You are rewriting history. The actual Lebanon territory contained Christians centuries before it became muslim. And it became a muslim territory after conquests. The fact that most regions of the world where there is muslim believers (Middle East, some parts of Europe and of the Indian subcontinent, Maghreb) is because of military conquest is telling. The only place this religion spread peacefully is South-Asia.

The Spanish case is also totally different and you can't blame them to get back again their territory and hold a grudge against the religion of their former invaders. I agree however that this is more complex than a simple religion choice, because in most case, this is not a choice (especially centuries ago) and its intertwined with a lot of other factors.

I'm not rewriting history, I'm separating the state from the religion. Yes, the Islamic empires were built with the military. After a state was conquered, there was usually not the forced conversion common in Christianity. Hence Lebanon containing Christians throug a millennium of Muslim dominance.

The Spanish case is not different. Much of Spain had been Muslim for as long as it had ever been Christian, and the Christians had been part of the empire for centuries. The expulsion wasn't an ancient grudge over being conquered, if it was then they wouldn't have also forced the Jewish population to do the same thing.

Oh, and if Spanish aggression was justified, colonialism justifies the current aggression in the Middle East.