From: fahs@ecf.toronto.edu (FAHS Samir M)
Subject: Re: Syrian occupation of Lebanon
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1992 04:13:03 GMT

 In article <4098@copper.Denver.Colorado.EDU> aaldoubo@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Anisa Alnoor Aldoubosh) writes:
>
>If Lebanon required Syrian intervention in order to put an end to that 'social
>injustice' and civil war, Syria aided in the economical, political, and
>social strife and inequity.  And who is specifically benefitting from it?
>It sure isn't the average Lebanese.
>

The Syrain intervention was never for that purpose, it was to end the
bloody fighting and bring the different factions to the table.  All at 
a price of course.
 
And can I ask you how you arrived at the above conclusions of inequity??

>Why are posters justifying this?  To support a country who's leader is so
>ruthless and sadistic as Assad, is only furthering his cause of aggression
>and suppression on innocent human beings.  So I should ask *you*; does the
>word political injustice ring a bell?
>
>Perhaps you won't answer (I was told that the posters here in soc.culture.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>lebanon do not extend any courtesy to women) but it is something for you
>and other rational people to reflect on.
>
>Anisa
>

Then again perhaps I will. :).

To the  contrary Anisa, I am disappointed that we do not have that many
lebanese (or none lebanese for that matter) contributing to the on going
discussions political or otherwise.  I am sure that most people on this 
newsgroup share the same feeling.  I am not sure who told you what they 
have told you but they must have had the wrong impression; since I 
really do not remember ever having a woman  not getting a response
 based on her gender.  Not that i saw many women posting their views 
on this newsgroup.
But mind you, every now and then we men get the blast for some of our 
opinions.  And sometimes we do feel that if a topic has already been 
beaten to death then there is no sense in replying any further.
Such as the current topic for example, I do believe that 
it has been discussed a few times already and I do feel that 
it is a topic for the new comers to SCL rather than the veterans.
And that's why i respond to selected statements only.

Since I can only speak for myslef, I do not think i have in anyway
justified anybody's actions; be them syrians or lebanese leftists.

If you were following the discussions and know  about 
the lebanese history and the recent events in lebanon you would
have noticed that the following usually takes place:

1.  One almost always reads what translates to " Will you call 
    Syria an occupier if I call "israel" an occupier?" or "here I 
    have just called "israel" an occupier can you call Syria as such?." 
    It has always sounded like bargaining. The point is you 
    either believe "israel" is an occupier or you don't, 
    regardless of what others think of Syria.    

   Words mean very little, especially when such claims come in
   follow up notes to an original posting or an ad that some 
   organization has bought in a national newspaper.  It is actions
  and what you have done and are willing to do about it.

   Historically, The lebanese resistance against the "israeli"
   occupation and continuous aggressions lacked any official support.  
   And i do not mean military support, I mean a respectable 
   standard of living for those close to the "israeli" border.
   That lack of support persists till this day, you 
   would always find those big political campaigns against
   the syrain "occupation" and somewhere in fine print
   the "israeli" occupation is mentioned, as we say in arabic
   "rafi3 3atab".  It is this type of hypocricy  that we
   are standing against.  

2.  The Syrian issue seems to always come up when 
    reforms are demanded. Now, reforms and the Syrian 
   withdrawal have always been linked.  They talk about
   the Taef calling for a syrian withdrawal, yes it does.
   but it stipulates that it is after political reforms. 
   Now, that's what they agreed upon in Taef. Hence, any move
   to the contrary goes against the spirit of the Taef agreement
   and does send a bad signal to those demanding justice.
   The people in power have done very little to calm those
   fears over the last few years; since they did not miss
   a chance of trying to prevent a progress at that front.
    

   Now those requesting political reforms see the continuous
   persistance on a syrian withdrawal before any political
   reforms as a way of avoiding it and it is being merely used
   to gain time;  an attempt to try to cling to power
   as long as possible.  The Taif accord is hardly what 
   the lebanese have strove for, but they saw in it a stepping
   stone into the real reforms.  Please do remember that it is still
   based on a confessional distribution of power and employment
   positions at the higher levels of government.   

   The fear of escaping reforms has its basis in history, the
   most recent being the biggest opportunity lost by Amin Gemayel.
   Where it was clear that no one wanted to give up those
   privilages they enjoyed for years, and went as far as
   taking revenge at the other party.  Some on this net
   have argued that such arguments show a lack of trust and they are not
   sure if we can really start a true nation that way.  Well,
   the trust was given at more than one occassion and was misused.
   And do bear in mind, that the basis for this system of privilages
   we have is the lack of trust to start with; otherwise why ask
   for assurances "Dhamanat".
  
   Do I do some people on this net a favor in return of their 
  favor of calling "israel" an occupier and in return equate 
  Syria with "israel".  I say, No.  Because the comparison just 
  does not exist.  

  Am I defending their presence in Lebanon?. No.  Did they commit
  atracities in lebanon?. On that you can bet. 

  What we are saying is that let's get our house in order and 
  there will be no execuse for their presence.


  
-- 
============================================================================
Samir M. Fahs       | " One will rarely err if extreme actions be ascribed
4925 Dufferin       |   to vanity, ordinary actions to habit, and mean 
Downsview, Ont      |   actions to fear."
Newsgroups: soc.culture.lebanon