Originally posted by Edbert1
At what point does the general population of a country become responsible for the actions of their government? At what point does the government (in Lebanon) become responsible for the acts-of-war carried out against their neighbor from within their sovereign borders?
It is a rhetorical question but I say 100% of the time on both counts.
Well, as I tried to point out, it's not so cut and dried. The reason Lebanon has Hizbollah, and why it has no military control over the South of Lebanon is Israel's invasion, and border clashes stirred up by both parties since. And as the people of Lebanon don't vote on who runs Hizbollah or what they do, how can we hold them responsible?
Especially given the sectarian nature of Lebanon _not only are there divides within the muslim populace between Shia & Sunni, but a bit over 40% of Lebanese are christians, and 5% are Druze, so they're less likely to agree with Hizbollah.
So if we're talking purely religiously, Hizbollah _as a *****e group represent about 26% of Lebanese. Of course, that's over-simplified a lot of Shia aren't going to agree with Hizbollah, and it doesn't go straight down religious lines _so no doubt some Sunni, Druze or Xians are going to be pro Hizbollah.
However as far as I can see, if we apply your logic, then both countries' civilians are legitimate targets, and both sides are justified in killing civilians now. So I'd say I disagree with the logic all told I reckon it doesn't justify deliberately killing civilians for either side.
