"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"thunder" wrote in message
...

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 05:22:16 -0500, Jeff Rigby wrote:



I'm not trying to be argumentative, but how did they do that? Maybe we
can learn from them and apply that to Iraq. DID they have a large
effective secret police not hampered by our laws? Were the people
there
finally ready for peace. Did they understand the people better?

Perhaps a little of "all of the above", but ultimately it was force. At
one time, Syria had 40,000 troops in Lebanon and used them, with a
"green
light" from Washington. I'm not trying to portray Syria as an angel
here,
they are not. However, unlike others here, I see the situation in
Lebanon
as tense, and wouldn't mind seeing Syria drag it's feet removing it's
troops *until* the situation stabilizes. Lebanon would be better off
without an occupying army on it's soil, but there is a real question
whether they are strong enough to maintain order without Syria's
presence.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/4308823.stm


They were known as the Paris of the Middle East for years. Very nice
place
to live. Then they let in Arafat and is band of merry armed men and
they
proceeded to try to make it into their kind of country. That is the
basis
for the "Civil War" Most of the Lebanese who could left the country.
Syria, just kept some control over the "Guests"



The death of Arafat is the most important factor in reshaping thought in
the Middle East. With Arafat gone, the Palestinians and the Israelis can
work out a deal with which each side can live. Once progress towards
such a deal is underway, much of the "trouble" in the Middle East will
deflate, and the remaining dictatorships will then have to deal with
their own people. There will still be terrorists, of course. but if the
majority of residents of a new and real Palestinian state are happy, it
will be difficult to maintain the fervor needed for a holy war.


We are talking about Lebanon. And according to you there is no Palistine.