Lebeneese Democracy?

[bluedemonspeedracer]

Isn't a formal democracy not supposed to have militerized political parties? So technically Lebenon would not exactly fit the defenition of an actual democracy even though it possess some characteristics of one. Can someone please explain?

[TonyTostieno]

At 11/9/07 01:14 AM, bluedemonspeedracer wrote: Isn't a formal democracy not supposed to have militerized political parties? So technically Lebenon would not exactly fit the defenition of an actual democracy even though it possess some characteristics of one. Can someone please explain?

Wasn't Cuba supposed to have a communist country?

[TonyTostieno]

At 11/9/07 01:24 AM, TonyTostieno wrote: Wasn't Cuba supposed to have a communist government?

Dammit, fixed

[bluedemonspeedracer]

At 11/9/07 01:24 AM, TonyTostieno wrote:

At 11/9/07 01:14 AM, bluedemonspeedracer wrote:

Wasn't Cuba supposed to have a communist country?

Well communist society under Marx's ideals (a Smurf Society) have never been achieved in running nations, they all just result in a government of de facto fascism. The only places that are close to being truely communist in theory are the communes outside of LA and the Jewish kibbutzes in Israel.

[TonyTostieno]

At 11/9/07 01:29 AM, bluedemonspeedracer wrote: Well communist society under Marx's ideals (a Smurf Society) have never been achieved in running nations, they all just result in a government of de facto fascism. The only places that are close to being truely communist in theory are the communes outside of LA and the Jewish kibbutzes in Israel.

Hence the sarcasm. Nice for a response though.
Of course the Smurfs were commies! It's scientifically proven that only those races that are blue skinned can uphold the insane ideas of the commies!

[Empanado]

At 11/9/07 01:14 AM, bluedemonspeedracer wrote: Isn't a formal democracy not supposed to have militerized political parties? So technically Lebenon would not exactly fit the defenition of an actual democracy even though it possess some characteristics of one. Can someone please explain?

Hizbullah isn't the government's party. While the Lebanese government may be put to blame for not dealing with 'bullah properly, the guys with the AKs aren't running the country. A democracy can be functional in most levels and still have a bunch of crazy people with guns running around. In fact, I'd dare to estimate that more than half of the democracies in today's world have one or two crazy armed groups, it's just that in most cases they're too small to have a significant impact on the big picture.
A democracy doesn't cease to be so for having a group of gun-toting psychos around. It's just that it's usually not an extremely good democracy if there's a group of gun-toting psychos around.

That being said, it's almost impossible for a country to turn into a decent democracy without stumbling into one or two of these groups, particularly when they're just stepping out of a long-ranging tradition of civil war, colonialism, racial/religious tensions and general bad stuff as is the case with Lebanon. They've got some serious shit to sort out, give the guys a break. "The guys" being Lebanon, that is, not Hizbullah.

[bluedemonspeedracer]

At 11/9/07 01:35 AM, TonyTostieno wrote:

At 11/9/07 01:29 AM, bluedemonspeedracer wrote: Well communist society under Marx's ideals (a Smurf Society) have never been achieved in running nations, they all just result in a government of de facto fascism. The only places that are close to being truely communist in theory are the communes outside of LA and the Jewish kibbutzes in Israel.

Hence the sarcasm. Nice for a response though.
Of course the Smurfs were commies! It's scientifically proven that only those races that are blue skinned can uphold the insane ideas of the commies!

Like frost bitten Russians LOL.

(Remember this forum is about Lebeneese democracy don't go off in a tangence about communism.)

[TonyTostieno]

At 11/9/07 01:42 AM, bluedemonspeedracer wrote: Like frost bitten Russians LOL.

(Remember this forum is about Lebeneese democracy don't go off in a tangence about communism.)

Hehe
I know, but that damn bit about the smurfs...

[bluedemonspeedracer]

At 11/9/07 01:41 AM, Empanado wrote:

At 11/9/07 01:14 AM, bluedemonspeedracer wrote: Isn't a formal democracy not supposed to have militerized political parties? So technically Lebenon would not exactly fit the defenition of an actual democracy even though it possess some characteristics of one. Can someone please explain?

Hizbullah isn't the government's party. While the Lebanese government may be put to blame for not dealing with 'bullah properly, the guys with the AKs aren't running the country. A democracy can be functional in most levels and still have a bunch of crazy people with guns running around. In fact, I'd dare to estimate that more than half of the democracies in today's world have one or two crazy armed groups, it's just that in most cases they're too small to have a significant impact on the big picture.
A democracy doesn't cease to be so for having a group of gun-toting psychos around. It's just that it's usually not an extremely good democracy if there's a group of gun-toting psychos around.

That being said, it's almost impossible for a country to turn into a decent democracy without stumbling into one or two of these groups, particularly when they're just stepping out of a long-ranging tradition of civil war, colonialism, racial/religious tensions and general bad stuff as is the case with Lebanon. They've got some serious shit to sort out, give the guys a break. "The guys" being Lebanon, that is, not Hizbullah.

So is it a parlament hijacked at gunpoint? If so, is their a possible way the government can disarm or crack down on the Hizbollah. Ironically Israel's attack seems to be the only thing that would have liberated their government if they don't support the Hisbollah. But does lebenon's parlament condone hizbollah?

[TonyTostieno]

At 11/9/07 01:42 AM, bluedemonspeedracer wrote: Like frost bitten Russians LOL.

(Remember this forum is about Lebeneese democracy don't go off in a tangence about communism.)

Hehe
I know, but that damn bit about the smurfs...

[bluedemonspeedracer]

At 11/9/07 01:47 AM, bluedemonspeedracer wrote:

At 11/9/07 01:41 AM, Empanado wrote:

At 11/9/07 01:14 AM, bluedemonspeedracer wrote: Isn't a formal democracy not supposed to have militerized political parties? So technically Lebenon would not exactly fit the defenition of an actual democracy even though it possess some characteristics of one. Can someone please explain?

Hizbullah isn't the government's party. While the Lebanese government may be put to blame for not dealing with 'bullah properly, the guys with the AKs aren't running the country. A democracy can be functional in most levels and still have a bunch of crazy people with guns running around. In fact, I'd dare to estimate that more than half of the democracies in today's world have one or two crazy armed groups, it's just that in most cases they're too small to have a significant impact on the big picture.
A democracy doesn't cease to be so for having a group of gun-toting psychos around. It's just that it's usually not an extremely good democracy if there's a group of gun-toting psychos around.

That being said, it's almost impossible for a country to turn into a decent democracy without stumbling into one or two of these groups, particularly when they're just stepping out of a long-ranging tradition of civil war, colonialism, racial/religious tensions and general bad stuff as is the case with Lebanon. They've got some serious shit to sort out, give the guys a break. "The guys" being Lebanon, that is, not Hizbullah.

:Columbia seems to also be in the exact same situation as Lebenon, it is also a parlamentery democracy that is rendered unstable by gun touting psychos. Narcoterrorists frequently try to hijack their parlament and sometimes forcing the government to give in to their demands. However the Columbian government seemed more proactive in dealing with the situation as they requested NATO assistance in helping them arm their military or occassionally have NATO troops come in and assist in crackdowns on drug cartels despite the frequent death threats that are recieved by their Prime Minister. Why has'nt Lebbenon's government been doing the same? Are they simply afraid to risk their own life or do they actually cator to Hezbollah's presence?

[Takeshima]

At 11/9/07 01:14 AM, bluedemonspeedracer wrote: Isn't a formal democracy not supposed to have militerized political parties? So technically Lebenon would not exactly fit the defenition of an actual democracy even though it possess some characteristics of one. Can someone please explain?

Your spelling makes me facepalmed.

Anyways the Lebanese government dont have much power politically now. its all Hezbollah

[bluedemonspeedracer]

Your spelling makes me facepalmed.

Sorry I can't help it, Im dyslexic.

[Empanado]

At 11/9/07 02:21 AM, bluedemonspeedracer wrote: Why has'nt Lebbenon's government been doing the same? Are they simply afraid to risk their own life or do they actually cator to Hezbollah's presence?

I'd say it's partly because, while Colombia's only serious problems are the drug trafficking and the guerrillas (both being closely linked), Lebanon also has to deal with the constant pressure that comes from being in the middle of Syria and Israel. Syria's been claiming Lebanon as its bitch for a while now and every once in a while the Syrians pull some tricks on the Lebanese to keep them in line. Also, Lebanon still hasn't quite healed from its 15-years long civil war, which was pretty much an all-out carnage between Christians, Sunni Muslims and Shi'a Muslims (and the Druze, caught in the middle of everything), each side backed by a complex mix of Soviets, Israelis, Lybians, Iraqis, Palestinians, Egyptians, western communists and Belgians. Since the civil war was mostly sparked from the religious/ethnic differences (a problem that Colombia doesn't have), they've got a pretty weird form of democracy now: The Lebanese goverment must always be comprised of a proportionate amount of Christians, Shi'a Muslims, Sunni Muslims and other smaller sects. When you divide each religious group into their own political left-wing/right-wing divisions plus how pro-Arab, pro-West, pro-Syria or pro-US they are, and all the possible combinations of the above, you get a pretty difficult parliament to get things done in. They can't agree on mostly anything and much less on their stance on Hizbullah, even though they're for the most part against it. Still, they've got an underfunded military and a fragmented nation so it's hard to crack down on them.

The funniest thing about this all is that Lebanon is still one of the most suscessful nations in the Middle East.

[bluedemonspeedracer]

At 11/9/07 02:53 AM, Empanado wrote:

At 11/9/07 02:21 AM, bluedemonspeedracer wrote: Why has'nt Lebbenon's government been doing the same? Are they simply afraid to risk their own life or do they actually cator to Hezbollah's presence?

I'd say it's partly because, while Colombia's only serious problems are the drug trafficking and the guerrillas (both being closely linked), Lebanon also has to deal with the constant pressure that comes from being in the middle of Syria and Israel. Syria's been claiming Lebanon as its bitch for a while now and every once in a while the Syrians pull some tricks on the Lebanese to keep them in line. Also, Lebanon still hasn't quite healed from its 15-years long civil war, which was pretty much an all-out carnage between Christians, Sunni Muslims and Shi'a Muslims (and the Druze, caught in the middle of everything), each side backed by a complex mix of Soviets, Israelis, Lybians, Iraqis, Palestinians, Egyptians, western communists and Belgians. Since the civil war was mostly sparked from the religious/ethnic differences (a problem that Colombia doesn't have), they've got a pretty weird form of democracy now: The Lebanese goverment must always be comprised of a proportionate amount of Christians, Shi'a Muslims, Sunni Muslims and other smaller sects. When you divide each religious group into their own political left-wing/right-wing divisions plus how pro-Arab, pro-West, pro-Syria or pro-US they are, and all the possible combinations of the above, you get a pretty difficult parliament to get things done in. They can't agree on mostly anything and much less on their stance on Hizbullah, even though they're for the most part against it. Still, they've got an underfunded military and a fragmented nation so it's hard to crack down on them.

The funniest thing about this all is that Lebanon is still one of the most suscessful nations in the Middle East.

Interesting.... Well if Syria is the problem that fuels the perpetual conflict and help become a breeding ground for hizbollah. Then why did't Israel just attack syria, bomb their weapon factories, intercept their shipments, and form alliances with armed leftest divisions in lebbenon? That way Israel would cut off Hezbollah's source of military streghth and they will slowly become weak as they run out of ammo, as the armed leftest rebels would take care of the katusha launchers and provide intel on hizbollah whereabouts.

[Ahmudi]

At 11/9/07 02:34 AM, Takeshima wrote:

Anyways the Lebanese government dont have much power politically now. its all Hezbollah

¬¬
You really dont know what your talking about, Hezbollah doesnt have political power in Lebanon!

[Empanado]

At 11/17/07 12:06 PM, Ahmudi wrote:

At 11/9/07 02:34 AM, Takeshima wrote: Anyways the Lebanese government dont have much power politically now. its all Hezbollah

You really dont know what your talking about, Hezbollah doesnt have political power in Lebanon!

Worry not, my friends, as you are both morons.