NASRALLAH GIVES HIS SPEECH, BUT WHAT DID IT MEAN?
Ok, yesterday I commented on Nasrallah giving a speech soon
for two reasons.
1. To try to explain to his support base why Hezbollah was
fighting in Syria ...
Hint his answer was really...really weak!!!
2. He would give a
hint as to where Hezbollah was heading with the Syrian conflict.
Now that the "speech" is over, a few things jumped
out at me.
It's clear Nasrallah was addressing more than just his base.
His comments and statements were often directed towards his opponents
fighting in Syria .
If you really breakdown his speech, it's clear over half of
his comments were addressed to the rebels in Syria .
Now, to some degree he did address the West to include Israel , but threats to the West and Israel
were clearly not the centerpiece of this event.
The next item that caught me by surprise was Narallah's
repeated reference to "friends" not allowing the Syrian Government to
fall; side not... notice he did not mention Assad by name?
He even went as far as stating these "friends"
have assured him they would not allow the fall of the current government in Syria .
Strange!!
Why the emphasis on this point?
I think I know why!!
As I said, although he didn't spend a great deal of time threatening
the West or Israel, this implied statement of so called "fact" that
Syria's "friends" would not allow it to fall was a clear indirect / implied
threat.
If you read between the lines, the statement is this, "
if the West openly intervenes, then Iran will commit to the
fight"!!
I know he mentioned Russia ,
but not even the blowhard Nasrallah could possibly think for a minute the Tsar
would commit combat forces to Syria ?
No oil / no fuel from Syrian land... no commitment by the
Tsar... Oil / fuel rules his thought process 24/7/365.
Ok, having made the comment about the Russians, did
Nasrallah just put the rest of the West on notice that Iran is willing to go the distance for Syria ?
Most likely, and that makes the US / Western response to the WMD
issue about as dangerous as it can get.
The third issue that caught my attention with Nasrallah's
speech was the absolute egocentric way
he addressed Lebanon 's
response to Lebanese citizens being in danger along the Syrian border!!
His point was simple, the Lebanese government is not capable
of defending the Lebanese people and only Hezbollah can take on this great
challenge.
Let there be no doubt that Nasrallah truly believes he
controls Lebanon !!!!
Last night, I commented Nasrallah had perhaps an opportunity
to pull Hezbollah out of the cycle of danger they had allowed Iran to force
them into.
It is clear today, Nasrallah has no intention of backing
up!!!!
Like the little Bully who thinks his 6-5 / 300 lb friend is
standing behind him //// Iran///// Nasrallah just kicked sand into the world's
face....
Oh by the way, just who is Nasrallah.... and what is
Hezbollah really/?????
Let me make a comparison and see if your perspective
changes.
Can you imagine in the US
/ Britain / China / France
/ Germany / Russia ...
an armed group based upon a religious doctrine living outside the control of
the national government... a militia / armed to the teeth / that dictates to
the rest of the world's leaders what the country they are living in is going to
do and not do?
It's like the KKK dictating to DC what the US will and will not do and speaking for the US on
international affairs?
It's insane and that is exactly how the rest of the world
needs to view Hezbollah!!!
Ok, here is the bottom line.
Nesrallah, for all intensive purposes, drew his redline
today..
"Do not intervene in Syria
or Syria 's
"friends" will defeat you"!!!
Here is the problem with "redlines".... when someone steps across, they do so knowing
they are ready to take on the consequences...
Is Hezbollah ready for that???? Really???
How deep is the whole Nesrallah lives in??
If I was him I would dig a much deeper hole or be ready to
move that "redline"...
