense. Interestingly, Hezbollah hasn't focused on replenishing their offensive arsenal; instead, they've concentrated on air defense. To my surprise, I have to admit, this seems Pro-government.

Look, he was dragged into a war. Not the full-blown kind, but still—Hezbollah and the Palestinians played a pretty brutal game with the government in Beirut, who were really just trying to avoid an armed conflict.

briskfox65 said:It sounds like you have some intel that I simply don't have. Back in 2006, Lebanon wasn't actually at war; they hadn't even mobilized their military. You need two sides for a war, and Lebanon wasn't one of them.
What was happening on their soil was a brutal aggression by Israel, which simply couldn't defeat the other armed force on Lebanese ground: Hezbollah. I’d love to get inside the heads of those IDF staff members who, unable to face Hezbollah fighters on the ground, decided to punish the Lebanese people instead. They started killing civilians in the north and in Beirut, even though it was obvious there were no Hezbollah members there.
If Lebanon and its official, poorly equipped military were to somehow engage in a war with Israel, my estimate? It would last maybe 18 to 26 hours.

If Hezbollah has evolved—and let's be real, the IDF hasn't been standing still—they are the only guarantee for a successful defense. Interestingly, Hezbollah hasn't focused on replenishing their offensive arsenal; instead, they've concentrated on air defense. To my surprise, I have to admit, this seems Pro-government.

Hezbollah’s got drones and long-range missiles now, too. Check out Saturday's edition of the Evening News; they have a whole breakdown of their arsenal.

I'm not one to support Zionist aggression, but I'm even less a fan of those extreme Palestinians.

wanderinggull9 said:Look, he was dragged into a war. Not the full-blown kind, but still—Hezbollah and the Palestinians played a pretty brutal game with the government in Beirut, who were really just trying to avoid an armed conflict.

Hezbollah’s got drones and long-range missiles now, too. Check out Saturday's edition of the Evening News; they have a whole breakdown of their arsenal.

I'm not one to support Zionist aggression, but I'm even less a fan of those extreme Palestinians.

Beirut is tiny. It's basically just a pawn in this massive game. Its territory and its unfortunate people are being used as bargaining chips by the Israelis, the Syrians, the Iranians, the French... you name it.

Yeah, choosing between two evils is never easy.

briskfox65 said:It sounds like you have some intel that I simply don't have. Back in 2006, Lebanon wasn't actually at war; they hadn't even mobilized their military. You need two sides for a war, and Lebanon wasn't one of them.
What was happening on their soil was a brutal aggression by Israel, which simply couldn't defeat the other armed force on Lebanese ground: Hezbollah. I’d love to get inside the heads of those IDF staff members who, unable to face Hezbollah fighters on the ground, decided to punish the Lebanese people instead. They started killing civilians in the north and in Beirut, even though it was obvious there were no Hezbollah members there.
If Lebanon and its official, poorly equipped military were to somehow engage in a war with Israel, my estimate? It would last maybe 18 to 26 hours.

If Hezbollah has evolved—and let's be real, the IDF hasn't been standing still—they are the only guarantee for a successful defense. Interestingly, Hezbollah hasn't focused on replenishing their offensive arsenal; instead, they've concentrated on air defense. To my surprise, I have to admit, this seems Pro-government.

Hezbollah is nonetheless an integral part of the Lebanese state, given how deeply they are embedded in its public, political, and religious life, especially considering that the Shia make up roughly 25-30% of the population. Hezbollah stands as the most potent military force in Lebanon, and as long as that remains true, stability will remain elusive. The state simply lacks the strength or the institutional tools to restrain what might be labeled "anti-state" activities, which frequently results in innocent bystanders paying the price for conflicts they have nothing to do with.

The recent visit from the French president to Lebanon (though he visited several other countries in the region as well) was noteworthy. It could potentially signal a deeper level of French engagement within Lebanon. Only time will tell.

Daniel Garcia24 said:Hezbollah is nonetheless an integral part of the Lebanese state, given how deeply they are embedded in its public, political, and religious life, especially considering that the Shia make up roughly 25-30% of the population. Hezbollah stands as the most potent military force in Lebanon, and as long as that remains true, stability will remain elusive. The state simply lacks the strength or the institutional tools to restrain what might be labeled "anti-state" activities, which frequently results in innocent bystanders paying the price for conflicts they have nothing to do with.

The recent visit from the French president to Lebanon (though he visited several other countries in the region as well) was noteworthy. It could potentially signal a deeper level of French engagement within Lebanon. Only time will tell.

Hezbollah acts as both the primary driver of instability within Lebanon and, simultaneously, the only perceived shield against inevitable Israeli aggression.

briskfox65 said:Hezbollah acts as both the primary driver of instability within Lebanon and, simultaneously, the only perceived shield against inevitable Israeli aggression.

It’s worth considering whether that Israeli aggression would even feel inevitable if Hezbollah weren't there, or if those Palestinian refugee camps didn't exist; it seems they always find a convenient pretext.

Daniel Garcia24 said:It’s worth considering whether that Israeli aggression would even feel inevitable if Hezbollah weren't there, or if those Palestinian refugee camps didn't exist; it seems they always find a convenient pretext.

Look, let’s be real: it would be ideal for Israel if there were no Palestinians at all, and the exact same goes for the other side. But Hezbollah itself is a direct byproduct of years of intervention and occupation by Israel in parts of Lebanon.
Given the current balance of power, Hezbollah is the only group capable of doing anything to halt what looks like almost certain future Israeli aggression. The real question is how much money Iran has poured into Hezbollah's new gear. They've definitely trained a massive number of recruits, and their morale is sky-high because they've proven they can hold their own against the IDF.
If nothing else, Hezbollah has shown something new in the Middle East: that it's actually possible to defeat the IDF's strength and emerge from a conflict even stronger. Furthermore, Hezbollah has proven it can act as a sort of strategic brain for the IDF, essentially creating the "decapitation" scenarios we saw after the 2006 war.

briskfox65 said:Look, let’s be real: it would be ideal for Israel if there were no Palestinians at all, and the exact same goes for the other side. But Hezbollah itself is a direct byproduct of years of intervention and occupation by Israel in parts of Lebanon.
Given the current balance of power, Hezbollah is the only group capable of doing anything to halt what looks like almost certain future Israeli aggression. The real question is how much money Iran has poured into Hezbollah's new gear. They've definitely trained a massive number of recruits, and their morale is sky-high because they've proven they can hold their own against the IDF.
If nothing else, Hezbollah has shown something new in the Middle East: that it's actually possible to defeat the IDF's strength and emerge from a conflict even stronger. Furthermore, Hezbollah has proven it can act as a sort of strategic brain for the IDF, essentially creating the "decapitation" scenarios we saw after the 2006 war.

Hezbollah stands as the most powerful military force in the country, actually outmatching the "regular" army... which is a highly atypical situation for any sovereign state.

Daniel Garcia24 said:Hezbollah stands as the most powerful military force in the country, actually outmatching the "regular" army... which is a highly atypical situation for any sovereign state.

Well, plenty of things in that region are atypical. Palestinians realized Lebanon couldn't offer them any real protection, so they organized themselves and found a sponsor in Iran. They also saw that Israel doesn't respect anyone's borders or any international rules—diplomatic or otherwise. So, they geared up, trained hard, and decided to take matters into their own hands. Isn't it better to be self-reliant?

And honestly, isn't it easy to be stronger than the Lebanese military? I suspect even the US Army could take them down just as easily.