Ibn Tayyar

@mahmood8726 Netanyahu's threats against the ceasefire are clearly a pressure move. He wants more concessions and is telling Hamas "we have full American backing, who will stop us?". This is why you have seen the publicised announcements of a massive amount of arms heading Israel's way from the US. Whatever checks existed before, they don't now. On the other hand, have a read through this; https://www.newarab.com/news/egypts-plan-counter-trumps-gaza-riviera-sideline-hamas Apparently this will be the Egyptian plan submitted to the Arab League tomorrow. It mentions some sort of multi Arab and non Arab governance of Gaza that may lay the groundworks for reconstruction and perhaps even take control of security. If there is an Arab consensus on this proposal - as in all the Arab States vote for it - this will also be another pressure move against Hamas. One thing is for sure to me, Hamas will exist in a different way than before if this ceasefire holds across all stages. Also I never said that Israel would win through brute force alone. Whether Israel ultimately wins depends on what the status of Hamas is following this ceasefire deal. If Hamas is sidelined completely (including in security of Gaza), then even you will say that this war has been a failure.

@mahmood8726 Check the latest announcement letter to the Arab League by Hamas, where they said would support a new Palestinian rule in Gaza, whether it be by technocrats or something else (what Egypt is proposing). As far as weapons goes, we will see how the negotiations continue. The above is already a Hamas concession from its pre-October 7 position, where it (and its allies) ruled Gaza alone. There have been many "redlines" which have turned out to be empty lines, we will see if this one holds. All in all, this war is turning out to be useless, with more losses than wins for Hamas and its allies, and a complete disaster for the lives of the Palestinians. And I believe as the negotiations continue, this weak situation & position will become clearer and clearer.

I don't know how serious this point is. Having the ability to repurpose unexploded ordinance does not mean you have the ability to clear thousands of unexploded ordinance dug deep in the ground under rubble and completely destroyed camps. There are hundreds of thousands of civilians at risk of stepping over things they don't know when they return to their homes. Curious kids, senior citzens and women - and probably most men - won't know what to look for or how to avoid not blowing up. You are Lebanese, you know that even decades after war there is still risk of unexploded ordinance lying around. Even in countries that are supposed safe such as Europe, there are still fears about places with mines from WW2. I can't believe you brushed this aside based on Hamas being able to repurpose bombs. This isn't a military capability issue alone, this is a civil engineering issue aseell. How can you clear rubble safely - to rebuild Gaza - with unexploded ordinance lying around? You need specialised construction and international support for sure. Here you go: https://www.newarab.com/news/hamas-says-ready-relinquish-power-gaza-conditions

The truth is Gaza cannot be rebuilt without international aid. Hamas will have to make concessions or Gazans will live in tents surrounded by rubble for decades, if not forever. Gaza has no building material of its own, it has no expertise in removing unexploded ordinance, and it has no way of supplying the basic needs of people. The Arab States have alot of leverage on Hamas here, because only through them could aid enter Gaza. Part of the Egyptian rebuilding plan (which is supported by other Arabs) is that Hamas has no role in Gaza's governance. You can read about it here: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/saudi-arabia-spearheads-arab-scramble-alternative-trumps-gaza-plan-2025-02-14/ It is very likely that there will be an Arab League consensus on supporting the Egyptian proposal. Qatar, which has alot of leverage on Hamas, also believes the PA should return to Gaza: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/1/21/qatar-pm-hopes-palestinian-authority-will-return-to-gaza-when-war-ends A Hamas leader already said in the past they are ready to relinquish control to an "independent" group: "What we are calling for is a Palestinian unity government, formed from technocrats who are not affiliated to any faction but supported from all factions … to run the situation in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank," he says. https://www.npr.org/2024/08/16/nx-s1-5077757/gaza-war-hamas-leader-basem-naim-doha-interview The above statement is actually in line with what the Egyptians are proposing today. Don't think for a second that we will return to the pre-October 7 world. Hamas is under pressure and will concede on many points in order to push the deal to Phase 3.

Don't take the statements of Trump and his minions seriously. They know that a plan to forcibly evacuate Gazans is dead on arrival. The true plan is to push Gaza between two choices: 1) no plans or money for rebuilding Gaza will come from the international community if Hamas remains in power, and this is obviously a cause of instability for the likes of Egypt, and this would also be a way to pressure Hamas. On top of that, there is a chance the war will continue, as Hamas relinquishing power will be the main Israeli demand in Phase 2 of the deal, in order for the ceasefire to continue onto Phase 3. 2) there will be money for rebuilding that will pour in from rich Arab States and the West if Hamas does relinquish power. Already there is momentum against Hamas within the Arab League, and I mean specifically from Qatar and Egypt, the main mediators, to relinquish power. Hamas has already stated it is willing to work with the PA and other Arab States on the future of Gaza's governance. The West & Israel, aswell as the Arabs, seek Gaza's demilitarization and dehamasification. I don't know if they will achieve this goal ultimately, but you can expect alot of concessions in the negotiations from Hamas's standpoint. I assume Gazans, just like the Lebanese, have no appetite for the continuation of the war after the fighting has already stopped and would like to move on with their lives.

@mahmood8726 We have now seen how the events have played out since the ceasefire. Hundreds of Israeli breaches and yet the ceasefire (from Lebanon's perspective) is holding strong. Eventually the Israelis will withdraw as the ceasefire states, but only after hundreds of airstrikes and at a much later date than agreed. Do you not see how Israel was able to achieve escalation dominance and act with near impunity, and impose alot of its will on the ground - and that this due to a failure of deterrence from the Axis of Resistance? Think 3 or 4 years ago, every Israeli airstrike that resulted in a Hezbollah member death in Syria was responded to by Hezbollah. Now the Israelis bomb the South all over even after a ceasefire and there's hardly a response. This is loss of deterrence. And one of the reasons is that Hezbollah is simply not as strong as it used to be politically within Lebanon, and will not risk the renewal of hostilities due to domestic pressure. We can now see from the actions of the new Lebanese Government that they will probably engage in a more hostile approach to Hezbollah compared to previous Lebanese Governments. The geopolitical reality has changed in Israel's favour following October 7. There is no reason to deny that.

Who said the A'immah never cursed their enemies? We literally have authentic narrations commanding us to curse and abuse the innovators, and some of these "sahabah" fall into these categories, such as this famous & authentic hadith. “The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, ‘When you find the people of doubt and innovation after me, show your dissassociation from them and increase your insults against them, speaking against them, and exposing them, so that they do not corrupt Islam, and (so that) people be warned against them and avoid learning their innovations. Allah will record good deeds for you because of that and elevate your ranks in the Hereafter.’” https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/2/1/163/4 We even have hadiths pertaining specifically to cursing the Shaykhayn. ‘What were the children of Ya'qub ((عليه السلام)), were they prophets?’ He said: ‘No, but they were the grandchildren of the children of the Prophets, and they did not depart from the world except as happy, repentant, and remembered what they had done, and the Shaykhayn departed from the world, they did not repent nor did they ever remember what they had done to the Commander of The Faithful ((عليه السلام)), so upon these two be the curse of Allah, the angels, and the people altogether.‘ https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/8/1/343/1 And other similar reliable hadiths: https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/8/1/340/1 In the Qur'an, there are numerous Verses pertaining to cursing the enemies of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). Indeed, those who abuse Allāh and His Messenger - Allāh has cursed them in this world and the Hereafter and prepared for them a humiliating punishment. [33:57] We know from authentic narrations that those who abuse the Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام) have abused the Prophet (saww), and therefore have abused Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and are worthy of cursing. Finally, the following is part of an authentic hadith on those who "refrain" from engaging in bara'ah in the form of cursing. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: Whoever refrains from cursing the one who is cursed by Allah [considering it a sin] then upon him be the curse of Allah. https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/9/3/83/8

Because he is a corrupt dictator who isn't liked by his people. His Army behaved like a corrupt gang, overly relying on foreign sources of assistance while incompetence and bribery spread through the ranks. Unlike his own forces, the Turkish-backed militants were highly motivated and were actually preparing for battle. Assad's own allies such as Iran and Russia were said to have told him many times to pay attention to his own domestic situation, but he ignored these requests because he is simply an Arab kleptocrat. I think everyone was surprised that he fell so quick, but after the fact it can be claimed at the same time that some may have seen the writing on the wall, and that the day will come when his rule will end.

I don't believe we are getting anywhere with this discussion, so I will agree to disagree and we will wait until the ceasefire date passes and see what transpires after that. Time will give us the answer. But just a question: can I ask which Israeli sources have said Israeli military bases will take years to recover, and that they have suffered the amount of damage you claim they have? I'm curious. I have tried to look for these sources but couldn't find anything.

I doubt there is anything that could happen in Gaza that would reignite the war in Lebanon. There is no more will for another round of fighting in Lebanon. Despite some breaches, the ceasefire is holding and we are halfway through. I believe the Axis has viewed the war with Israel as one war with multiple fronts, and Syria was one of the fronts. I believe it could then be considered that in terms of wins and losses, Israel is the clear geopolitical victor of this war that started on October 7. Would you agree? Which bases take years to repair? Any competent engineering division could easily fix a base on short notice. In WW2, bases were subjected to much more ferocious firepower and still remained active. Bases are designed to absorb significant attacks, otherwise there would be no use of them at all. Look at Ukraine, where some bases have been hit mutliple times by heavy missiles and have remained and continue to remain of importance. To "disable" a base, you don't just cause cracks in concrete, you must destroy or damage actual equipment or kill personnel. I don't doubt that Hezbollah was able to do so, in fact I believe it was able to inflict alot of pain on Israel, I just don't agree with you on how valuable this damage really is. In the 1973 war, Israeli losses in equipment and personnel were much more significant in both numbers and importance, than in this war. Way more, not even close. Yet they were able to finish that war in 1973 in a pretty strong military position. What does this tell you? That Israel's military is able to absorb losses. It is able to adapt to losses. These losses then become "tactical", not really strategic in any sense. Especially when you have a supplier like the US (which saved Israel in 1973). The main strength of Israel is its Airforce, and even after all these rocket and missile attacks, the Israeli Airforce remained in the battle without showing any signs of slowing down. Hezbollah's inability to inflict strategic damage on the Israeli Airforce (such as hitting them in their bases) is a military failure, given that denying Israel its Airforce capabilities would probably have been the number one priority for Hezbollah, as that would literally "disable" Israel. Or perhaps they never had the ability to do so, and accepted that. Israel had plentiful losses but its ability to recover would be much easier for it than Hezbollah, given Western support and the fact that it is a state which is a regional power. Like I said, we have proof of that from previous Israeli wars which resulted in high losses. Israel's ability to recover has been witnessed and tested. Hezbollah on the other hand is a party in a divided country which is supported by one State only and is reliant on a single powerbase, while also being part of an alliance with other parties (some of which weren't even supportive of the war). On top of that, it has lost its main supply route which would have assisted in the recovery effort. Do you see how the scale is much different? I don't believe in Israel's 80% assertion, but the truth is that being "underground", while it does help, does not make it "destruction-proof", given we saw how effective American-made bunker busters were in the assassination of both Sayyed Nasrallah and Sayyed Hashem, where the holes literally reached some 60 feet or more in depth. What do I believe? Some ammo that is stored underground was also hit, just as the Hezbollah leaders were hit. How much of Hezbollah's arsenal was destroyed or used in the war? I don't know. But either way, it will be hard to restock all those rockets given the debacle in Syria. And even if Hezbollah did restore it, the main issue of the Party was the intel penetration in the first place. Israel did not have nowhere near this level of penetration in 2006.

The war is over brother. It is finished. Shaykh Naeem has pretty much said so himself. Israeli cabinet differed amongst themselves on whether to go to war against Hezbollah on October 7 or not. Gallant and some IOF Generals were among those who were supportive of that idea, but Netanyahu made the decision not to go to war due to US pressure. The US also showed its backing to Israel by increasing its presence in the Middle East and instantly sending billions of dollars worth of arms and intelligence support. So that's a set back. The definition of failure. How have they been weakened militarily? They don't even have to worry about Syria anymore. Their position is stronger than it ever has been. Because they lost soldiers and equipment? Because some of their bases got hit? My brother, the axis lost a whole country with its entire Army and every single strategic piece of equipment that came with it. They lost their most important logistical route. Compare the losses of both sides and tell me who is in a better position now. That's how you know who is in a better position militarily. So you are satisfied that Hezbollah gave away all of those martyrs to simply return to the status quo? Was that the point of the war? I find it strange how brothers like to mention the economic and infrastructure damage Israel suffered, as if Lebanon did not suffer multiple times the damage. Why do you view it as a success for Hezbollah to destroy Israeli infrastructure, displace settlers and cause economic damages, but not a success for Israel when it destroys Lebanese infrastructure, displaces Lebanese citzens and caused economic damage to Lebanon? Let us compare the damage. This article illustrates the Israeli Government's estimation of the damage: https://www.jns.org/northern-israels-war-toll-5b-shekels-in-damage-and-counting/ Based on their figures, it seems to be $450 million in direct damages and over $1 billion in indirect damages. Let us assume they are lowballing the figure and it is actually $2 billion in damages overall. How does that compare to what Lebanon suffered? Well, the figures are dire. https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2024/11/israel-hezbollah-war-cost-lebanon-85b-damaged-100000-homes-world-bank And this is a country with one of the worst performing economies in the entire world, that was swimming in debt and deadlocked in a political crisis even before the war. What about economic growth? Israel is projected by the World Bank to return to positive GDP growth in 2025 and 2026, while Lebanon will probably still be contracting. So Israel will rebuild quicker with less expenses, and less suffering for its economy and its people. Why is that not factored in your analysis? Does Lebanon's losses not count for some reason? Why was it wasted? Do you personally know that Hezbollah has cleaned its entire organisation from the intel penetration? Or is that just an assumption? And why don't they have another decade to spare? What will happen in a decade that will cause them despair? Brother, the war is over. The reason you don't want to believe the war is over is because it means that all the talk about not delinking from Gaza until a ceasefire is reached no matter the cost would be pretty much in vain. What changed for Gazans? Unfortunately, American aid is a big fix whether we like it or not. The aid that the US gave Israel is nothing but a speck in the US economy. Israel's warcrimes are known to the world. I don't see how that changes anything? Israel never claimed Iron Dome is a magic system and said that it could be saturated, but Israel would be worse off without an Iron Dome for sure. It is the only system of its class (anti-rocket and anti-artillery) in the world that has been repeatedly been used in battle. Why can't you also look at it the other way, which is that Israel may have also learnt from this conflict, and can now upgrade the Iron Dome or make a manufacture an even better system based on their battle experience? In warfare, both sides learn and adapt to eachother. I personally think both sides would have learnt from eachother. I don't see it as a one side thing at all. Hezbollah did show that Israel cannot occupy Lebanon without significant or unbearable losses. That is true. I think you just focus on what Hezbollah learnt, and discount anything Israel has learnt. This is the same issue of all Arabs, they always underestimate their enemy. In 2006, it was actually the Israelis who underestimated Hezbollah, which is why they were defeated. This time, they did not underestimate Hezbollah, they didn't venture deep into Lebanon. They learned from their mistakes, clearly.

Hezbollah did not enter this war to displace some settlers for the sake of displacement, they entered to pressure Israel into a permanent ceasefire with Gaza. If what you say about Syria is true, that Hezbollah knew that Assad was basically finished, then Israel was not only able to take Hezbollah out of the fight with a ceasefire and solely focus on Gaza, but also ended up destroying the multi-decades built capabilities of the Syrian Army (& Iran in Syria), all the while capturing Syrian territory with impunity, and with basically no restraint on its behaviour and no strategic damage to the IOF's capabilities. Whether by Israeli design or whether the circumstances favoured Israel, the Israelis have come out of this post-October 7 period much stronger than before it. I believe you can admit that. They are in a much better position both geopolitically and militarily. In actuality, all Hezbollah did was displace Northern settlers for the sake of displacing them, and returned back to the 1701 UNSC Resolution of 2006, while losing their first in line command structure. Whether the Northern settlers return to their homes or go live somewhere else in Israel, it does nothing to the overall stability of the Israeli State, not now, nor in the future. Most of the richer Israelis in Tel Aviv and Haifa couldn't care less about them anyway. Israel knew that settlers would be displaced in any war with Hezbollah which is why they had evacuation plans in the first place. So what was achieved by Hezbollah? Survival... that's it? Is this what you personally expected to be achieved in October 8 2023 when Hezbollah entered the war? I will make another prediction: When the war ends in Gaza, Hamas will not be the sole ruler of Gaza. The Arab League will also have more sway on Gaza than it ever has.

Atleast when it comes to Iraq, there are "credible representatives" that are from those "circles" (including in the PMF) who fought Daesh to liberate Iraq. There are those who have simple national aspirations within the borders of Iraq - and total subservience to the Iraqi State with no foreign loyalties or alliances driving their actions. They continue to operate in their sole anti-Daesh mission aswell as protecting Public and Religious sites. That's it.

Taliban make flowery statements when it comes to the treatment of the Shi'a. Unfortunately, reality on the ground is much different. https://en.mehrnews.com/news/203618/Afghan-Shias-urge-Taliban-to-cancel-Muharram-restrictions

I understand your sarcasm brother. May Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) bless you. I will however say that with the Hamas solidarity statement to their Syrian rebel brothers, and the Saddam (la) pictures being paraded and circled around, it did remind me of this particular video. This was in 2003. I wonder who could have predicted a group of Saddamists would betray the Shi'a at their time of need - just a decade later? Ali b. Husayn (عليه السلام) said: You must not associate with a fasiq; he may sell you for a single loaf or even less to this or that person. (al-Kafi) Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has exposed their treachery, but unfortunately some brothers will never be convinced of their nature.

Subhanallah, who could have expected? You will find some brothers will be harsher towards their fellow Shi'a who disagree with them politically, while they will show quite a bit of leniency towards repeat backstabbers.

I don't believe I said that even once brother. I have stated that even those Shi'a that fought in Bosnia did something honourable and should be praised. Those who died are martyrs. All I'm saying is two points. 1) We can only do so much and we only have so much resources. Our resources should favour Shi'a over non-Shi'a, but there is honour and great thawab in helping the non-Shi'a, as long as it doesn't deviate from the priority of attending to Shi'i causes. 2) We shouldn't support those who openly oppose us, whether it be those that oppressed us, betrayed us, or even worse, killed us.

@Jaabir Brother I believe you are mistaken on the Shi'i belief/narrations regarding "Bayt Al-Maqdis". Most of the narrations you are referring to speak of "Al-Aqsa" being in the Heavens, not "Bayt Al-Maqdis", even thought you might find a narration or two that says otherwise. "Bayt Al-Maqdis" (the one in Jerusalem) is a Holy site and Mosque in our narrations, regardless of whether it is "Al-Aqsa" or not, or in Heaven or not. This is but one narration on the thawab of Salaat there. Ali (عليه السلام) said: “A single Salaat of Baitul Muqaddas is equal to one thousand prayers. A single prayer of Masjid-e-Azam is equal to one hundred prayers. A single prayer of Masjid-e-Qabeelah is equal to twenty-five prayers and a single prayer of Masjid-e-Sooq is equal to twelve prayers. A Salaat offered in one’s house is equal to a single prayer only.” https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/23/2/73/1 There is no reason to belittle the Quds brother.

It is the exact same analogy my brother, but in reverse. When Sunnis betray Sunnis, it is because they choose dunya over deen, and that is what could be said of the Arab regimes. When Shi'a betray Shi'a, it is because they chose dunya over deen. When Sunnis betray Shi'a for Sunni causes, it is because of inter-madhab solidarity with other Sunnis. Such is the case with Hamas and Syria. And likewise, when Shi'a "betray" Sunnis for Shi'a causes, it is because of inter-madhab solidarity with other Shi'a. Such is the case with the Shi'a who "betrayed" Saddam (la) for Iran. They did a great thing, by the way. May Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) reward them for "betraying" that creature. Let me ask you this: Why did Hamas betray Syria? What was the "main" cause? Was it not Hamas's Sunnism?

wa alaykum al salam There's no shame in that. It is a Shi'i country where the Leader & President have to be Shi'i (according to the Constitution), where the country is Shi'i majority, where it is ruled in accordance with Shi'i Law. When does it stop being Shi'i? Foreign policy? Unfortunately Iran did more than just "talk" to the Taliban. It actually supported them in certain ways. When Shi'a betray eachother, it is because the dunya has come between them. When the Sunnis betray the Shi'a, it is because of their madhab. Otherwise, how do you explain Hamas' betrayal when it came to Syria? Was it not inter-madhabi solidarity with the Syrian Revolution? Like you said, the Axis was mostly a Shi'i thing. And there is a reason for that. Let us stop deluding ourselves into not thinking a big chunk of Sunnis absolutely despise us and want nothing to do with us.

Thank you for your insight brother, I believe I understand where you are coming from, but I have my own objections. While you are focusing on the geopolitical results of Taliban rule - which may favour Iran - I am speaking more about the suffering the average Shi'i is going through in Afghanistan when it comes to Taliban oppression. You don't even need to look further than what Iranian media is itself reporting on the plight of the Shi'a there. I understand your sentiment in that you want to look at the "bigger picture", but I cannot ignore the suffering of my brothers & sisters.

He was an oppressor of his people. He was obviously disliked. He ruled with a Cult of Personality. Such regimes mostly fail unless assisted by a powerful security apparatus. His problem is that it turns out even his security forces were corrupt and easy to bribe. Many of them were opportunists. It is simply a shame that he has been replaced by something which looks to be an even bigger monster, with a vengeance for us Shi'a.

Iraq had better be prepared for anything. That border needs to be completely sealed right now. Every metre manned by a soldier. I'm not sure there is anyone that could be cooperated with to ensure border security from Iraq's point of view. I also wonder what the future holds for the SDF. Will the Kurds and the rebels come to any sort of agreement? Or will this simply mean a new civil war between them?

I realise it is realpolitik, but this realpolitik has bolstered a group that has killed and is currently oppressing the Shi'a. I believe Islam asks of us to have a moralist policy on the world, surely if the blood of the innocent believers is on the line. Perhaps you and I can agree to disagree.

I don't believe so brother. I made note many times that those who sacrificed themselves in conflicts such as Bosnia and Gaza are to be honoured. I don't believe they made any sort of mistake in doing what they did. I don't believe I said exclusivist, but more Shi'a-centered.