Tear between Hezbollah, Hamas: 'Leave Lebanon'

[azurnoir]

As thousands of Hezbollah men aid Syrian President Bashar Assad's forces and fight alongside them in Qusair, they are faced with an organization that until recently was their close ally – Hamas. Arab media reported Thursday morning that according to Syrian opposition sources, in light of Hamas' support of Syrian rebels, Hezbollah is demanding of Hamas men still in Lebanon to leave the country "immediately and within hours."

Lebanese officials close to Fatah said that a Lebanese defense official said to Hamas' representative in the country, Ali Baraka, that all people affiliated with Hamas in Lebanon are no longer welcome in the country. The decision came as a response to the Palestinian Islamist movement’s role in the ongoing war in Syria against the regime of President Assad.

Baraka himself denied the report to Lebanese newspaper Al-Liwaa. "We contacted Hezbollah officials who were surprised from this report," the Hamas representative claimed. "Hamas is staying in Lebanon and nothing has changed so far," he clarified.

.............................................

In April, the London Times reported that Hamas, which terminated ties with the Assad regime, began training the Free Syrian Army rebels in Damascus. Diplomatic sources told the Times that members of the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades are training the opposition organization members in areas under their control. That development confirmed that Hamas has officially disconnected from Syria and adopted Qatar as the new patron.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4386246,00.html

[pelsar]

1. the path to democracy.....

i understand from different posts (i've been educated) that this too is part of the 'arab spring" religious fanatics fighting a facist regime....as the path to democracy.

so given that the 80,000 dead and the shari courts in conquered territory, I am to understand that these are first steps toward a democracy, i'm assuming we're supposed to cheer on the jihadnikim that 'represent the people"

did i get that right?

if not, can i get a clarification of who i should be supporting?
__________

anybody here want to help me out and simply stay on topic and explain who the "progressives here support" and why....(lots of history explaining why hizballa are the good guys, defending lebanon and all....)

[delrem]

2. I'll bite, pelsar

I've been excoriated for saying that Hillary Clinton's "Friends of Syria (tm)" was based on less than W. cited for the Iraq war.
Now we know for a fact that "the most able crew" of the FSA are al qaeda. Thinking people would come to a full stop, here.

[pelsar]

3. how about a deeper bite....

thinking people believe all kinds of things.....and its been hinted to me if not written clearly that the concept of 'limited options" and only "bad choices" is something that is not acceptable.

granted in my limited view, thats how i see the syrian options, but i am open to options that i dont see....

so whos to be supported? and please do not tell me we agree on something,that would really really ruin my day

[azurnoir]

4. Tell me pelsar do you think it's some sort of serendipity

that the Syrian situation is tying up Iran's 2 strongest allies in the region and the "West" is offering just enough support to Assads opposition to help keep it going?

[pelsar]

5. an accident yes.

but i wouldnt call it "good"

it may be "fun" to watch, from a strategic point of view and watch how the different political/military groups maneuver around each other while exposing all the western false beliefs ... BUT

nobody knows how its going to end.....so even if the present situation was one particular political groups "wet dream" the short term and long term results are unknown to all, the sole constant is that there is not a secular liberal in sight, so i think its safe to say the outcome is not going to be pro western at its base value.....

[azurnoir]

7. for myslf there is no party here to support

not Assad not the rebels there is no good guy here what there are is innocent civilians who do need support and we (the US) should be concentrating our efforts there

[pelsar]

8. wheres ken when i need him.....

the only civilians that can be supported are those that have fled. The concept of "non military support" or non lethal support simply gives additional resources to the military group that is in charge of that particular area.

non military to support to rebel areas means they can put more resources in the guns, while the western "do gooders" take care of the butter.

so even supporting the civilians within Syria your indirectly supporting a group.....as cruel as that sounds.

[azurnoir]

10. Ken's probably somewhere chillin'

I wasn't talking about giving any support to either sides combatants though, I was speaking of humanitarian aid for the civilian population

[shira]

6. Simple. They support whoever you and I would oppose. n/t

[azurnoir]

11. that leaves you in quite the conundrum

as I haven't much support for either side here

[shira]

12. Who do you support in Hamas wars vs. Israel? n/t

[azurnoir]

13. neither n/t

[shira]

14. One more. Between the USA and Taliban, who do you support? n/t

[azurnoir]

15. OMG that isn't even worth answering

the question itself is silly

[shira]

16. So you support the US vs. the Taliban, but not Israel vs. Hamas. Why? n/t

[azurnoir]

17. so that was your point okay

now if your asking if I support there US's current and on going presence in Afghanistan no I do not but that does not equate to supporting the Taliban either

so in that case my answer would be the same as it was for Israel and Hamas-I don't support either

[delrem]

9. no thanks.