قطع طريق دوار المرجان بصيدا رفضا لاعتصام الاسير والحريري تؤكد سعيها للتهدئة "بعد تقصير الحكومة"

Mowaten,
you seem to have misunderstood my comment: شر البلية ما يضحك in Arabic it should be clearer :)
the problem is we all know we are being manipulated from outside, but internally we lack agreement on who the ennemies are:
- we agree on israel.
- the syrian regime is our worst ennemy in our view while you guys consider it your ally.
the problem is, the syrian regime is falling down and whoever will take over will be totally against the shias for supporting this regime.
the shia should wake up and distance themselves from this falling regime at all costs before it is too late.

I don't usually agree with Geha, but I think he makes a good point there. We agree on Israel and disagree on Syria, and so long as Nasrallah, a head of a SHIITE militant group, supports Assad, then some non-Shiite forces may want to seek revenge once Assad falls.

In the end, for the sake of Lebanese unity, Nasrallah should have not backed Assad so bluntly, even if this is against his strategic interests, because such a stance is inviting revenge and hatred towards his followers.

@mowaten
there are some major errors in your comment :)waw!
- kamal joumblat preserved the christian presence and it is only after he was killed by the syrians, and the israeli invasion of Lebanon that the syrians with joumblat kicked off the christians from the region.
- the syrian did not come at our request: they created the situation for us to ask them to come in. have you forgot the syrian saika and what they did?
- the syrians did not leave at our request: they were kicked out.
now there remains the major question: do you agree that hizbushaitan should change course and deliver their weapons to the state in order to avoid hurting the shias first and the lebanese second?

@mowaten
I was sitting on the beirut council during that period :) and no KAMAL jounblat was not OK with what they syrians through saika were doing to christians. actualy he was killed mainly because he refused the syrian entry to lebanon.
whatever you say, the syrians were kicked out of Lebanon, and that was denoted in the way they ran out. normally it takes any army a lot more time to withdraw.
now for the israeli part: the plo actions in fatehland in the south were the reason for invasions, followed by hizbushaitan actions.
if there were no more threats to israel, why should they do anything?
on the ther hand, the weapons of hizbushaitan are a concrete reason for them to do somthing :)
no I AM NOT THE ONE IN DENIAL :)

well mowaten i agree with what u said.. cant argue with that...