It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lebanon Civil war=WW4?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 19 2005 @ 07:21 PM
link   
Lebanon’s climate has been charged with violence since the assassination Monday, February 14, of Lebanese former prime minister Rafiq Hariri, and his funeral two days later. Sparks began flying when the opposition unveiled their “peaceful democratic uprising for independence” Friday, February 18.
Syria has fired it's intellegence chief, armed it's citizens in Lebanon, and allied itself with Iran/Hezbullah; it looks like a fight.
Could this drag in the Russians, U.S., and Israel and be the start of a really big fight?




posted on Feb, 19 2005 @ 08:00 PM
link   
Realist05 mentions:


Syria has fired it's intellegence chief...

Nada. The intelligence chief retired. He is replaced by Major-General Asef Shawkat, Assad's brother-in-law.
Lebanon Minister Quits; Syria Replaces Spy Chief



...armed it's citizens in Lebanon...

Only those that back the Syrian government's involvement and occupation of Lebanon, which is a very small minority.



...and allied itself with Iran/Hezbullah...


You make it sound like something that has just taken place. Hezbollah and Syria have always been in bed together, despite Hezbollah being of Iranian origin and backing. Iran has been supporting Hezbollah through Damascus, as well as being supported by Syria/Damascus/Assad.



Could this drag in the Russians, U.S., and Israel and be the start of a really big fight?

Maybe, maybe not. How about Syria just do Lebanon and the world a favor and withdraw it nearly 14,000 men, arms, and equipment? Russia will most likely not be drawn into this for varying reasons, though assuredly, Putin will mouth his rhetoric as par...I mean after all, Syria is a major arms buyer of Russian equipment. The U.S. will work through the U.N., as well give its rhetoric talk, as well. israel will simply sit back and enjoy the view, as would I.

As such, the ball is in Syria's and Assad's court. How he serves it will determine how it is returned. Incidently, there are some in Syria that are rethinking Syria being in Lebanon anyhow.
Some Syrians Want Army to Leave Lebanon


In Wake of Hariri Murder, Some Syrians Think It's Time for Their Army to Leave Lebanon.






seekerof



posted on Feb, 19 2005 @ 08:39 PM
link   
Um I think WW3 would have to happen first. Although some think we're in it right now.



posted on Feb, 19 2005 @ 08:41 PM
link   
Seeker,
As usual, an insightful contribution. My question is, if a "orange revolution" occurs in Lebanon, will it be put down forcably by the Syrians and thier Hezbullah allies and lead to a wider conflict?
Arab factionalism is already on display in Iraq, but in Lebanon the possibility of an American/European common approach is much stronger, given Chirac's attitude to the latest events.
Syria, I'm afraid, is nowhere close to doing the world a favor and withdrawing from Lebanon, to the contrairy, I think they and Iran are set to rachet things up.



posted on Feb, 19 2005 @ 08:43 PM
link   
when was WW3???

???





posted on Feb, 19 2005 @ 08:57 PM
link   
WW3 was the period between the rise of the Iron Curtain in 1945 and the fall of the Berlin wall in 1991; the battle between communism and the west encompassing the airlift, korea, vietnam, cuba, angola, nicargua, the space race, and a host of "low intensity" conflicts between the USSR and US.
p.s. The U.S. won... I think.



posted on Feb, 19 2005 @ 09:09 PM
link   
Realist05:


My question is, if a "orange revolution" occurs in Lebanon...

Are you refering to when Lebanon holds its parliamentary elections this coming April? If so, I do not think it will be like Ukraines "Orange Revolution." I may be wrong on this though. I can see what your are certainly getting at, I think. 2005 has been a semi-big year: Palestinian's choose/elected a new president, Iraq choose/elected a National Assembly who will then write a constitution that will be put to a national referendum in the fall of this year, and in the Spring of this year, Lebanon will hold parliamentary elections. Also, Saudi Arabia toyed with elections, but to me, that really doesn't mean much concerning them. Reverberations will undoubtedly be felt in the Syrian placed and backed 'puppet regime/government.'



...will it be put down forcably by the Syrians and thier Hezbullah allies and lead to a wider conflict?

Thats a big "if" and is dependent on a number of factors that I cannot fully or totally go into because I simply cannot say or describe them all. You are aware that as of today (the 19th), it was Hezbollah that mentioned:
Hizbollah Warns Of Lebanon Civil War

As to this indicating a larger or wider conflict, I simply think that remains to be seen.



Syria, I'm afraid, is nowhere close to doing the world a favor and withdrawing from Lebanon, to the contrairy, I think they and Iran are set to rachet things up.

Perhaps. Time will only tell. I do believe that Iran and Syria, in regards to Lebanon, had better have their ducks in a row, because one mis-calculation could prove to be their undoing. Rhetoric is cheap, backing that rhetoric is another matter all together. I think it will boil down to how the world stands on the Lebanon issue. If the assassination had not taken place, which I am sure that Syria wishes it hadn't, the issue of Lebanon would not be as it is now.




seekerof

[edit on 19-2-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 08:46 AM
link   
erm,what happen to WW3?

In the future,I predict more wars to come.What will become of human civilisation.I pity these humans.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 09:26 AM
link   
"Only the dead have seen the end of war"
Looking back, I'm sure the people contemporary with the 30 years war didn't call it that, I'm sure future historians will a have different name for present day conflicts.
The difference between today and the age old conflicts from the levant to the himilayas is the degree of U.S. intervention in the violence and that events seem to have reached a tipping point.
If the Syrians, backing terrorism in Iraq, and losing, see themselves losing thier Lebanese colony to western interests as well, who can they pull in to raise hell is a issue of supreme concern.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Realist05
WW3 was the period between the rise of the Iron Curtain in 1945 and the fall of the Berlin wall in 1991; the battle between communism and the west encompassing the airlift, korea, vietnam, cuba, angola, nicargua, the space race, and a host of "low intensity" conflicts between the USSR and US.
p.s. The U.S. won... I think.


nope...

all wrong...

WW3 has not been fought...





posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Realist05
and allied itself with Iran/Hezbullah; it looks like a fight.


Hezbollah are a Sunni muslim resistance group that were originally, and always have, protected lebanon from Israel. Hezbollah are no less patriots of lebanon than Walid Jumblatt's druze community (I am a druze, by the way). If Syria launches a ful-scale and violent invasion of lebanon, Hezbollah will rather lose its Syrian backing than let lebanon fall to a foreign aggressor.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Interesting. The Syrians are helping the Sunni "Iraqi insurrectionists" who have been attacking Iraqi Shias while completing a pact with Iranian Shiite Mullahs who fund Hizbullah, who you say would fight the Syrians in a Lebanese conflict.

Is it just me or does it seem that terrorism makes strange bedfellows?



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Realist05
WW3 was the period between the rise of the Iron Curtain in 1945 and the fall of the Berlin wall in 1991; the battle between communism and the west encompassing the airlift, korea, vietnam, cuba, angola, nicargua, the space race, and a host of "low intensity" conflicts between the USSR and US.
p.s. The U.S. won... I think.


Calling the Cold War WW3 cant say I have heard that many times but its a interesting P.O.V. I have to the say the Cold War was really not all that Cold at times it was indeed a Proxy War I wold even add the Russians in Afghanistan to your list.

But look at what those events taught us all those conflict didnt draw the US and Russia into a Direct War. So really what makes you think a Conflict in Lebanon would?



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 02:18 AM
link   
Yup,beside Cold War isn't really what you'd call World War my friend.Let's see the definition of World War:A GLOBAL MILITARY conflict.Certainly the Cold War isn't a global one because it is mainly tensions or argumants,in a more simple term,between USSR(now Russia) and US.Furthermore,Cold War is war for the spies and intelligence community and not really the military.

Cold War is not a global one and there's no direct military conflict between the two nations and therefore,Cold War is not recognised as WWIII.Sorry.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join