[Stolen from the thread - What is a Freedom Fighter - so as to examine specifics of this organization][Acknowledgements to Wikipedia for the majority of quotes]

Iran might soon be invaded judging by the almost perfect repeat so far of the lead up to the Iraq invasion – the same pattern of Georgie blustering and sabre rattling followed almost instantaneously by a new but matching barrage of propoganda from much of the Western media.

One of Iran’s sins is that it supports Hezbollah, so let us take a look at this terrorist organisation, starting with their mission:

Hezbollah's 1985 manifesto listed its three main goals as "a) putting an end to any colonialist entity" in Lebanon, b) bringing the Phalangists to justice for "the crimes they [had] perpetrated," and c) the establishment of an Islamic regime in Lebanon.

a) Hezbollah first emerged as a militia in response to the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982, set on resisting the Israeli occupation of Lebanon.

Sounds like a reasonable response to being invaded by a foreign power. When someone occupies my house I have the right to react. Therefore, so far Hezbollah sounds like a classic Freedom Fighter – one of the justified resistant fighters. And hence I have little complaint about them, on the contrary, all things considered I should have supported them at the time (which I didn’t). Yes, I know that PLO supporters fled to Lebanon, but think about the overall balance here – do we want such invasions and their justification to be a world standard. Oy vey, I certainly hope not.

a.1) Its leaders were inspired by Ayatollah Khomeini, and its forces were trained and organized by a contingent of Iranian Revolutionary Guards.

Hmmm – I can see some folk on this forum having problems with that, but to be honest, when I am being invaded I will take support from whoever offers it. And let us not forget that Khomeini himself rebelled against the oppressive regime led by the Shah Pahlavi and policed by the dreaded SAVAK. The fact that the Shah was supported by the US right from the start when he overthrew the democratically elected Iranian government in 1953, should in fact count for Khomeini and against the US. Is that not reasonable?

So Hezbollah comes out of this one also on the side of justice and fairness, with an Iranian mentor who was against State-sponsored terrorism (SAVAK was the epitome of State terror – no debate – fear was their main tool). “But the Iranian students occupied our Tehran embassy in 1979 without state intervention.” Didn’t we deserve it? (reread above paragraph).

# Shi’a Muslims make up 35% of the total population of Lebanon. They are the single largest group in this demographically very complex country.
# Shi’a make up 89% of Iran’s Muslim population.
Ahhhhh …. The light goes on.

b) Bringing the Phalangists to justice for "the crimes they [had] perpetrated":

The Phalangists: A Maronite Christian-based Lebanese political party originally created to struggle against the French Mandate. Great, a second Freedom Fighter group!! How are we going to unravel this? Answer: Step-by-step.

The Maronites were a group favored during the French mandate who have always led Lebanon. They make up 22% of the population of Lebanon. Hold on!! What’s that? A minority regime supported by the West? OUCHIES!! This does not look good. Can we presume that the overall Muslim majority saw this as an injustice foisted on them by the West? You bet!! Hmmm … starts to look less and less like the Maronites were Freedom Fighters, and more like religious Apartheid.

But back to the Hezbollah manifesto – what’s all this about Phalangist “injustices”?
On 16 September 1982, Elie Hobeika, a Phlangist militia commander, led the massacre of up to 2,000 Palestinian refugees in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps. Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) allowed the Phalangist militiamen to enter the two Palestinian refugee camps, the militia massacred civilians inside, while the periphery of the camps were under the control of the Israeli army. A major international outcry against Israel erupted. DOUBLE OUCHIES!! Sabra was truly disgusting, like killing chickens in cages – see this link - http://electronicintifada.net/bytopic/145.shtml Got a knee jerk reaction against the word intifada? OK, try this link instead, which provides eyewitness accounts by an orthopaedic surgeon, Dr Ang Swee Chai. http://www.inminds.co.uk/from-beirut-to-jerusalem.html Anyone want to suggest that Hezbollah was unjustified in this goal?

c) The establishment of an Islamic regime in Lebanon. Recently, however, Hezbollah has made little mention of establishing an Islamic state, and forged alliances across religious lines. A Nasrallah quote: "We believe the requirement for an Islamic state is to have an overwhelming popular desire, and we're not talking about fifty percent plus one, but a large majority. And this is not available in Lebanon and probably never will be."

So far Hebollah seems to be a pretty straight up freedom fighter group, although Hezbollah describes their actions as a defensive jihad. Their militia dress in uniform and they pride themselves on their discipline.
______________________________

And now for the other side:

Some translations of Hezbollah's 1985 Arabic-language manifesto state that "our struggle will end only when this entity [Israel] is obliterated", however neither the original publication of the manifesto, nor those found on Hezbollah's website include the statement. But in an interview with the Washington Post, Nasrallah said "I am against any reconciliation with Israel. I do not even recognize the presence of a state that is called 'Israel.'" Throughout its history, Hezbollah has made statements and actions against the United States, in part because of the United States' support for Israel. Many highly inflamatory quotes attributed to Nasrallah are said to be fabrications (I have not yet researched this).

Hezbollah has declared that it distinguishes between Zionism and Judaism. According to Joseph Alagha, it considers the Jews as "People of the book" and only regards the Jews living in Israel, either civilian or not, as racist Zionists. This is the basis for Hezbollah’s support for the PLO.
Eighteen years later the initial invasion in 1982, Israel finally ended its occupation of Lebanon in 2000, when the resistance by its local recruits, the SLA broke, down against Hezbollah attack. Did Hezbollah extract vengeance on the SLA members left behind by Israel? No, they did not. As Charles Glass the famous Lebanon media hostage asked: Barbarous?
___________________________________

More from Charles Glass, who, as a hostage, has seen deeper into Hezbollah than any other westerner: That is why, having failed to eliminate Hizbullah while it occupied Lebanon, Israel is trying to destroy it now. Hizbullah’s unpardonable sin in Israel’s view is its military success. Israel may portray Hizbullah as the cat’s-paw of Syria and Iran, but its support base is Lebanese. Moreover, it does one thing that Syria and Iran do not: it fights for the Palestinians.

I can only judge whether this stance of Hezbollah for the PLO and against Israel by embarking on a further analysis, namely what are the factors for and against the Hezbollah position. I know that there are many people who will rank Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation because it has targeted civilians. But so has Israel, so the canvas cannot be painted only in black and white. Such an analysis is obviously beyond the scope of a single post. I should mention that since 2000 my opinion has slowly but steadily been moving, during the process of detailed fact gathering. In 2000 I had not even heard of Benny Morris or the other Israeli New Historians, nor of the Sabra and Deir Yassin massacres. I then sincerely believed that Israel was in full compliance with UNSC resolution 242.

So back to the original concept; can we use Iran’s support of Hezbollah as a ‘de facto’ legal justification for the invasion of Iran? At this stage may I suggest that the balance on the scales of justice and fairness are far too uncertain to make that justification a knee-jerk reality?

The neocons need to come up with some reason to attack Iran before the elections. This is probably as good as any.

Well, the US trained Osama bin Laden. And, we still financially support and sell our weapons to the Saudi's, who were the majority of the 9-11 hijackers.

So shouldn't we finish kicking our own arses first? Bush has us up against the ropes, so we should be able to finish ourselves off with just a few more years of peace spreading war.

__________________
"For time and the world do not stand still. Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future."
"Conformity is the jailer of freedom and the enemy of growth"
"Too often we... enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
-JFK

Knight Errant of the Simian Order
Truth - Justice - Comedy

As a legal justification, not likely. As a BS rationalization it certainly adds to the growing drumbeat. If Iran continues to act as a channel for Russian and Chinese military gear, Israel will be in a real bind. At some point, they'll loose the ability to do much more than drop bombs on Lebanon. Israeli armored units were unprepared for the quality and tactics of Hezbolla's ground units during the '06 fighting, courtesy of these imported armaments. When (not if ) Hezbolla acquires portable SAMs, Israel will have to accept heavy casualties with every cross-border incursion. At some point soon it's entirely possible Hezbolla could respond tit-for-tat with modern DU, DIME, and cluster bombs on targets within Israel. The dynamic is changing, slowly but surely. Israel has a lot on the line if the situation keeps heading in that direction.

no. While the west sees those groups as terrorist groups. The middle east russia and china see those groups as freedom fighters.

If Israel tries to use that approach all hell will break loose in all countries in the region.