Hezbollahs top commander killed in Israeli air strike

[B@KH]

RIP for the martyred commander. They are unique jewels. Martyr's blood gives power to the righteous.

 

[Kuwaiti Girl]

If Syria officially breaks up, Israel will start a new 2006-style war against Hezbollah, in my opinion.

 

[raptor22]

Monstrous terrorists' death should be celebrated by everyone. Last week was nice to me.

Actually he was in charge of killing monstrous terrorists ... he sent many of them to hell ... and his death is only celebrated by monstrous terrorists and their supporters + israel

 

[Kuwaiti Girl]

In a way, I feel sorry for Hezbollah.

There was a time when it was solely a Lebanese resistance movement (against Israeli occupation).

Now, however, it has become al-Assad's main army because the Syrian government is too incompetent to have its own reliable fighting force.

 

[Falcon29]

In a way, I feel sorry for Hezbollah.

There was a time when it was solely a Lebanese resistance movement (against Israeli occupation).

Now, however, it has become al-Assad's main army because the Syrian government is too incompetent to have its own reliable fighting force.

I don't know if this was indeed work of opposition or Israel, or internal dispute. If we do attribute it to Israel, then we can safely assume Hezbollah has less deterrent ability than Hamas at this point. Due to number of factors:

-They draw no specific red lines, and if they do, it does not involve retaliation from Lebanon through means of rocket fire
-Sometimes will power is more important than physical arsenal, Israel knows any such attacks in Gaza will bring about immediate retaliation, Palestinian factions are always ready for it.
-Hezbollah is a big part of the state in Lebanon, but itself is not the state. Therefore takes into account public opinion of retaliation
-Hezbollah seems to believe it is isolated, even though it still has access to Iran, and the situation on the ground won't change dramatically in Syria during a Lebanese-Israeli war, as Russian presence will not allow it, Russia has invested enough and won't let it go into waste. Especially after missile shield deployment recently in Romania.
-Hezbollah doesn't want to be seen as making a 'unnecessary' decision at least during negation period between opposition and regime in the West

There are other points to be made....Retailing won't lead to war as some people assume, it would be just enough to let Israel know Hezbollah doesn't mind change of status quo in the north. Hezbollah is not as isolated as some make it out to be. Hamas is isolated completely yet is able to survive and rehabilitate. In much worse situation than Hezbollah. Retailing on Hezbollah's part could lead to large burden held by the organization which it does not want to put supporters into. It also must foresee a long conflict in Syria.

So the argument goes both ways, some believe they can and should respond, others believe they are in no position. But, my opinion, sometimes you need to be 'crazy' and show you draw red lines.

 

[Kuwaiti Girl]

I don't know if this was indeed work of opposition or Israel, or internal dispute. If we do attribute it to Israel, then we can safely assume Hezbollah has less deterrent ability than Hamas at this point. Due to number of factors:

-They draw no specific red lines, and if they do, it does not involve retaliation from Lebanon through means of rocket fire
-Sometimes will power is more important than physical arsenal, Israel knows any such attacks in Gaza will bring about immediate retaliation, Palestinian factions are always ready for it.
-Hezbollah is a big part of the state in Lebanon, but itself is not the state. Therefore takes into account public opinion of retaliation
-Hezbollah seems to believe it is isolated, even though it still has access to Iran, and the situation on the ground won't change dramatically in Syria during a Lebanese-Israeli war, as Russian presence will not allow it, Russia has invested enough and won't let it go into waste. Especially after missile shield deployment recently in Romania.
-Hezbollah doesn't want to be seen as making a 'unnecessary' decision at least during negation period between opposition and regime in the West

There are other points to be made....Retailing won't lead to war as some people assume, it would be just enough to let Israel know Hezbollah doesn't mind change of status quo in the north. Hezbollah is not as isolated as some make it out to be. Hamas is isolated completely yet is able to survive and rehabilitate. In much worse situation than Hezbollah. Retailing on Hezbollah's part could lead to large burden held by the organization which it does not want to put supporters into. It also must foresee a long conflict in Syria.

So the argument goes both ways, some believe they can and should respond, others believe they are in no position. But, my opinion, sometimes you need to be 'crazy' and show you draw red lines.

You only need to look at Nasrallah's face to see just how depressed he is as of late. Either he's depressed or terminally ill. I really do feel sorry for him. This isn't how he and Hezbollah should be remembered. They should be remembered for their heroics against Israel in the early 2000s rather than their involvement in the increasingly sectarian Syrian civil war.

I used to tell the arrogant mullah lovers on IMF (many of whom are too arrogant for their own good) that Hezbollah has become weaker, not stronger, ever since the start of the Syrian civil war, thanks in large part to the fact that Iran has used Hezbollah as an expendable tool on the Syrian battlefield. They denied it, of course, because that's the only thing they knew how to do. But the fact is, Hezbollah is now weak and overstretched.

Hezbollah needs to have a geographic link to Iran via Syria and Iraq.

If Syria and Iraq break up, Hezbollah will become geographically isolated from Iran, which will give Israel a golden opportunity to declare an existential war on Hezbollah.

In hindsight, Hezbollah should have undergone demilitarization straight after Israel's withdrawal from Lebanese territory in the early 2000s. It should have become exclusively a political party. Hezbollah's biggest mistake was that it didn't evolve with time. It stuck to the same methods and philosophy that it practiced in the 1980s.

Iran must be blamed for this. I can understand Hezbollah protecting endangered Shiite civilians in Syrian towns near the Lebanon-Syria border, but I cannot understand why Hezbollah has been transformed into the main fighting force for al-Assad's corrupt and incompetent government.

Iran has destroyed Hezbollah without even realizing it.

Like I said many days ago in the Syrian civil war thread, nobody has won (or will win) the Syrian civil war. All sides have lost. And the same goes for the other conflicts in the region, such as the conflicts in Yemen and Libya.

The only real winner has been Israel, followed by the Kurds, if only and only if the Kurds succeed in getting their own country or autonomous regions in northern Syria and Iraq.

Hezbollah ideology is Shia Islamism. It is directly opposite of Nusra and allies which is salafism. Of course they are going for each other's throats.

Hezbollah and Nujaba have exactly the same ideology.

That's the problem, though.

Hezbollah was primarily a Lebanese nationalist movement prior to 2011. It was a local resistance movement against the Israeli occupation of Lebanon. It was never meant to fully dedicate itself to regional issues.

Nowadays, however, Hezbollah has become the face of Shiite militantism/sectarianism in Syria, while the Syrian opposition (e.g. the FSA) has become the face of Sunni militantism/sectarianism.

How incredibly stupid of the Muslims. They've been played like fools by the West and Israel.

The famous CIA-linked political analyst, George Friedman, said in his book, "The Next 100 Years", that America's primary objective in the Middle East was to let Muslims fight one another rather than fight the United States.

Well, they succeeded alright!

 

[Falcon29]

You only need to look at Nasrallah's face to see just how depressed he is as of late. Either he's depressed or terminally ill. I really do feel sorry for him. This isn't how he and Hezbollah should be remembered. They should be remember for their heroics against Israel in the early 2000s rather than their involvement in the increasingly sectarian Syrian civil war.

I have not seen him lately, 'depressed' or 'terminally ill' isn't the right word here, probably more like dumbfounded, and he isn't the only one. Almost every leader in the region(besides Israeli's) are facing dilemmas which really aren't in their hand, and they're main objective seems to be to secure stability, usually they even struggle in that regard. So whomever you are, I doubt it's about being 'remembered' at this point.

No one is remembered with good faith in this region, I attribute that to religion, which has led people to develop unrealistic expectations, they expect to be delivered from the current administrations. Usually moral/ethical standards as well. And it's not possible to achieve that in a world of 'survival of the fittest'. You have to be an effective and efficient asshole to achieve anything of great magnitude. Islam paints picture of Utopia, with leaders with pure intentions, which would be nice, but not realistic. Hence organizations and governments will run into many obstacles if they take ethical approach.

Hezbollah isn't gone, it just is facing identity complex at this point. It's best period was during the occupation of Lebanon and the civil war, which they sought to disseminate. Efforts which people appreciated.

I used to tell the arrogant mullah lovers on IMF (many of whom are too arrogant for their own good) that Hezbollah has become weaker, not stronger, ever since the start of the Syrian civil war, thanks in large part to the fact that Iran has used Hezbollah as an expendable tool on the Syrian battlefield. They denied it, of course, because that's the only thing they knew how to do. But the fact is, Hezbollah is now weak and overstretched.

Depends what you mean by 'weak',and what you're comparing it to. They're not in crisis, but they are facing realities of major conflicts in the Arab world, but so are everyone else in the region.

In hindsight, Hezbollah should have undergone demilitarization straight after Israel's withdrawal from Lebanese territory in the early 2000s. It should have become exclusively a political party. Hezbollah's biggest mistake was that it didn't evolve with time. It stuck to the same methods and philosophy that it practiced in the 1980s.

I disagree with you on this one, demilitarization is stupidest thing possible to resort to. Especially in world dictated by power, or 'might is right' philosophy. Disarming achieves nothing but put you in weaker position. Many people wished Hezbollah would just remain military party, and not get involved in government, but even that role was fought against, hence they had to go governmental route. Past is past, and can't be looked at.

Iran must be blamed for this. I can understand Hezbollah protecting endangered Shiite civilians in Syrian towns near the Lebanon-Syria border, but I cannot understand why Hezbollah has been transformed into the main fighting force for al-Assad's corrupt and incompetent government.

Iran has destroyed Hezbollah without even realizing it.

I agree here, I don't like Iran's intentions in this regard, they essentially view Hezbollah as rental organization for their political philosophy, which isn't great. Hezbollah has it's own political approach which was better. Although it's not end of the world, like I said, they're not outdoing anyone in making difficult or poor decisions, the whole region as a mess, and no one will be singled out more than the other.

How incredibly stupid of the Muslims. They've been played like fools by the West and Israel.

The famous CIA-linked political analyst, George Friedman, said in his book, "The Next 100 Years", that America's primary objective in the Middle East was to let Muslims fight one another rather than fight the United States.

Well, they succeeded alright!

Please don't resort to that stuff, it's just scam artist looking to make sales. Muslims were never fighting the United States, actually at one point they didn't know such a land exists. US was not a big player in the Middle East until more recent 50 years. That being said, international community will definitely 'tweak' or 'fine tune' each conflict to their liking, as they garnish strong means of influence.

Ultimately though, this is less of a political struggle, and more a social/philosophical one that the people of the region need to undergo. Primarily in regards to religion, ethnic and tribal importance as well. Religion can no longer provide outlook into the future, it needs to be determined by the people, based off how they see the world evolving around them.

 

[Suff Shikan]

View attachment 305007

Its clealry states "among the believers" ....

 

[Malik Alashter]

I don't know if this was indeed work of opposition or Israel, or internal dispute. If we do attribute it to Israel, then we can safely assume Hezbollah has less deterrent ability than Hamas at this point. Due to number of factors:

-They draw no specific red lines, and if they do, it does not involve retaliation from Lebanon through means of rocket fire
-Sometimes will power is more important than physical arsenal, Israel knows any such attacks in Gaza will bring about immediate retaliation, Palestinian factions are always ready for it.
-Hezbollah is a big part of the state in Lebanon, but itself is not the state. Therefore takes into account public opinion of retaliation
-Hezbollah seems to believe it is isolated, even though it still has access to Iran, and the situation on the ground won't change dramatically in Syria during a Lebanese-Israeli war, as Russian presence will not allow it, Russia has invested enough and won't let it go into waste. Especially after missile shield deployment recently in Romania.
-Hezbollah doesn't want to be seen as making a 'unnecessary' decision at least during negation period between opposition and regime in the West

There are other points to be made....Retailing won't lead to war as some people assume, it would be just enough to let Israel know Hezbollah doesn't mind change of status quo in the north. Hezbollah is not as isolated as some make it out to be. Hamas is isolated completely yet is able to survive and rehabilitate. In much worse situation than Hezbollah. Retailing on Hezbollah's part could lead to large burden held by the organization which it does not want to put supporters into. It also must foresee a long conflict in Syria.

So the argument goes both ways, some believe they can and should respond, others believe they are in no position. But, my opinion, sometimes you need to be 'crazy' and show you draw red lines.

As an observer I can say this:

Hizbullah facing right now three front's:

Israel as external enemy.

The Lebanese parties the main one of them led by Saad alhariree and his alliance Sunnis and christines.

And the Syria front where he should help keep the Syrian government in position.

Any retaliation with Israel right now is not in their favour since that means a war with the west and the Arab regimes all at once.

I think they try to keep the internal front as calm as possible until they get the Syrian front settled for their favor until then they will tolerate some attacks from Israel but after that when the Syrian government and their alliance get rid of the terrorism then things will change big time.

That's why you can see Israelis and their alliance arab throw all their weight in Syria to achieve a victory their that victory will lead to what they hope of (the war of the century) between the Shiite and the Sunnis!!!!! a peaceful thoughts and intentions for sure.

Well, they succeeded alright!

Thanks to Al saud and Al hamad.

But When Muslims thought of fighting the US and why?.

 

[Bilad al-Haramayn]

@Falcon29 @Kuwaiti Girl

It's much more preferable to see the kind of interesting and informative exchange that you guys just had rather than agenda driven or troll-like posts. Refreshing to say the least. I wish there were more of such exchanges on this section of the forum. The level of the debates here would become much higher and maybe the many interesting users who vanished due to the poor standard of PDF, would return? I know that 80% of the previously active Arab users left due to the poor standards on this section. Keep it going if possible.

Anyway my opinion, for all that it counts, is that Hezbollah committed a grave mistake by interfering in the Syrian Civil War but nothing else could be expected from them as their ideological father (the Mullah's in Iran) deemed it necessary after they choose to support their ally Al-Assad. Before Hezbollah involved themselves in the Syrian Civil War many Arabs (in fact most) had a positive view of them in the sense that they supported their legitimate fight against Israeli occupation and presence in Lebanon. This despite most Arabs knowing about the close Hezbollah-Iranian Mullah relationship. However since the Arab Spring began we have seen the true nature of the Iranian Mullah's in regards to Arabs, in particular Sunni Arabs but even Shia Arabs, as they view many of them as mere puppets, so Arabs have naturally grown increasingly anti-Hezbollah and I don't think that anyone can blame them/us for that.

I feel that the Sunni Arab regimes in the region and ordinary Sunni Arabs would have no problem with strong independent Shia Arab groups such as Muqtada al-Sadr (who Iran is hostile too and in conflict with in regards to influence in Iraq) and the more independent/Lebanese/Arab nationalistic part of the Hezbollah movement, rather than the likes of Hassan Nasrallah.

Anyway this was not that relevant say less than 10 years ago as KSA/Arab-Iran relations were not bad. Today the situation is very much different but I believe that relations can improve again if both parties truly want that to occur.

Notice the nature of those two videos. It's hilarious how mindless Shias in Lebanon, Iraq and Iran with respect for themselves, their people and country, can continue to blindly support such a person and movement.

This below should have been the official policy of Hezbollah if they had genuinely hoped for the support of the entire "Arab Street". Something that they deludedly continue to believe is the case. At least when Nasrallah delivers his long speeches:

It's a shame because ordinary Arabs, Muslims and overall people of the region should not be hating each other to such an extend due to differences in politics or sect in the first place. Or "race" for that matter. Arab and Muslim rulers, regardless of their sect, should heavily combat extremists regardless of sect (also not only religious extremists) and not use them whenever it suits them as they will always bite the hand that feeds them in the end as their goals and ambitions are known to everyone. Many Muslim countries have learnt this the hard way but the geopolitical situation of the region makes it difficult for most of them to leave such "old habits" where they belong - in the dustbin of history.

Unfortunately I do not see that stopping anytime soon as regimes have always used religion as a tool of influence and power, however this does not mean that religion is bad on its own. What is lacking is merely righteous leaders and just systems. None of the current regimes in place reflect Islamic values despite them boosting of it 24/7. When people see their falsehoods they loose interest in religion altogether. I for once have always, since I became interested in politics, made a CLEAR distinction between Islam and Muslim rulers and regimes who claim to be Islamic or base their corrupt systems on it or that of any other religion. I could discuss this issue in much, much greater detail but religious discussions are banned here and besides it would not be on topic.

 

[Madali]

You only need to look at Nasrallah's face to see just how depressed he is as of late. Either he's depressed or terminally ill. I really do feel sorry for him. This isn't how he and Hezbollah should be remembered. They should be remembered for their heroics against Israel in the early 2000s rather than their involvement in the increasingly sectarian Syrian civil war.

I used to tell the arrogant mullah lovers on IMF (many of whom are too arrogant for their own good) that Hezbollah has become weaker, not stronger, ever since the start of the Syrian civil war, thanks in large part to the fact that Iran has used Hezbollah as an expendable tool on the Syrian battlefield. They denied it, of course, because that's the only thing they knew how to do. But the fact is, Hezbollah is now weak and overstretched.

Hezbollah needs to have a geographic link to Iran via Syria and Iraq.

If Syria and Iraq break up, Hezbollah will become geographically isolated from Iran, which will give Israel a golden opportunity to declare an existential war on Hezbollah.

In hindsight, Hezbollah should have undergone demilitarization straight after Israel's withdrawal from Lebanese territory in the early 2000s. It should have become exclusively a political party. Hezbollah's biggest mistake was that it didn't evolve with time. It stuck to the same methods and philosophy that it practiced in the 1980s.

Iran must be blamed for this. I can understand Hezbollah protecting endangered Shiite civilians in Syrian towns near the Lebanon-Syria border, but I cannot understand why Hezbollah has been transformed into the main fighting force for al-Assad's corrupt and incompetent government.

Iran has destroyed Hezbollah without even realizing it.

Like I said many days ago in the Syrian civil war thread, nobody has won (or will win) the Syrian civil war. All sides have lost. And the same goes for the other conflicts in the region, such as the conflicts in Yemen and Libya.

The only real winner has been Israel, followed by the Kurds, if only and only if the Kurds succeed in getting their own country or autonomous regions in northern Syria and Iraq.


That's the problem, though.

Hezbollah was primarily a Lebanese nationalist movement prior to 2011. It was a local resistance movement against the Israeli occupation of Lebanon. It was never meant to fully dedicate itself to regional issues.

Nowadays, however, Hezbollah has become the face of Shiite militantism/sectarianism in Syria, while the Syrian opposition (e.g. the FSA) has become the face of Sunni militantism/sectarianism.

How incredibly stupid of the Muslims. They've been played like fools by the West and Israel.

The famous CIA-linked political analyst, George Friedman, said in his book, "The Next 100 Years", that America's primary objective in the Middle East was to let Muslims fight one another rather than fight the United States.

Well, they succeeded alright!

There is a reason why there are first world countries and third world countries. It is not by accident or luck. The west keeps making moves that trip us.

The Arab "Spring" was quickly hijacked and manipulated in a way to completely destroy all resistance in the middle east. What choice did Hezbollah have with Syria? Do nothing until Syria is completely overrun by Islamist Maniacs? Their next objective, while Hezbollah is doing nothing, would have been to "free" Lebanon from Christians, Shias, and seculars. At least Hezbollah soldiers are dying now, rather than the soldiers, plus their civilians.

I made this thread a few months back from a 2008 poll,
https://defence.pk/threads/2008-ara...-has-fooled-us-and-we-need-to-wake-up.417207/

In 2008, the most popular leader among Arabs were, no# 1 Hezbollah, no# 2 Assad, no# 3 Ahmadinejad! A few years later, the Syrian project was handled so perfectly that I am sure all of these three would get much lower support.

Is this an accident? A coincidence?

 

[Falcon29]

As an observer I can say this:

Hizbullah facing right now three front's:

Israel as external enemy.

The Lebanese parties the main one of them led by Saad alhariree and his alliance Sunnis and christines.

And the Syria front where he should help keep the Syrian government in position.

Any retaliation with Israel right now is not in their favour since that means a war with the west and the Arab regimes all at once.

I think they try to keep the internal front as calm as possible until they get the Syrian front settled for their favor until then they will tolerate some attacks from Israel but after that when the Syrian government and their alliance get rid of the terrorism then things will change big time.

I agree with your analysis.

@Falcon29 @Kuwaiti Girl



Unfortunately I do not see that stopping anytime soon as regimes have always used religion as a tool of influence and power, however this does not mean that religion is bad on its own. What is lacking is merely righteous leaders and just systems. None of the current regimes in place reflect Islamic values despite them boosting of it 24/7. When people see their falsehoods they loose interest in religion altogether. I for once have always, since I became interested in politics, made a CLEAR distinction between Islam and Muslim rulers and regimes who claim to be Islamic or base their corrupt systems on it or that of any other religion. I could discuss this issue in much, much greater detail but religious discussions are banned here and besides it would not be on topic.

Well said regarding the use of religion among current regimes, however, I still believe religion has its effect on the general populace. It heavily influences our outlook. But, even then, even if there were separation of church and state, for me personally it's theological/philosophical issue. I don't dislike or like Islam, I have a difficult time believing in it. It takes its toll on one's personal life in the West, I would love to have some sort of theological discussion with you on that though.

 

[raptor22]

Its clealry states "among the believers" ....

And that's why the terrorists that killing people and innocent civilians in Iraq and Syria on the daily basis are called Takfiri terrorists .. 'cause they do take themselves as a believer and consider others as infidel and takfir them.... are you one of them? who's given you such an authority to play God?

 

[Solomon2]

RIP for the martyred commander. They are unique jewels. Martyr's blood gives power to the righteous.

Opinion: Hezbollah – What a Blow!
TARIQ ALHOMAYED 4 hours ago 63


Hezbollah has accused the Syrian opposition of killing its most prominent military commander in Lebanon and Syria Mustafa Badr Al-Din by targeting one of the group’s centres in Damascus with artillery fire. Who will believe that? The director of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights told Reuters that it has not “recorded the fall or launch of missiles from eastern Ghouta on Damascus International Airport since a week ago”.

Was Badr Al-Din killed by the group itself? The truth is, it is hard to believe both scenarios. It’s hard to believe the group’s statement that Syrian factions assassinated him, just as it is hard to believe that the group killed him. Mustafa’s murder is considered a painful blow to the group, and it is clear that his assassination was the result of a rigorous operation. It is interesting that the incident took place near Damascus airport which has already been targeted by Israel in order to attack the group.

Of course, Mustafa Badr Al-Din was not Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi or Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi. However, he was more dangerous; he has been one of the founders of terrorism in our region for decades. He was also one of the leading masterminds of bombings, a pioneer of assassinations before Al-Qaeda and an efficient military commander of Hezbollah even whilst Imad Mughniyah was around.

According to what an informed source told me, Mustafa was “responsible for Hassan Nasrallah’s security and protection, was trained by the group’s first assassinations expert and was interested in the safety of the area around Assad”. The source added that “before the assassination of Mustafa was one thing, and after his assassination was something else. His assassination means that it is possible that Naim Qassem or Hassan Nasrallah will be the next target”.

It is noteworthy that the confused Hezbollah has not hastened to accuse Israel despite the fact that some of its media outlets have done so. Some of the group’s officials asked some journalists not to talk about the Israeli role. The reason being that accusing Israel would mean that the group would have to respond in order to save face. However, the group is aware that the timing was not right and that there isn’t a serious Arab country that will defend it internationally, especially after its recent crimes in Syria, as was the case in 2006. In addition to this, the international community will not be keen on appeasement now.

Who assassinated Mustafa Badr Al-Din, then? Assad’s regime? This is hard to believe because his assassination is considered a blow to morale that the group and its supporters cannot tolerate. Iran, then? Not likely as it had the ability to have him replaced by simply making a phone call and cannot afford the repercussions of the news of his death in terms of propaganda after its losses in Khan Touman!

Who, then? It seems that whoever killed Mustafa is a professional on the ground, has lots of clues to the game there, knows the most important cards, can move undisturbed and can do what he wants when he wants to serve his interests. Perhaps the assassination of Mustafa is a disciplinary slap in the face for Hezbollah which can only take the blow and shut up. However much the group or Hassan Nasrallah screams, their scream will have no meaning because a treacherous scream does not have an echo.

TARIQ ALHOMAYED is the former editor-in-chief of Asharq Al-Awsat. Mr. Alhomyed has been a guest analyst and commentator on numerous news and current affair programs, and during his distinguished career has held numerous positions at Asharq Al-Awsat, amongst other newspapers. Notably, he was the first journalist to interview Osama Bin Ladin's mother. Mr. Alhomayed holds a bachelor's degree in media studies from King Abdul Aziz University in Jeddah. He is based in London.

 

[jamal18]

Allah bless and keep this great muslim hero.