Who gives a shit whether the Epic of gilgamesh is a "real story" or what exactly was the cedar forest in the original tales (for now)-the fact is the Babylonians referred to some interesting shit in the cedar forest of Lebanon c.1800BC that kind of sort of maybe sounds like to me it may be referring to the megaliths found at Baalbek.
There are some board members who try to remain evidence based. Attempting to weave in an allegorical tale into archaeological research will always raise eyebrows.
This epic has hundreds of missing lines and has been interpolated with other tablets which were also broken with missing text.
The 1800 BC. Babylonians of which you speak were only reframing a much older narrative from approx. 2600 BC and which may have had even earlier origins, but was passed down orally before being written in cuneiform. Hence, a reference to Lebanon.
The ruins at Baalbek may well be older than Roman times, and most probably are, but I doubt that you will get much traction through any reliance on the Epic of Gilgamesh as source material. Separating the two topics would lead to more serious and worthwhile discussions.