Talk:Guardians of the Cedars

Historical Errors

". Unlike the Phalangists and the Tigers, which sometimes cooperated tacitly with Israel for tactical reasons, the Guardians of the Cedars' alignment with Israel was based on the conviction that there was a commonalty of interest between the Jewish state and the Christian minorities of the Middle East. Apart from the South Lebanon Army (founded by Sa'ad Haddad), they were the only significant faction in the Lebanese Civil War to side with Israel openly"

This is mistaken. Certainly the policy of the Phalange was alliance with Israel and there was nothing hidden about that policy.

at the beginning it was. Pierre Gemayel and Amin Gemayel were against ratifying the 17th of May agreement . The alliance was tactical, not strategic. equitor 05:16, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup required

The current version is repetitive and not properly divided into sections. Todowd 10:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I've cleaned it up myself, and added a picture of Étienne Saqr. Todowd 11:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm removing this until someone provides a source

In the heading, it says the Guardians changed their official motto to:

It is the duty of each Lebanese to kill one Palestinian in reaction to numerous crimes and massacres committed by the Palestine Liberation Organization against Lebanese civilians on Lebanese soil.

Firstly, this sounds a touch long-winded to be a real motto. Secondly, it had a 'citation needed' tag at the end and there is no way something this extreme should stay up without a reputable source, let alone *no* source at all. Don't revert back unless you can provide a citation. Roland Deschain 01:40, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Roland, actually it's the shorter version of the sentence that was a motto, and it was graffiti-ed all over east Beirut in a time of complete animosity by the Lebanese Christians towards the Palestinian presence in the country. The quote 'It is the duty of each Lebanese to kill one Palestinian' and it largely held as an ethos for Abu Arz's men throughout their operations in the war. --A Gooner (talk) 15:00, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I added some references.Petrus Groen (talk) 15:43, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Embarrassment to Wikipedia and VERY POV

This article must be an embarrasement to wikipedia, not only is it Extremly POV, the aticle implies in many instances Lebanon is a non-arab country, says that the Palestinians plundered and massacred all of Lebanons christians and demonizes Palestinians and Arabs in general. The article must be completly revamped. I took out the most serious and questionable racist remarks in the article but an entire rewording is needed to make the article up to standard, i dont know how no one has noticed anything all this time. --Doge120 05:10, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Strongly agree with Doge. Good clean-ups. In the future, if such issues pop up, and strong bias cannot be eliminated, the article must at least mention that opinions are divided. However, the previous wording was generally incorrect by historical standards. Thanks Doge, I also intend to do some revisions. Nimur 21:58, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Continuing work. Much of the ideology has been tagged as controversial. Historical facts are also being corrected. Other editors, feel free to contribute so that we can make this article better as a whole. Nimur 22:14, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Much further work to help organize and clean up. I will leave up the POV tag until I get some feedback. Please, everyone, let's work to keep Wikipedia informative and unbiased - realize that our audience is here to learn, not to be propagandized. Nimur 22:36, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't really understand something over here. Is telling the truth really a racist thing? Robert Fisk, the most pro-Palestinian Western journalist even admitted to the crimes commited by the Palestinians against the Lebanese. Being politicall correct all the time shields the truth.

Its POV or racist when its factual Palestinians DID do that in Lebanon and they do it do to christians, 94.7.109.168 (talk) 18:31, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was merge.--Jorfer 16:57, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Merge with Lebanese Renewal Party

Since these organizations are essentially one and the same, I suggest we merge them. We should create a sub-section to discuss political vs. military wings; but the history, demographics, and ideology are the same for both. The LRP article will simply re-direct here. This merge will also make it easier to police for POV statements by consolidating them into one area. Comments welcome. Nimur 22:35, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I thought Lebanon didn't have national elections from 1972-1990. Did the party ever win any seats, even on a local level? -- Kendrick7 03:31, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Two points. First, there was a war from 1975 - 1990 (of course); but elections were held anyway. The legitimacy of these elections was disputed (with military force - several winning candidates were assasinated in the late 1970s); and of course, opposition parties would not participate in the voting process. Second, the "party" or political wing was merely a figurehead representation of the militia. I'm not sure whether they held "seats in parliament" - the way the government was run in the '70s and '80s was very military-junta style. I'd be interested to know if any official records were even kept. Finally, the collaboration of this group with similar parties (Phalange and others) may make it hard to distinguish which group a particular politician represented, especially towards the late 1980s. Nimur 20:17, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

In that case, the merge sounds good to me. -- Kendrick7 23:31, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I think it's been agreed. So someone do it. Radagast83 16:01, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Agree

Let's merge them, its essentially the same thing, but can some writer from the "lebanese civil war" article or some non-bias knowledgeable person explain the difference between the two movements. we should merge. --Doge120 23:19, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

You know what I love. A bunch of people who have no clue about Lebanese culture and history trying to write our history as Lebanese. Anyway, it's simple. The "Lebanese Renewal Party" was the name of the GOC before it officially turned into a party with a militia. That's it basically. 198.7.245.91 04:50, 10 January 2007 (UTC) Fadi

If you would like to contribute, please do. Wikipedia allows you to edit articles if you feel you can improve them. Nimur 06:38, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Talk:Lebanese Renewal Party

Again theres some bias here, can some people, NOT Guardian of the Cedars members please, also check the facts and explain the difference between the guardians and the renewal party.--Doge120 06:06, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Herras l Arz Eblem 2022.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:07, 22 January 2022 (UTC)