Comments on: Is The International Tribunal Really A Deterrent?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 25 Sep 2007 04:25:01 +0000

Akiva:
Great suggestion. Aoun will always use the excuse that there is now a vacancy for an MP. What would he do if someone from his party was assassinated? Meanwhile, he uses the blood of fellow Lebanese to fulfill the murderers’ and his goals. He’s basically telling the killers “I’m with you” with all his gloating and his actions. I bet if a law was enacted to replace the MPs with the same party, he would protest it…. and still deny that he’s helping the killers. He should stand trial one day. But Aoun can always plead insanity in court – after all, he is crazy.

By: Akiva M.

Akiva M. — Mon, 24 Sep 2007 19:21:49 +0000

The smartest thing you could do is swiftly enact a law that let members grant each other proxies to vote for them if they were killed, or to allow the party to replace an assassinated member with a politician of their choosing for the balance of the term.

Eliminate the tactic’s effectiveness and you will eliminate the tactic

By: CK

CK — Sun, 23 Sep 2007 06:45:54 +0000

Mustapha cheri, I love your blog, but I think you wrote this entry 15 minutes before iftar time when there was no more sugar flowing to your brain.

For that I forgive you, bas please please ma t3eeda.

By: Ace

Ace — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 13:15:24 +0000

There isn’t an Int. Tribunal YET and that is the problem. We know it’s the problem because Hezbo, Syria, Lahoud & Berri have done everything in their power (which is immense) to keep it from happening. Evidence and charges will not be presented until the Court and procedures are in place and those who are guilty must stop this at all costs.

What does anyone think would happen if the Int Investigators were to announce they had evidence and would bring charges against the President of Lebanon, Hezbollah leaders & Syrian leaders? This is the likelihood of what will happen when the Court is convened. Hezbollah members don’t even get traffic tickets in Lebanon. How would they react to murder charges?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 05:03:57 +0000

March 8 and Aoun are the direct beneficiaries of all these murders, period. All those who follow Aoun are liars and sheep when they try to convince themselves and others that they’re innocent. They think everyone else is as stupid as they are, so they’re surprised when we state the obvious. If one of them was killed, what would they say? More importantly, what would they do? Meanwhile, they ask the peaceful majority to not rush to judgement while one by one those against them (against Aoun/M-8) are killed. Wake up, people, enough is enough.

By: Sam

Sam — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 01:11:30 +0000

Great post Mustapha, you call it Deterrent Power to stop the killing, I call it the Equilibrium of Terror.
- Eye for Eye thought is justified and reasonable due to urgent circumstances.
- It is no longer about the Rule of Law, therefore the survival of the fittest takes place!
- Whether a war will start in the region or not, we need to act now.
- Berri’s trap succeeded, seduce March 14th MP’s to return to Lebanon, so we could kill them!
- Therefore, Downtown Beirut is no longer safe for presidential elections!!!!!
- March 14th leader’s should be aware that there is trap to assassinate them and it not safe to go to the Parliament anymore!!!
- March 14th are cosmopolitan, businessman, professional etc. while March the 8th are spartan warriors.
- Therefore we need more hawks and Fighters like Geagea/ Jumblatt type.
- We need to select as well allies to contribute doing the dirty job.
- Jordan’s Intelligence and Egypt’s intelligence are to be involved.
- Al Jamaa Al Islamia should be involved to defend Islam and Arabs in Lebanon.
- Welfare regime should immediately start to support March 14th population and stop demographic bleeding!!!
- Lebanese who still in Lebanon should not leave it in benefits of Hassan Nasrallah an Whilayat El Faqih Plan!
- Tourism and investments stopped. Still, Lebanese should have decent means to stay in their country or we will lose it.
- PM Rafik Hariri was the first to start the generous welfare in Lebanon, it worked very well!
- Therefore welfare regimes should be reestablished to involve not only Beirut Sunni, but as well, and especially the North, the Bekaa and Mount Lebanon Maronites and Druze.
- Saudi Arabia should finance this welfare plan mainly in order to maintain strategic balance.
- They have the means and this is an EFFECTIVE respond to Iran, Syria and Qatar’s financial parrainage to March 8th mobs and population.
- Any Aouni, Weam Wahab, Sleiman Fenjié supporter etc. who convert to March 14th should be awarded financially.
- This what Hizballa does with poor druze, sunni and maronites to attract them. It is efficient!
- Hizballa and Al Qaoumi are to be excluded of this convert benefit.
- Alternative Airports and traveling means should start now in Lebanon.

March 14th should open their eyes and listen to new ideas.
Adaptation and evolution are the means to their survival in this case!

By: Vox P.

Vox P. — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 23:11:55 +0000

Your argument is fundamentally flawed Mustafa. It is not the tribunal that will deter the killers, it is the condemnation of Syria that will deter the killers by giving us political ammo. If anything, the recent assassinations show how much Damascus want to stop this tribunal.

By: Jay

Jay — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 20:32:57 +0000

Assuming that there is a connection between most if not all assassinations afflicting Lebanon, then the tribunal is obviously not a deterrent. The culprits are screwed already if there is a tribunal, so they have nothing to lose by killing a few more people if it means the tribunal is going to be buried. When speaking of deterrance, then the tribunal or more accurately bringing the criminals to justice would have to be perceived to be a near certainty.

Now, what the tribunal can do is to expose and dismantle whoever is behind the current assassinations. This cannot happen in advance of the tribunal either.

By: Amir in Tel Aviv

Amir in Tel Aviv — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 18:56:18 +0000

A democracy is a game that demands acceptance by the players to the rules of the game.
You can’t play football, while in your heart believe that touching the ball with your hands is essential to winning.
And when your opponent decides to play football with his hands, you’ll lose the game.
A democracy is not a ‘sucker’. Un-democratic elements tend sometimes to ridicule democracy, and democracy seekers.
So, democracy has to defend itself, sometimes in immoral manners.
Unfortunately, in times you have to burn ( Dresden, Germany ), or destroy ( Hiroshima, Japan ), in order to deter un-democratic forces, and to defeat them.

By: M.

M. — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 17:44:07 +0000

A comment that has nothing to do with the post. The color of lebanese-videos banner you have at the top clashes with the theme of the rest of the blog, and distracts attention.