How to disarm Hezbollah ......

Originally posted by no1marauder
Since Iran and Syria don't allow other countries to dictate what their foreign policies will be, that won't work. And even if the Syrian and Iranian governments cut off every bit of official funding to Hezbollah, it would still be able to raise money for arms and training. So your "solution" doesn't work.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Who's using "formal" reasoning now? The absence of a specific word is not dispositive considering that all three of these nations refused to support the resolution based on its interference in Lebanese internal affairs.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
Nowhere does it say that the six countries regarded the resolution as being "illegal". Hence you are speculating also in this regard. Don't mistake correct reasoning for formal reasoning, marauder.

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
Where did No1 say that those countries thought the resolution illegal?

Originally posted by ivanhoe
He speculated on this issue. Thát is what I am adressing, Miss X.

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
No actually he made quite clear that he wouldn't speculate on such an issue. He stated that he personally believed that the resolution was illegal and outside of stating that didn't even use the word illegal. You however used it repeatedly asking questions such as "Where do they state the resolution is "illegal"?" despite No1 never having stated that they said that at all.

EDIT: I feel dirty defending No1.

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
No actually he made quite clear that he wouldn't speculate on such an issue. He stated that he personally believed that the resolution was illegal and outside of stating that didn't even use the word illegal. You however used it repeatedly asking questions such as "Where do they state the resolution is "illegal"?" despite No1 never having stated that they said that at all.

EDIT: I feel dirty defending No1.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
The marauder claimed many times in previous discussions that UNSC resolution 1559 is illegal. Moreover, the marauder now hints at (speculates) the possibility that the reason why six countries abstained from voting in favour or against the resolution was indeed this "illegality"of the resolution. This is and remains unacceptable speculation.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
X: "EDIT: I feel dirty defending No1."

I would feel the same ... certainly in this case .... 😛

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
I can't possibly comment on what No1 has said previously as I have only your word that he said what you say he said. However, I can find no trace in this thread of No1 implying anything about the abstainer's opinion on the legality of the UN resolution.

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
No1 and I have clashed numerous times in the past. But I'm willing to put aside pretty much any difference to defend those that are in the right.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
Marauder: "..... Apart from the fact that this provision is illegal for reasons I have given many times (this might be why 6 nations, including two permanent members, abstained), ...... "

Please notice the "many times" .... But maybe you should talk to the marauder about this. I run the risk of misrepresenting his position.

Originally posted by no1marauder
I already gave you the solution: integrate the Hezbollah military wing into the Lebanese army.

And since we're doing "call outs", I'd like to hear your comments on the AI report concerning Israeli war crimes in that thread.

man, if hezbollah is integrated into the lebanese army but continues fighting cross-border .... WHOMP!

Originally posted by ivanhoe
Ivanhoe: "And how exactly are you going to garantee that it will be the Libanese Prime-Minister or the Minister of Defense and not Hassan Nasrallah who wil be in command of this army within the Lebanese army ?"

Any answer ?