Coup d'etat: The only "Democratic" Solution..

[Salome]

Originally Posted by shevchenco

after all what they've done they don't deserve to be hanged????? they should be chopped into pieces. (too barbaric, I know)

Sure they deserve it, but we are not barbars right? Nor God, to deliver the final punishment....best punishment would be that we let their own demons eat them alive...am sure we can convince them all why it is safer for them on that deserted island

and then:

Originally Posted by Boris®

lets give them each 1 gun with 1 bullet to see who will survive

but we have to make sure nobody will survive, which wont be hard, you just need to tell them that the other is a pro-Syrian and plans an assassination

[shadow1]

Originally Posted by John A

IMO, there are 2 solutions to save Lebanon :
1- An atomic bomb to wipe this country and all its citizens.
2- A Coup d'etat, as fast as possible to put the country under the military rule, and we can go back to the 1918, and hang up people from their balls, whatever it costed.

I prefer the first option because the second one is way too dangerous and it might lead to sectarian strifes that might linger on for 1000's of years. Remember this is the Middle East we are talking about and people live in ages long gone by. You wouldn't want your children to inherit vendettas they have nothing to do with. When you think about it, the shia havent forgiven the Sunnis for Karbala, and the muslims havent forgiven the christians for what the crusaders did and the christians havent forgiven the Jews for what they did to Jesus. These things could be quite nasty if not executed properly and with the utmost regards to every sect's sense and sensibility.

An atomic bomb is short and sweet but you make sure to do it after my summer holidays as I'd rather be tanned by sunlight rather than radiation.

[erzallubnan]

We thought of it LONG time ago and this is the reason why. pls read below. History repeats itself, are we civilized and intellectual enough to know where & whats good for our country and people? ie: I was one of those R's that opposed a military coups d état, but now for some reason I changed my mind, cause when you have an infected cancer in your body, one needs to perform and operation otherwise the whole body is in threat.


In 1949 the SSNP tried to seize power in Lebanon through a revolution but failed. In 1952, the constitutional process of succession broke down when President Bishara al-Khuri tried to extend his term in office. Again in 1958, there was a similar breakdown in the constitutional process of succession which led, with other factors, to a civil war. A question, then, arises: “Why does the Lebanese polity break down from time to time?

In a paper entitled “The Prospect for Lebanese Civility”, delivered in 1962 at a conference on Lebanese Democracy held at the University of Chicago, Professor Edward Shils came to the conclusion that the first and most general factor behind the breakdown of Lebanese polity is “the deficient civility of Lebanese society”.[1] “Lebanon”, he argued, “is not a civil society”.[2] He added;

Because of the deeply rooted communalism of Lebanese society, it is not an integrated civil society in the modern sense of the term. It lacks that attachment to the national society as a whole, that sense of identity, the consensus that should embrace much of the population on issues that touch seriously upon the interests of the communities which make it up.[3]

As a result of this situation, the Lebanese polity suffers from various shortcomings and handicaps. Shils described some of them. First, he contended that:

Lebanese society revolves around an empty center. It has representative institutions, and these representative institutions are able to conduct debates but they are precluded from making decisions. The Chamber of Deputies cannot institute changes. It can only serve to prevent changes which would alter the present balance of interests among the communities of belief and primordial attachment.”[4]

Another handicap of the Lebanese polity, according to Shils, is that “the National Pact limits efficiency in the civil service by making communal membership [i.e., confessionalism] a major criterion for recruitment”.[5] According to Ralph E. Crow, confessionalism affects not only the recruitment process, but the operation of the Public Service in general. As he puts it: “Confessionalism manifests itself at several points in the administrative process, three of which are: recruitment and promotion, performance and control, and effect on the stability of the political regime.”[6]

A few attempts to improve the administration were made after 1953. Sham’un introduced some improvements in the procedural level of the administration. Following the crisis of 1958, President Fu’ad Shihab made a serious effort to bring about administrative effectiveness and to promote a sense of national unity in Lebanon.[7] This latter goal, according to Kamal Salibi, “was the first and most important concern of the [S]hihab regime”.[8]

Despite all improvements and efforts made, within the framework of confessionalism, to provide effective remedies for the social and political ills of Lebanon, this country remained, by 1961, a communally segmented society with no genuine democracy and civil order and with an inefficient and corrupt administration. Shihab succeeded, to a certain extent, in reducing corrupt practices at the top administrative level, but these were difficult to get rid of at lower levels. It was not easy, as Salibi concludes, “... to introduce practical improvements in a civil service where inefficient practices were traditional, and where sectarian considerations overrode others in the choice of new recruits”.[9]

The absence of genuine democracy was evident by the continual denial for ideological parties to play a great part in the Chamber of Deputies and other institutions. It was also evident in Lebanon’s “alienated intellectuals” who had not succeeded in establishing their ideal form of politics.

At the end of 1961, amidst increased dissatisfaction with Lebanese administrative ineffectiveness and corruption which had led in recent years to widespread criticism and demands for the abolition of confessionalism, the polity of Lebanon was exposed to sudden and radical change. This happened on December 31, 1961, when the Syrian Social Nationalist Party with the co-operation of few military officers attempted a coup d’état against President Shihab and his government.

The coup was considered as “the first instance of direct military action in Lebanon against the established government”.[10] It resulted in the death of a number of victims and failed to achieve its objectives. Eleven months after the coup attempt, president Shihab reminded his countrymen that its main objective “...had been to deprive Lebanon of her sovereignty and independence”.[11]

This chapter studies the 1961 attempted coup of the SSNP and discusses its motives, preparation and failure. The aim is to examine the validity of the accusation that the SSNP, when carrying out this coup d’état, had the objective of depriving Lebanon of its sovereignty and independence. But first, the discussion must be preceded by a short theoretical explanation of coups d’état. Then, in the light of this short explanation, we can look at the SSNP’s coup d’état.

[1] Edward Shils, “The Prospect for Lebanese Civility” in Leonard Binder (ed.), Politics in Lebanon, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1960. p. 2.

[2]Ibid.

[3]Ibid.

[4]Edward Shils, “The Prospect for Lebanese Civility”, op. cit., p.3.

[5]Ibid., p. 4.

[6] Ralph E. Crow, “Confessionalism, Public Administration and Efficiency in Lebanon”, in Leonard Binder (ed.), Politics in Lebanon, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1966, p. 172.

[7]This will be discussed in more details elsewhere.

[8] Kamal Salibi, “Lebanon Under Fu’ad [S]hehab 1958-1964”, Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 2, No. 3, April 1966, P. 218’.

[9]Ibid., p. 222.

[10]George M. Haddad, Revolutions and Military Rule in the Middle East; the Arab States , op. cit., p. 139.

[11]M. Capil, “ Political Survey 1962- Arab Middle East “. Middle Eastern Affairs, February, 1963, p. 36.

[Red Phoenix]

One A-bomb to rule them all, One A-bomb to find them, One A-bomb to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.

Lord of the Rings RP version

[ecce homo]

Originally Posted by shadow1

I prefer the first option because the second one is way too dangerous and it might lead to sectarian strifes that might linger on for 1000's of years. Remember this is the Middle East we are talking about and people live in ages long gone by. You wouldn't want your children to inherit vendettas they have nothing to do with. When you think about it, the shia havent forgiven the Sunnis for Karbala, and the muslims havent forgiven the christians for what the crusaders did and the christians havent forgiven the Jews for what they did to Jesus. These things could be quite nasty if not executed properly and with the utmost regards to every sect's sense and sensibility.

An atomic bomb is short and sweet but you make sure to do it after my summer holidays as I'd rather be tanned by sunlight rather than radiation.

Turkey has learned to live with Kemalism.

Remember in 2005 Aoun said that he didn't believe that the Atatürk experience would be right for Lebanon but seeing things developing since 2005 maybe it's the ultimate solution for the country, an imposed secular and democratic solution rather than agreed upon.

[Salome]

Originally Posted by ecce homo

Turkey has learned to live with Kemalism.

Remember in 2005 Aoun said that he didn't believe that the Atatürk experience would be right for Lebanon but seeing things developing since 2005 maybe it's the ultimate solution for the country, an imposed secular and democratic solution rather than agreed upon.

In Turkey it could have worked because they dont have 17 different sects. I think it shall come from the people, otherwise I dont see how it would work without a big bloodshed.

[freedom4ever]

We need something Similar to the french Revolution.

These religion people along with these sects chiefs and bourgeoisie should be whipped out from this country.

I am Talking about a real revolution,
Not sawret l arez wel batata.

People should be Hangged, these politicians should suffer,
Everything for the people should be turned back to the people.

A List for people who made our country suffer should be Prepared and they should be executed in Public in front of everybody so they will be a lesson for whoever comes after.

If all the people is not aware, than let the part that knows his own benefit start preparing.

And this time we don't need anybody to support us.

[ecce homo]

Originally Posted by Salome

In Turkey it could have worked because they dont have 17 different sects.

In a secular country you treat all sects as equals. All has to obey to the same rules. Religion has no say in politics.

[shadow1]

Originally Posted by ecce homo

Turkey has learned to live with Kemalism.

Remember in 2005 Aoun said that he didn't believe that the Atatürk experience would be right for Lebanon but seeing things developing since 2005 maybe it's the ultimate solution for the country, an imposed secular and democratic solution rather than agreed upon.

Turkey is now in the process of winding back the secularism imposed on it by Ataturk. If it werent for its fear of scuppering its chances to join the EU, it would adopt the KSA model of governance.

Furthermore, timing is of the essence. A coup d'etat would have been a splendid idea in the dying days of the Lahhoud regime and no one would have shed a crocodile tear for him but times have changed.

Coups d'etat dont work in Lebanon, 3azeez A7dab tried one in 1976 and he had a popular support but that ended up being a fiasco more fit for a cartoon series than the history books. The SSNPs tried one or were about to try one in 1962 and that bit the dust.

What Lebanon needs is Leaders who can negotiate with each other, a little less self-righteousness and more righteousness, some negotiation skills rather than sordid wiliness. As it stands today the country is split in half and while a coup d'etat might satisfy one half, the other half will forever be indignant. And believe me if a coup d'etat takes place today the only countries in the world to recognise the regime would be Iran and Syria assuming that it's your side which does it. And if a "neutral" side undertakes it, it will soon fizzle into a comedy of errors.

[Salome]

Originally Posted by freedom4ever

We need something Similar to the french Revolution.

These religion people along with these sects chiefs and bourgeoisie should be whipped out from this country.

I am Talking about a real revolution,
Not sawret l arez wel batata.

People should be Hangged, these politicians should suffer,
Everything for the people should be turned back to the people.

A List for people who made our country suffer should be Prepared and they should be executed in Public in front of everybody so they will be a lesson for whoever comes after.

If all the people is not aware, than let the part that knows his own benefit start preparing.

And this time we don't need anybody to support us.

Lebanon is not Iraq or Iran, there wont be public hangings!!

Remember the time of terror, by then the spirit of the revolution and all the causes were lost.