[vegojimbo]

Since 2005, the main argument the 14 feb camp has been using to pinpoint the cause of all the problems that have been plaguing the country was the emptinesss of presidency seat. Even when Emile Lahoud was still president, the loyalists didn't acknowledge his existence (except when their interests dictated it) and kept on stating that the chair in baabda was empty. Emile Lahoud left and the focus on the empty chair being the source of all the problems intensified to the point that they claimed that once a new president is elected, all obstacles would cease to exist and life would go back to normal. The opposition on the other hand stated that the empty chair was merely a symptom and not the cause. Electing a president would not magically erase all differences and problems bc the solution must come through dealing with the real causes of the crisis rather than one symptom. And the 2 diverging views battled it out for years.

Let's mention these problems that some claimed to be solved once a new president is elected:

- the security will improve and clashes will cease to appear every now and then

- relations with our neighbors will go back to normal

- the christians will get their rights back and will be represented fairly

- the economy will boom

- the 2 battling sides will be closer and the hatred among them will decrease

- tourism will improve

- bombings and assassinations will stop

- the gov's decisions will not be blocked (referring to Lahoud's era)

- life of the average lebanese citizen will improve.


Now that a new president has been elected, and seeing clashes happening on a daily basis, our relations with our neighborly countries are still sour, economy and tourism still limping (despite reservations and number of flights booked for the summer having increased), hatred among the different factions at its peak, bombings still around, no new government, life of the lebanese citizen still below average, emigration on the rise, corruption alive and kicking, accusations and fear mongering still in effect, do u still believe electing a new president would have solved anything? And ultimately which argument turned out to be correct: "the vacancy in the presidency chair is the source of the problems, electing a president will automatically solve most of our issues" or "the vacancy is merely a symptom, electing a president without prior agreement on various subjects will not change anything"?