Quote:
|
Originally Posted by joseph_lubnan Lebanon cannot start anything, since these are HA controlled weapons, and HA does not recognize any control of the state over their weapons. It is HA that should agree to negotiate. It hasn't and wont for a long list of reasons most of them have nothing to do with Lebanon and Nasrallah gave us a flavor of where HA stands in his recent speech.
Much like HA is negotiating the prisoner release, they can if they are willing negotiate peace and disarmament. But they do not want to, and no one can make them do anything, since they act like an independent state with its own independent internal and regional policies.
All weapons in Lebanon are a problem especially the ones in the hands of Lebanese. It doesn't matter if the palestinian arms are not first, but they should be disarmed as well. |
Actually, what I said is the following: "Bottom line: Does Lebanon wants peace or not? Does Hezbollah want peace or not? The rest is irrelevant quibbling.", so yes, the decision right now is Hezbollah's. But theoretically, two major Lebanese groups, Hezbollah and the loyalists (let's say represented by Siniora) refuse any peace talks or agreement with Israel.
The first wants to annihilate Israel, the other wants to be the last Arab country to ever sign a peace with Israel. In that context, presenting the "bargain over the weapons" as a raison d'etre for Hezbollah's weapons is an ultimate absurdity.