Thursday, January 23, 2020

After months of protests Lebanese police fire tear gas at protesters

Image result for cnn lebanese police throw tear gas at protest


After months of protests by anti-government movements, the police in Lebanon turn violent and
fired tear gas at the protesters. As described by reporters this week is “a week of rage” as the
officers respond to the protests. As an attempt to try and throw the officers of as tear gas was
thrown, the protesters threw cocktail Molotovs and tried to shine lasers in their eyes however
this still caused 80 people to be treated at the hospital and 140 to be treated at the scene of the
protests. The people in Lebanon are protesting because of the economic and political crisis in
their country for their government is extremely unstable, and inflation in their country has spiked
60%, these protests started off peaceful however ever protests this week things have been
getting more violent as protesters are more getting frustrated and they started breaking ATMs
and bank windows, despite ongoing protests and the recent event of throwing tear gas at the
protesters, the government has failed to take any action or establish any sort of stability. 


Discussion questions:
  1. Do you think it was appropriate for the officers to throw tear gas at the protesters?
  2. Do you think breaking the atm and bank windows is justified or adding to the problem
  3. Have we seen things like this in history before if so where?

11 comments:

  1. I do not believe that tear gas was appropriate as long as the protests were peaceful. If they were not peaceful and the protesters were trying to fight somehow I believe the government has the right to throw tear gas. The breaking of the atms definitely is not beneficial to the current situation over there. That gives the police a reason to arrest the protesters. We've seen the people vs. the government throughout history and the government using lethal force against the civilians. When we learned about the Syrian Civil War we know that Assad used chemical weapons against the civilians so this event is not an uncommon situation.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think freedom of speech without getting attacked is an essential thing to have in every country. I do not believe that tear gas was the right way to handle the situation at hand. They should listen to the people more and not physically attack them. They should all have the right to freedom of speech.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I do not think that the tear gas was appropriate because as far as I know, it was a peaceful protest. Furthermore, the officers continued to throw tear gas excessively which was unnecessary. However, I think that the protesters did react more violently than needed, including breaking ATM's and more.

    ReplyDelete
  4. To answer the first two questions, I don't think either sides were justified in their actions. The government was not right to tear gas at peaceful protesters, it seems unnecessarily cruel and violent. The protesters reactions to the violence is not the best way to handle things either. If both sides keep ramping up the conflict by contributing more and more violence, it could potentially lead to a civil war.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think that it's wrong to attack civilians especially a nonviolent protest no matter how offensive it may be verbally. The tear gas against the civilians reminds me of the Hong Kong Protests.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I do not think it is appropriate for officers to throw tear gas at protestors due to there being other ways to move protestors away rather than being cruel and using unnecessary physical force. I think breaking the windows and atm of the bank was adding onto the problem because most protestors are there to express their guilt in posters and speech and not necessarily using force and damage to the setting. This information is important because if actions were to increase and get worse, it could possibly lead to a civil war.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I do not think it is appropriate for officers to throw tear gas at protestors due to there being other ways to move protestors away rather than being cruel and using unnecessary physical force. I think breaking the windows and atm of the bank was adding onto the problem because most protestors are there to express their guilt in posters and speech and not necessarily using force and damage to the setting. This information is important because if actions were to increase and get worse, it could possibly lead to a civil war.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I feel it is not right for the police to attack peaceful protesters. Even though the protesters were nonviolent at first, they turned violent and attacked the police officers as well. This would have probably escalated the situation and made things worse. The breaking of the atm and bank windows seems to be using the protest to steal money but there may be another reason. Recently, we have been seeing similar mass protests that have resulted in violence. According to this article: https://theintercept.com/2020/01/25/lebanon-protests-torture/ the protesters are allegedly being tortured by security forces. This will anger many and will probably lead to even more violence.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I do not believe that the throwing of tear gas was appropriate during the protest. The direct attacking gave the protesters even more of a reason to protest against the government's political and economic weakness. However,the breaking of atms and bank windows definitely added to the current negative situation. Therefore, giving the police a motive to arrest the protesters.

    ReplyDelete
  10. It is inappropriate for officers to throw tear gas at the protestors; they were in tens of thousands, and they were peacefully against new, unfair tax measures announced by the government. Their right to block main, public roads is upheld by the UN, and the Lebanian government has been violating international law by failing to protect them, rather using excessive force through torture, arbitrary detention, etc. The government’s violent actions make it justified for protestors to respond violently, as individuals should have the right to rebel against tyranny or political injustice.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I believe that it is not justified for police officers to throw tear gas at the protestors. The breaking of the ATMS were not necessary in the protest. If this was a peaceful protest, the government should have left the protest be. If this had been a violent protest, it would be somewhat justified in trying to break up the violence. This act just made the people have a bigger reason as to protesting against the government. People should be able to freely express what they think peacefully.

    ReplyDelete