Why can the Middle Eastern Editorialists not see the real issue

This just drives me nuts. Everything has to be shrouded by the evil intentions of the 'Zionists' or the 'hidious Sharon'.

The issue this time? Hizbullah, Shaba'a Farms and Israel (again.)

Background:
The Shaba'a Farms are recognized by the UN as Syrian. (Israel captured the disputed portion in the 1967 war.)
Lebanon claims it, Syria agrees. Both parties claim Syria gave the territory to Lebanon in 1951. But the UN for some reason does not fully agree with this. (Keep in mind Syria believes that Lebanon IS Syrian territory, that the British and French conspired to divide up Greater Syria)

The two parties can resolve this easily, by providing documentation to prove it is Lebanese, and if that can't be found a new treaty could be written up to give ownership to Lebanon. Why do they not do this? If the disbuted portion is Lebanese, then the Syrians were an occupation force prior to the 1967 war.

Israel started the 22 year occupation of Lebanon in the early 1980's because the PLO was there, and using Lebanon as a base to launch their terrorist attacks. (There were prior invasions, but Israel left.) The PLO's presence in Lebanon was a destabilizing factor. After expelling the PLO from Lebanon, Israel continued to occupy southern Lebanon, to create a buffer zone. This buffer zone was to keep attacks from being launched into northern Israel (where civilians lived.)

Hizbullah forced Israel to leave Lebanon after 22 years of occupation. (Israel grew tired of the continous loss of soldiers killed by members of Hizbullah.) After leaving Lebanon, the UN agreed that Israel withdrew to the International border (not Syrian territory, just Lebanese.)

Hizbullah claims to be a party of resistance. Resistance to what? Part of Hizbullah's manifesto is ' "Islamic resistance units" are fighting "for the liberation of the occupied territories and the ejection of the aggressive Israeli forces" ' Israel is out of Lebanon. Hizbullah did not fight the occupation by Syria. Was Syrian occupation OK? Was it OK for Lebanese citizens to just dissapear into Syrian controlled jails?

So why does this article "The Missiles 'Dialogue' in Shebaa" have to shroud the issue of Hizbullah's retaining their weapons, in violation of UN Security Council resolution 1559, in terms of resistance and Sharon needing a war to be re-elected?

Hizbullah is not resisting Israeli occupation, nor unjustified Israeli aggression. If Hizbullah were to stop their unjustfied aggression against Israel, then Israel would not violate Lebanese territory. Israeli spys know that Hizbullah is plotting to attack Israel, and thus provokes Israel to send overflights for reconnaissance. Maybe they just do not want to give up their weapons, and want to create the illusion of resistance (to the niave) by stroking the flames
of war.

If Hizbullah wants its members released from Israeli jails, then Hizbullah will have to do the unthinkable - end the war with Israel. Countries do not have to exchange prisoners of war until the war is over.

In my opinion it is time that the Middle Eastern journalists start reporting the truth; stop the endless blaming of all the problems facing the Middle East on US and Israel. Lebanon's problems are not with Israel but with Syrian and Iranian meddling.