I do.
Should this not happen, i also count on the US to be consistent and to immediately invade Syria in order to restore peace and democracy over there, and free the Lebanese people from this unacceptable breach of sovereignty, since what applies to one nation surely apllies to all others. Is there any oil over there? If so they might as well kill 2 birds with stone and take possession of it, as peace and freedom sure come at a price.

I dont' know if there's oil in Syria, but there's oil in Venezuela. If we want to free Lebanon, then Venezuela is the place to bomb.

bomb Venezuela = free Lebanon? what the shit are you talking about? I hope you are not serious. I would rather we not invade Syria, that is not what I was implying by starting this thread. The US government has done major damage to our own and to others throughout the Iraq invasion and occupancy, and no one has gained peace or freedom. Quite the opposite.

I'm traveling to beirut on saturday and hoped people might share their thoughts on this issue, not on what country the U.S. should bomb or occupy next.

Yikes! I was only kidding, but maybe Bush could stoop even lower...

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/americas/02/28/venezuela.us.curacao.ap/

there is an interesting dilemma.... concerning the US supported the syrian occupation after the lebannese civil war, to promote stability. I wonder who benefits most from Rafik Hariri's assassination??? syria sure doesn't, but maybe their just as "crazy" as Iran and North Korea....I smell a new axis of evil speech in the works. One last thing, I wonder when we will heed the okiwanian's pleas for the same removal of occupation from their homeland?

What's the exit strategy? - New boots for the walk back over the hill? Maybe the Syrians could trade in their AK47s for shovels and pitch in with the rebuilding of that place. It needs it. They need the money. Everybody wins.

fuck the international investigation of this or that.
never gets any results because every outsider puts their own political agenda and interest into that investigation and bombs always blow things up and bullets fly in natives land.
best is already happening in the main squares of beirut because of the will of lebanese citizens there. enough is enough. middle east has been looted for so long by these father to son than to the relatives type of despotic regimes like the one in syria and some other places in the area. good for the lebanese people that they have the courage to say no. for once lets give the credit to the people, and i repeat, fuck all the external manupulators of any kind, anywhere.
one outcry of people like in last few days in beirut is better than tens of UN resolutions that is not followed. what i really hope is civil unrest spreads first to damascus than to amman and i know i am too wishful but, to kuweit city and eventually makes its way to riyadh, sweeping entire arab world in time.busting united states red handed in iraq.
i just wish this.

I agree. I respect the power of the people, but there are always larger forces at play. Lets just hope the lebanese get something better out of this...instead of the continued position of a shrimp between two whales.

It's funny how everyone has something to say about the Syrian occupation of Lebanon now that it's been front page in the papers and all. I find it ironic how nobody, including the U.S. gov't, has really brought up Israel's role in the country's affairs. By the way, I'm not Palestinian in case anyone thinks I have biased allegiances.

After Israel practically pushed the Palestinians out of their own land (they call it their land b/c of biblical precedent when Palestinians have lived there for thousands of years. Come on now). You then have thousands of Palestinian refugees trying to find a home elsewhere, especially Lebanon. When you get a minority flooding a country w/limited resources and limited employment like Lebanon, you get tension. Yes, I know there;s not a direct line of fault here, but it seems pretty clear nonetheless. In addition, I think we as Americans are a bit naive in the whole int'l relations game. Travel outside the States and you gain a whole new perspective on things. You get to see a side of the story that the media has not spun. Just my M.O. Just opinion, no harsh sentiments. I'd like to hear other sides.

Syria should not only be out of lebanon soon but also accept the UN resolution 1559 and not interfere in the elections of spring 2005

what hipocrisy! resolution 1559 should be imposed on syria and not the US in Iraq and not israel in the occupied terrorities... If I have to hear one more word out of Scott McClellan's big mouth about what other countries should do regarding their national security while we voliate as many as we like for our own, I'll lose my mind>>>

'By the way, I'm not Palestinian in case..etc' sanofiSYN

Does it lessen the credibility of your point, if you were? Or that because you are not Palestinian, suddenly that elevated you above the subjective viewpoint. You almost apologize for leading us into believing you were one ( a Palestinian)...now, THAT, was pointless. Language has nuances, even if you yourself might not notice.

As for the Israeli-US/Palestine vs Syria/Lebanon issue...they are completely different issues (though links can be forged) with different histories and should not be used to smugly stalemate each other. This is, unfortunately, what happens a lot in this region.

The Lebanese want Syria out...that also does not mean that all Lebanese parties agree to the 1559 in principle:

1-as an external bullying US-led tactic in the form of a benign UN resolution .....whereas Lebanon, apropos the decisions made after the Ta'if agreement -to end the civilwar- where it formally acknowledged for itself an arab identity, seeks to reach independence from the Syrian intelligensia/army and political 'overseeing' with the aid of other arab countries and still retain a 'fraternal' relationship with its arab Syrian neighbour. The aim is not to increase the stigmatizing pressure on Syria -which aids the US in its struggle against 'terrorism' (archenemies: Syria and Iran). There is worry that the same accusatory gestures being made towards Syria mimic those that occured during the build up to the Iraqi invasion. Bush certainly took courage in the knowledge that the US people voted for him again...ie he can return to his not so petit war against 'terrorism'. Perhaps the only thing he did learn in his second election was to caress the european and world community.

2- there is an additional clause that stipulates Hizbollah's disarmament -it being viewed as a terrorist group...Hizbollah is not viewed as a terrorist group by the Lebanese but as a resistance movement cum major shiite political group. If US attacks Hizbollah..it actually attacks a very large supporting population within Lebanon..and therefor Lebanon itself. It is akin to saying that since the black US population shares colour and culturally sympathizes with Africa...that means they're not american. That is moronic.
It is not, as the overworked cliche has been pandered, an 'Iranian' presence though there is religious allegiance. Yet this is not unique to Hizbollah..this is the multiconfessional nature of Lebanon..vis a vis religion and subcultures, there are forged links to Iran, Saudi Arabia,France, Italy, Greece...etc.

There is also still dispute as to whether there is still some Lebanese southern terrain in the stronghold of Israel - or whether that is Syrian territory (and this is also another disservice Syria has done to Lebanon through refraining from resolving this issue)..and so there is still dispute as to whether said disarmament should occur. So, the actual full realisation of 1559 is frought with controversy for the Lebanese.

What all this implies is that the issues should be discussed intelligently.. not simply to accept 1559 as either necessarily benign or as a uniform document (being comprised of different clauses)...nor to counter Syria's form of occupation with Israel's.