ONCE AGAIN.. THE QUESTION OF... Whose SIDE ARE THEY ON?

Ok, so, again, Hamas operatives are killed in Syria by Assad's men... who are supported by Iran... who some believe is still supported by Hamas??????

Did Assad's troops know they were Hamas?

Hard to tell who is who when the bullets start flying all around you, but given the area they were in and given the fact Assad's troops know Hamas is in that area.. yep.. go figure.

So, is Hamas supporting Iran as everyone thinks?

If so, why are they fighting Assad's troops?

Confused???

Can Hamas have "slits" based upon bloodlines?

Yep..

Once you kill someone's family members, as Assad's troops did in Deraa, then all localized "deals" are off!

Oh ya.. don't forget Palestinians are Sunni; trust me.. Assad's troops didn't forget.

That leaves some to ask the question, one that is irrelevant in that part of the world. is Hamas Playing both sides on both sides of the fence"?

Who doesn't play on both side of the fence in the Middle East???

If the Hamas, Assad issue gets even close to getting out of control, unfortunately 400 dead doesn't qualify in this conflict, then you can bet Iran will make adjustments to what is going on.

In my opinion, Hamas hasn't been in Iran's "camp" for over a year, but Iran can't allow that fact to become common knowledge.

The tensions in Gaza are not all just Hamas's doing.... and Hamas knows it.

As has been the case for years and years.... the scorecard in the Middle East is simply impossible to keep track of.

http://www.worldbulletin.net/?aType=haber&ArticleID=97748

HOW TO LEVERAGE A RELATIONSHIP OF MISTRUST!

The tension between Ahmadinejad and leadership of Khamenei has been a topic of mine on many of occasions.

What I find interesting time and time again, is the Iranian government's inability to hide this obvious split.

The Persian Nationalist and the Islamic Fundamentalist both have visions of Iran's future that simply do not match.

Again, none of this is new to the rest of the world, so why hasn't someone or some group tried to leverage this tension to destabilize Iran?

One issue that has always worried me is the consistent mistake by the West to categories everyone who is in the Middle East as the same pot of Islamic Radicals.

It just makes their lives easier when they refer to everything that goes on in the region as, "Those Arabs" or " Those Muslims"..

For all the talking heads who appear on cable TV you would think someone would hold the theory of playing these two Iranian egomaniacs against each other... or better yet.. you would think someone in the GCC would figure out what it takes to get these two coming to blows.

Now, as I have talked about in the past, Ahmadinejad doesn't own much in the way of military support; practically nothing is the real answer.

But, I still don't give up on my theory that Ahmadinejad could create tension far more than most people realize.

His time grows short and his "keepers" are standing on top of his every move, as this story indicates, but has anyone even tried to take advantage of this complicated conflicted relationship?

Would it work?

Who knows!

The more important question is, why don't we give it a try?

Oh ya.. The sanctions!!!!

Is that a tool under executed in this potential plan?

Someone remind me again... what is the strategic "plan" behind the sanctions?

Does anyone really have a "plan" fro dealing with Iran????

My opinion..... We are missing an opportunity to at least take a shot of disrupting Iran's leadership without having to wage a regional war.

Just my two cents worth.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/10/2012102223530435716.html

DID SHEIKH HAMAD ALTHANI'S VISIT TO GAZA SPARK A CONFLICT?

The question is a simple one.

Did the Sheikh of Qatar's visit to Gaza spark the current round of fighting?

Perhaps.

I would say it was absolutely a factor that must be weighed into the analysis.

I have a few other questions that, in my opinion, are more important.

Why?

Why now?

Why not the West Bank as well?

Why appear as if Qatar is leaning towards Hamas and not Abbas?

What does Saudi think of this move?

Did they have a vote in the visit?

What are Iran's thoughts on the Qatar visit to Gaza?

And last but not least, did the Sheikh just buy Hamas off to keep them from supporting Iran?

Now.... that is the real question!!! and nobody seems to be asking it.

As for the current exchange of fire between Israel and Hamas and more likely the Islamic Jihadist groups in Gaza, it should calm down quickly; at least let's hope so!

Egypt, and I have said this over and over again, doesn't want a conflict between Hamas and Israel... at least not yet!!!!

I am sure there is a full court press by the Egyptians to calm this series of events down as soon as possible.

As for Hamas, it scored a major victory not only in the region, but over the PA / Fatah / by having this Qatar visit take place.

Qatar, who has been more than ambitious in the region for the past two years, may be showing its value to regional issues by boldly going into Gaza and buying Hamas loyalty.

How much "coordination" took place between Egypt and Qatar and Saudi on this media event is going to need to be reviewed.

I would be willing to bet, the Ottoman's were not part of the planning phase.

So, the exchange of fire between Israel and Gaza / Hamas / Islamic Jihadist / should calm down quickly for no other reason than it was probably not in the Qatari " Plan".

We shall see what Iran thinks of this event.

None of this is being accomplished to favor Iranian interest.

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=289141

TIME FOR AN UPDATE ON EGYPT AND its "DEMOCRACY".

Well, it's becoming more and more clear the use of the world "democratic" in Egypt is spelled.... ISLAMIC LAW!

If you remember way back when... I initially framed the Muslim Brotherhood as the slow version of cancer.

If you're not paying attention or you just simply ignore the warning signs, you wake up one day to have the Doctor say, "There is nothing we can do".

That day is still coming for the Western World's relationship with Egypt, but it's still coming.

Not only is the MB slow in its quest to shape the region to its liking, it has no problem deceiving anyone and everyone it needs to in order to achieve this goal.

A point I also made over two years ago.

As the Islamist quickly places the finishing touches to the new Constitution, the next set of, "what a minute.. that isn't what you said a few months ago".... issues will come to the forefront.

Oh ya.. It's about time Jimmy Carter step into the "Home" and watch reruns of Gun Smoke!!!

Don't be surprised if the new Constitution has "changes" to the issues of Women's rights... and Religious freedoms all in the name of " The People".. the crutch the MB leans on when someone questions the MB.

Perhaps it's time we lend a little "support" to those who are willing to make life more difficult for the MB?

That might take a change in leadership in other parts of the world, but that might happen in about two weeks.

At some point in time, the World has to realize the MB is part of the problem and not part of the solution.

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2012/Oct-23/192467-egypts-top-court-to-rule-on-constitutional-panel.ashx#axzz2A8ZsKOfN

THE ASSASSINATION OF AL-HASSAN..  WHO...  WHY NOW?

Ok, so much for "conventional wisdom" when it comes to the theory nobody wants to see Lebanon catch on fire.

So, did Assad call for the murder of al-Hassan?

Only if he got the green light from Tehran.

Did Tehran want Hezbollah to take the brunt of the Sunni wrath in Lebanon because of this attack?

NO!

So, would Tehran have sanctioned this attack?

Did someone or some country just execute a key individual in the Special Tribunal of Lebanon case for the UN?

Yep.

Ok, then who would want that to happen?

Hezbollah?

Would Hezbollah conduct this operation without the approval of Tehran?

If so, why?

So far, the "conventional wisdom" on what happened doesn't fit the logic of current events in the region.

Having said that, let me say something that is "unconventional".

If you go back and read some of my post from early this year and even late last year, you will find several occasions where I talked to the issue of Iran and or Russia come to terms with how to out Assad, yet keep control of Syria.

If anyone thinks that ether the Russians or Iran would not turn Assad into a dead man if they knew they would not lose influence in Syria.. then you are wasting your time reading about the region.

If anyone has and still realizes this issue, it's Assad!

If he can't trust the guy who cleans his floors day to day, then how in the world does he trust Tehran or Moscow?

Paranoia has been his middle name for well over a year now and it just gets worse day by day.

So, let's assume for a minute Assad decides that regardless of what Tehran or Moscow wants he gives the orders to turn up the heat on Lebanon; thus further terrifying the whole region.

Again; does this mean he places his own survival ahead of his support from Hezbollah?

It's just hard to accept!

Ok, let's take the other track.

Lets assume Hezbollah and Tehran are involved and dreamt up the whole plot.

Why?

Back to one of my other theories.

Iran is so desperate not to lose Syria and Hezbollah they would rather see Lebanon in flames than to see the Sunni movement succeed in Syria.

Perhaps the threat of social unrest based upon the sanctions has the Iranian leadership so desperate and paranoid they are willing to create the "distraction event" many have feared?

Again, I have a hard time with this logic line.

Tehran has to know killing someone as prominent as al-Hassan in such a dramatic act, one that just smells of 2005, is an act with uncontrollable consequences.

Hezbollah fighting for its life in Lebanon is a Hezbollah that is in no position to conduct operations against Israel in a proxy war set by Iran.

Notice how quickly Hezbollah "condemned" the attack?

Ok.

Back to the primary issue.

Who killed al-Hassen and why?

It's clear there is an argument from both camps.

What's not clear is the repercussions of this murder.

Just because someone or some government anticipated the act as beneficial, that by no means guarantees positive results.

A region living on the edge day by day, is simply not predictable.

Containment of the event is job one for all in the Middle East and the UN.

The call for the current government of Lebanon to step down will probably get louder.

If that government does fall, one supported by Hezbollah, then Lebanon could turn into a Syrian replica... .something that is probably already happening.

Again, this is an event where the region teeters for the next several days.

Will the situation calm down to some acceptable level or will Lebanon cook off?

Can someone find a way to blame Israel? I bet they already have.

I don't have the answer just yet, but If Iran was not at the center of this attack, Tehran is in full scale panic mode.

A lost Hezbollah is a lost Iran government.

How many more fires can the peace seeking people of the region and the rest of the world put out?

Don't look now, but I smell smoke in Kuwait and Bahrain.. again!!!

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/10/2012102113542122371.html

UAVs AND HEZBOLLAH...... WHAT DOES IT MEAN?

Ok; I've stayed away from this story for several days now in the hope of seeing what transpires as a result of this event.

Several issues to talk about here, so let me take a hack at this.

For starters lets all realize this was yet another Iranian generated event.

So, why did it take place?

My opinion of Iran needing as many distractions as it can possibly generate given its economic crisis and the pending fall of Assad in Syria; yet all the time knowing they must avoid open warfare at a time when Israel will strike them first and the hardest is the overall reason events like this take place.

Lebanon knows all too well Iran is going to make it the target of Israel actions if at all possible, yet the current Lebanese government is powerless, for now, to prevent Hezbollah from pushing them around.

From Hezbollah's foxhole, they get the chance to make the age old statement of, "why can Israel do something and we can't"?

Now, the UN is very aware of Israel's commitment to protecting itself and remember part of that process is insuring everyone in the region understands Israel's willingness to do so!... Salesmanship is key to Israeli survival...

It's my opinion this all falls into the category of the continuous Chess Game being played out in the region; a Chess game with more than two players all playing at one time and not always waiting for their "turn".

What's going to happen?

Good question!

My bet is as long as these UAV's continue to show up approaching Israeli airspace, they will continue to be shot down.

The fist shot missed and the IAF has made the technical adjustment to insure that doesn't happen again.

I also would predict the Israelis will not wait for the next UAV to enter Israeli airspace or it might be taken out as soon as it does.

Not sure how many of these Iran wants to waste on Hezbollah and I'm not convinced Nasrallah will continue to see the value in being the fall guy for the events.

It could be he and Hezbollah will not be the "fall guy" for the next one.

The blame line might go directly to Iran and I'm not sure what the consequences of that might be.

I do know this, Israel continues to understand Iran's desire for Israel to take action against Lebanon or Gaza on a massive scale, but I'm beginning to think Iran's warped leadership doesn't comprehend no Arab nation, Hezbollah and Hamas.. who would fight anyway, are not Arab nations, is going to side with Iran.

To put it simply, pushing Israel into attacking Arabs like Lebanon is a hard sell to the Arabs, especially by a Persian country.

Can it happen?

Yes..

Will Lebanon be the only one to suffer?

NO!

Iran will "suffer" and will probably suffer first.

That Israeli plan is far more complicated than Iran realizes.

Can Israel and Arab countries, "come to terms" to avoid conflict in an Iranian war?

I bet the Generals in Iran know the answer:)

http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=288440

ANOTHER TWIST TO THE IRANIAN SANCTIONS PLAN?

The idea that sanctions would create social stress in Iran has been greeted with skeptical questions from some time now.

Sanctions tend to hurt those who have nothing to do with what a government is being punished for, especially in a dictatorship such as Iran.

But here comes an interesting "twist".

Could it be the sanctions were designed to do just what this article suggest is taking place?

Could it be the sanctions are designed, at least in part, to created stress between two factions inside the government that already exist?

The anti Ahmadinejad movement has been known by all for several years.

Perhaps the friction caused by economic hardship is designed to split a government that depends on being united?

Perhaps this is not about Students and Middle Class working folks, but about rival political camps that are looking to climb to the top?

A Government divided is something that becomes very difficult to sick the Secret Police Thugs on.

It's easy to beat up protesting students, but what about political party members at each other's throat?

Ok, even if this was the case, I have to ask the question.

What is the desired outcome?

If we get political party factions fighting, does that mean the Qud force will no longer back the religious leader??

Does Khamenei lose his grip on power if the political underlings continue to fight?

Khamenei knows all too well what this end fighting can lead to and he is already well aware of the fact the sanctions are creating pressure on the day to day politics of Iran.

So, perhaps there is yet another possibility of what the world is trying to accomplish with the sanctions, but I still have to wonder... what is the end state?

What is it that the "plan" is trying to accomplish?

http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/News/Article.aspx?id=288227