Quote:
Originally Posted by Abou J  No labelling whatsoever, dont worry...instead a group learning session in logic.
If there are armed strangers in your country vs. armed fellow citizens, regardless of motives and causes, who would you want to disarm first?
Keep in mind that one of the reasons that Shiites carried arms was not only to fight Isreal, but also because of the persecution they suffered at the hands on palestinians in the south.
Want more? Did the palestinian weapons achieve anything in the past 50 yrs? Did HA weapons achieve anything?
More? Were palestinian weapons ever used against you? Were HA weapons ever used against you?
I hope you get to the same conclusion I got. |
I agree I would rather have a stranger disarmed before a fellow citizen, but I will have to reference my post again to tell you how I feel... The shiites were no the only ones that suffered under the hands of the palestinians a lot of people all over the country did, and obviously all other armed groups "officially" disarmed so why not them...
neither weapons of either group achieved anything.. I will throw a little curve ball here... can you prove that if hizballah did not exist that Israel would have stayed in the south.. you're answer might be yes, but you can';t prove it.. its the chicken and the egg theory.. so them liberating the south which is what i believe you are trying to reference.. might not have been needed if they just never kept their weapons..
not sure if palestinian weapons were ever used against me.. i was very young and lived in the metn so more than likely it was my fellow chrisitans shooting at our buildings... and the syrians of course can't forget them ;) ... and in regards to hizballah they have not personally used there weapons against me ... but because of their weapons, armed aggression caused me to re-live the evacuation i endured when I was young and running away from lebanon from Jounieh.. I never wanted to relive that .. unfortunately I did and It will stay with me forever..