Revision as of 10:00, 3 March 2012 editSuriel1981 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers15,330 editsm Reverted 1 edit by 77.42.137.61 (talk) identified as vandalism to last revision by Suriel1981. (TW)← Previous edit | Revision as of 10:30, 3 March 2012 edit undo77.42.189.248 (talk) Plese refrain from deleting discussions on talk page without a proper explanation.Next edit → | ||
Line 179: | Line 179: | ||
Hezbollah's insistence on keeping its arms is justified... I think Nasrallah has a reasoned argument and persuasive argument that they should be in the hands of Hezbollah as a deterrent to potential aggression, and there is plenty of background reasons for that. So until – I think his position reporting it correctly and it seems to me reasonable position, is that until there is a general political settlement in the region, the threat of aggression and violence is reduced or eliminated, there has to be a deterrent, and the Lebanese army can't be a deterrent. (Noam Chomsky, Al Manar TV, 13 May 2006) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 09:55, 22 February 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | Hezbollah's insistence on keeping its arms is justified... I think Nasrallah has a reasoned argument and persuasive argument that they should be in the hands of Hezbollah as a deterrent to potential aggression, and there is plenty of background reasons for that. So until – I think his position reporting it correctly and it seems to me reasonable position, is that until there is a general political settlement in the region, the threat of aggression and violence is reduced or eliminated, there has to be a deterrent, and the Lebanese army can't be a deterrent. (Noam Chomsky, Al Manar TV, 13 May 2006) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 09:55, 22 February 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ||
What planet are you from? this is WIKIPEDIA, the Zionist propaganda machine that disguises itself as a neutral encyclopedia through the use of certain editing rules that might seem "encyclopedic", to get more attention than it deserves. The day when the "Jerusalem Post" and "Fox News" are no longer neutral sources on wikipedia is the day when hell freezes over.--] (]) 09:28, 3 March 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 10:30, 3 March 2012
Skip to table of contents |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hezbollah article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Template:WikiProject Political Parties Please add the quality rating to the{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
The terms "extremist", "terrorist" and "freedom fighter" should be avoided or used with care. Editors discussing the use of these terms are advised to familiarize themselves with the guideline, and discuss objections at the relevant talkpage, not here. If you feel this article represents an exception, then that discussion properly belongs here. |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Hezbollah. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Hezbollah at the Reference desk. |
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
Hezbollah has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on February 16, 2008, February 16, 2011, and February 16, 2012. |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hezbollah article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
Archives |
---|
Topical archive: |
Darrell Issa
The article contradicts itself. In one paragraph, it quotes Issa as he calls Hezbollah a terrorist organization. Then in the next paragraph it says that he claims it is not a terrorist organization. Upon reviewing the sources, it seems that the latter claim is the erroneous one. Serotrance (talk) 02:56, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Edit request from 96.26.213.146 (talk)
It is requested that an edit be made to this article that the user below does not want to make because of a conflict of interest. Please review the request below and make the edit if the edit is well cited, neutral, and follows other Misplaced Pages guidelines and policies. To the user using this template: please explain your conflict of interest in detail below. Please replace the {{Request edit}} template with {{tld|Request edit}} when the request is handled. |
How many times can the article emphasize that Hizbullah has Iranian/Syrian backing and funding (in first and fourth paragraphs)? I propose that at least one of these mentions be removed. 96.26.213.146 (talk) 07:43, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
"It receives financial and political support from Iran and Syria..."
"Hezbollah receives military training, weapons, and financial support from Iran, and political support from Syria."
Political position
On what basis is Hezbollah labeled right wing?? In light of their extensive social programs, what Conservative, Libertarian, Austrian or Capitalist could support them? They may be "national socialist" but take any political science class and you will learn that the Nazis were of the Authoritarian Left. 99.231.200.55 (talk) 05:55, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- It was re-added without discussion, though it had been previously removed. They are Islamist, and Islamism is a right-wing ideology as it is religious and holds to traditional, conservative values. Hizbullah is not "National Socialist", and the Nazis were authoritarian centrist (fascism), not leftist. 96.26.213.146 (talk) 22:20, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
I don't think it makes any sense to label Hezbollah as either right-wing or left-wing since these concepts includes many different ideas. Hezbollah is also not a political party, but a militant group. Davidelah (talk) 23:07, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- It's a political party too. Why else would they have representatives in the Lebanese parliament? 96.26.213.146 (talk) 06:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
- How about religious (i.e. Islamic) conservative, with the Sharia and all that. After all right-wing often includes libertarianism, which is not what Hezbollah is espousing, if they are fighting to imitated Iran. Davidelah (talk) 10:30, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- And Libertarianism can be left-wing too, that's exactly what anarchism is about. "Left-Right" is an economical scale, not a social one; libertarianism and totalitarism are the opposites on the social scale, and both can be either right or left wing. That being said, we can't decide whether they're right wing or not. We have to find reliable sources for that. Walid Charara and Frédéric Domont define them as "Islamo-nationalists" in their book about the Hezbollah. Don Durandal (talk) 13:48, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Fair enough, although I doubt that they are nationalist (fighting for Lebanon), but maybe that excludes "Islamo-nationalists," they rarely use the Lebanese flag if at all. Also if you read the right-wing article its seems to be a social thing also. Davidelah (talk) 14:58, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- And Libertarianism can be left-wing too, that's exactly what anarchism is about. "Left-Right" is an economical scale, not a social one; libertarianism and totalitarism are the opposites on the social scale, and both can be either right or left wing. That being said, we can't decide whether they're right wing or not. We have to find reliable sources for that. Walid Charara and Frédéric Domont define them as "Islamo-nationalists" in their book about the Hezbollah. Don Durandal (talk) 13:48, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- How about religious (i.e. Islamic) conservative, with the Sharia and all that. After all right-wing often includes libertarianism, which is not what Hezbollah is espousing, if they are fighting to imitated Iran. Davidelah (talk) 10:30, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Political Position 2
I very much agree that Hezbollah has no business being labeled Right-Wing. Unfortunately we live in the same world that even labels Adolf Hitler and National Socialism as Far-Right, even though the very word Socialism takes is to the left spectrum of the political matrix. Second, Adolf Hitler was far from being a fascist, I could say that he was labeled so as an attempt to undermine the development of the Fascist ideology. If we'd judge other ideologies by its previous crimes, than Communist wouldn't be allowed anywhere in the world.
Hezbollah is not right-wing or left-wing. Besides Islamism is not right-wing! That is an awfully childish and biased way of putting things. A Religion and its values can't be translated into a political matrix, even though that religion is tied to the state in several cases.
I'd say it is of great display of ignorance by Misplaced Pages to label Hezbollah as right-wing. I'd even say it is greatly offensive for right-wingers. Right-Wing all over the world is closely connected to ideologies and movements that strive to end terrorist and that are at times xenophobic and racist towards Islamic people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.90.97.171 (talk) 03:02, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- "...Hitler was far from being a fascist...he was labeled so as an attempt to undermine the development of the Fascist ideology"
- Yes, Mussolini was a real saint. It was just those Leftists who besmirched his name, turning fascism into something negative. Il Duce was so good for progress, wasn't he?
- Also, your argument about Right-wingers disliking Islam is invalid, because religious fundamentalists oppose each other and are by and large intolerant of other religions, even though they are all on the right.96.26.213.146 (talk) 09:32, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
As long as there are no sources approving the right-wing political position, according to Misplaced Pages:Verifiability it should not be included. At the moment it looks a lot like Original Research. Maybe the western left-right scheme simply cannot be applied to an islamist party. RJFF (talk) 21:17, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
"Islamic socialism" in the infobox
The claim of "Islamic socialism" in Hezbollah's ideology stands only in the infobox. It is not mentioned anywhere in the article body, namely the ideology section, and it is not sourced. It seems very dubious to me, probably "Original Research". If there is no reference added soon, it should be deleted. RJFF (talk) 21:35, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
- No objections? No sources? OK, I delete it. -- RJFF (talk) 20:59, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Hezbollah in the Arab and Muslim world
In this section a statement is made claiming that "Hezbollah support in the Arab world is on decline, and the Arab world except for the Palestinians appears to be united in blaming Iran and Syria for the fighting in Lebanon." The citation for this statement is an article in the Jerusalem Post, a very biased source. I seriously question the ability of the Jerusalem Post to decide who is to blame for the violence in Lebanon, especially given the three extremely deadly and controversial Israeli invasions of Lebanon. Soapy1 (talk) 19:42, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
- Jerusalem Post is considered a reliable source on wikipedia. If you think there is a case of bias you can open a thread at RSN noticeboard. Wikifan 02:41, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
- Actually the article in question is an editorial by KHALED ABU TOAMEH and hence not a reliable source for Arab public opinion.Poyani (talk) 23:32, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Hezbollah's Founding Date
This article notes on numerous occasions that Hezbollah was founded or active in 1982 and attributes numerous activities to Hezbollah between 1982 and 1985 (for example bombing of US assets in Lebanon). However more authoritative and reliable sources note that Hezbollah was founded in 1985. The actions taken against US and French troops in 1982-1985 was claimed by Islamic Jihad Organizations, which existed parallel to Hezbollah between 1985 and 1992 (see article Islamic Jihad Organization). The US government claims that many members of IJO later joined Hezbollah and hence label IJO a "precursor" to Hezbollah"
Take for example this recent testimony of Brown University professor Dr. Melani Cammett to US Congressional Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence.
The precise origins of Hezbollah are difficult to pinpoint. Various individuals and groups, including those linked to the bombings of the U.S. Embassy and marine barracks in Lebanon in 1983 and the kidnappings of Westerners during the 1980s, are said to be precursors to Hezbollah, which did not formally exist at the time. In 1985, Hezbollah officially announced its establishment with the publication of its Open Letter. The document outlined its philosophy of “oppression,” called for the established of an Islamic state in Lebanon modeled after Iran’s Islamic Republic, declared its opposition to the state of Israel, and detailed other aspects of its ideological orientation.
Is there any serious evidence to suggest that Hezbollah was formed in 1982 because it seems that we are just using this date because it is the year of the Israeli invasion? The current source is a BBC article which briefly goes over the movement's history. But I think this BBC article should be considered less reliable than the testimony of an academic expert before a government panel. Poyani (talk) 18:01, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Egypt classification of Hezbollah
The lead states that Hezbollah is currently classified by the government of Egypt as a terrorist organization. It cites the Los Angeles Times. But there are a few problems with this.
1. The link to the Los Angeles times is not a news item. It is a blog. 2. I think the entry from the Los Angeles Times blogger is being misinterpreted. The blogger did not state that the government of Egypt maintains a list of terrorist organizations (I don't think they even have one), to which it had added Hezbollah. It states that one Egyptian politician has used the adjective "terrorist" to describe Hezbollah (which the blogger approved). 3. The minister in question, along with the rest of his colleagues in the National Democratic Party, was overthrown in the 2011 Egyptian revolution.
For that reason I am removing Egypt, from the list. If anyone objects, please discuss. Poyani (talk) 03:26, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
File:Sayyed Hassan.jpg Nominated for Deletion
An image used in this article, File:Sayyed Hassan.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 9 February 2012
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:35, 10 February 2012 (UTC) |
scholarly views
all of the views seem to be supporting only one side, that hezbollah is a terrorist organization and i dont disagree but why call it scholarly views if they all conform to one view point? also i think chomsky and finklestein would not agree with that label, perhaps those are other view points that can be added. for example on May 8, 2006, MIT Professor Noam Chomsky began an eight-day visit to Lebanon and in a speech said:
Hezbollah's insistence on keeping its arms is justified... I think Nasrallah has a reasoned argument and persuasive argument that they should be in the hands of Hezbollah as a deterrent to potential aggression, and there is plenty of background reasons for that. So until – I think his position reporting it correctly and it seems to me reasonable position, is that until there is a general political settlement in the region, the threat of aggression and violence is reduced or eliminated, there has to be a deterrent, and the Lebanese army can't be a deterrent. (Noam Chomsky, Al Manar TV, 13 May 2006) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.68.252 (talk) 09:55, 22 February 2012 (UTC) What planet are you from? this is WIKIPEDIA, the Zionist propaganda machine that disguises itself as a neutral encyclopedia through the use of certain editing rules that might seem "encyclopedic", to get more attention than it deserves. The day when the "Jerusalem Post" and "Fox News" are no longer neutral sources on wikipedia is the day when hell freezes over.--77.42.137.61 (talk) 09:28, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Categories:- All unassessed articles
- GA-Class military history articles
- GA-Class Middle Eastern military history articles
- Middle Eastern military history task force articles
- GA-Class Islam-related articles
- Low-importance Islam-related articles
- WikiProject Islam articles
- GA-Class Lebanon articles
- High-importance Lebanon articles
- WikiProject Lebanon articles
- GA-Class politics articles
- Low-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- Unassessed Crime-related articles
- Unknown-importance Crime-related articles
- Unassessed Terrorism articles
- Mid-importance Terrorism articles
- Terrorism task force articles
- WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles
- GA-Class organization articles
- High-importance organization articles
- WikiProject Organizations articles
- Misplaced Pages controversial topics
- Misplaced Pages good articles
- Social sciences and society good articles
- Old requests for peer review
- Selected anniversaries (February 2008)
- Selected anniversaries (February 2011)
- Selected anniversaries (February 2012)