Israel’s intelligence superiority and the Resistance Axis’ reluctance to escalate are responsible for why the self-professed Jewish State is indisputably winning the latest war with Lebanon.
Yep, I was a believer in the might of Hezbollah. Not because I knew, had researched it or something, but just because I believed our alt media gurus. The 'clerisy' of alt media.
More and more I realise that they are little better than the MSM.
I slowly became aware of how many simply drone the same message every time they are interviewed. Then how many of them were talking sheer rubbish off the cuff in their 'analysis' of battlefield and such.
Then how many based their prognostications on published 'facts' - a childish error one struggles to believe they could have made.
And so on.
I am down to checking a couple of TG channels every morning now and that's about it. On a daily basis. When he writes I check John Helmer.
That's it. There really, really is nothing.
I've long said it now and I'm saying it stronger and stronger: those at the top are lunatics, the mass at the bottom are asleep, those we might hope/expect some help, information and direction from: the self styled clerisy, they give nothing.
So I hold them to be at major fault.
The half million dead in Ukraine are dead not because of the lunatics in Kiev and Washington and not because of the zombie apathy of the masses but because of the pathetic behaviour of the clerisy.
The same with Palestine.
The same everywhere.
We desperately need a real clerisy with thinking sensible caring and dynamic people who can illuminate the way and spread truth.
When was the last time you ever got any suggested direction from anyone anywhere in the clerisy?
They still universally refer to it as 'helping Ukraine' etc. when - surely I don't need to point it out ? - helping a civil war perpetuate never helps the nation. Half a million dead didn't get helped did they?
Norman Finkelstein has an interesting take on this, from this interview: "Prof. Norman Finkelstein: An Israeli Ground War Against Hezbollah Would Be A 'Catastrophe'"
..EXCERPT..
Israel is hoping it can knock out Lebanon by air. The Hezbollah strategy is perfectly obvious: they will keep shooting rockets at Israel; however, they're not going to let out a huge blitz. Every time Israel declares victory over Hezbollah, they will fire more rockets. Israel will then inflict more aerial destruction, declare victory, and then Hezbollah will fire more rockets in order to make the situation politically untenable for Israel. They'll have to launch a ground invasion. Now, if you listen to Nasrallah's last speech, he literally said, "Please invade, please invade. We welcome the invasion," which is true. Whether it's 100,000 or 75,000, the Party of God longs for, yearns for that invasion so they can finally settle the score with that satanic state, man to man, in hand-to-hand combat.
The Israelis dread the land war. Hezbollah longs for it, and the only way it can force the land war is to keep its rockets and missiles in reserve and deny Netanyahu the chance to declare victory. That's what happened in 2006. Israel amassed the troops on its border with Lebanon, and it wasn't until 72 hours before the 33-day war was over that Israeli troops entered Lebanon. Condoleezza Rice had already gotten a UN resolution through to end the war because Israel begged the US: "Get that resolution, get that resolution because we don't want the land invasion; it will be a disaster." And, speaking as a complete military know-nothing, speaking as a complete military ignoramus, I would say with 100% certainty, if it comes to pass, it will be a catastrophe for the state of Israel because those people have no fear, no dread of giving their lives to finally settling the score with that monstrous state that has inflicted so much death, destruction, agony, and anguish with all the haughtiness and arrogance of the Übermensch.
...
So the question is, how much death and destruction will Israel inflict from the air, and secondly, whether they will be forced to act because Hezbollah will deny Prime Minister Netanyahu the ability to declare victory. I should note that in the 2006 war, Hezbollah, on the very last day—on the 33rd day—fired more missiles and rockets than on any other day in that 33-day war. I think—correct me if I'm wrong—it was 10,000. Hezbollah wanted to transmit the message: "You lost." And I think they're going to do the same thing this time. They will hold back—that's my guess.
One can drag one's military underground, but one cannot drag its population underground. This is a weak spot for all these pseudo-state actors. However, the human intelligence and counter intelligence failure, and perhaps signal intelligence failure as well, are defects that have to be fixed before folks against Israel can seriously think of a military confrontation.
Andrew greatly oversimplifies Hezbollah’s situation and misunderstands how resilient and adaptable these organizations are, which is surprising, given his usual penchant for overly complicated frameworks that rarely map to reality.
Anyone familiar with the region’s history knows that Hezbollah, along with other Shia paramilitary groups like the IRGC, has a deeply ingrained culture of martyrdom. This isn’t just rhetoric—it’s a core part of their operational strategy. The assassination of figures like Abbas al-Musawi in 1992 didn’t lead to Hezbollah’s collapse, and General Qasem Soleimani’s death didn’t dismantle the IRGC. In fact, both groups grew stronger, using martyrdom to fuel their cause and recruit new members. Killing Nasrallah—or any other leader—won’t break Hezbollah, as they’ve shown time and again they can replace leadership and continue operations with minimal disruption.
Andrew also downplays Hezbollah’s well-established continuity plans. These organizations are specifically designed to withstand leadership decapitations, expecting and planning for such moves. Hezbollah didn’t falter in the 1990s when it was less organized; today, it’s far more sophisticated and well-equipped.
Given Hezbollah’s long history of surviving and growing stronger despite military and political efforts to dismantle them, claims of a decisive Israeli victory are overstated. Hezbollah has faced significant setbacks before and emerged more resilient, and there’s no reason to believe they won’t do so again.
It’s exactly this kind of misguided thinking that has led the West to repeatedly lose conflicts against so-called "rag heads" and "goat herders." I suggest researching the concept of "Insurgent Math" put forward by General Stanley McChrystal.
Simplistic comments like "let them be martyrs" reveal a fundamental misunderstanding of the enemy. Martyrdom isn’t just accepted in groups like Hezbollah or the IRGC—it’s celebrated, fueling their cause, rallying new recruits, and strengthening their resolve. Killing their leaders doesn’t weaken them; history shows that it often makes them stronger.
People from cultures like Israel, where fear of death is deeply embedded in both society and its military philosophy, struggle greatly to grasp this. Not every culture has the same paralyzing fear of death they have. For many, especially in organizations built around martyrdom, death is seen as honorable and even necessary for their cause. Simply removing leaders won’t end these conflicts because groups like Hezbollah are designed to survive and adapt in the face of such losses.
If all of Israel’s leaders were killed, it might indeed end the war for them—because they are total cowards—but for groups like Hezbollah, that’s exactly what they’ve prepared for.
It would be interesting to know how this cultural “fear of death” arose in their nation. Is it a cultural belief that existed when they were in the diaspora, that they brought with them when the current entity was founded in 1948?
Israel has no problem with mass extermination on a hitlerian scale.
Edit: I shoulda added, that I am abundantly aware of the Shia culture of martyrdom, of Imam Hossein and Karbala, as well as how killing insurgents creates insurgents.
I agree Israel has genocidal intent, but the idea that they could "completely eradicate" their enemies is logistically implausible, even with sustained military operations.
Take the combined populations of Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Iran—around 169.5 million people. Even assuming a death rate of 37,697 civilians per month (based on the reasonable assumption that the actual Palestinian death toll is 10 times the reported figure of 41,460 over 11 months), it would still take over 374 years to eliminate these populations. That's years, not months. This doesn’t even factor in birth rates, migration, or increased resistance.
Focusing solely on the Shia populations of those areas—about 119 million people—would still take 262 years at a rate of 37,697 civilian deaths per month.
Executing mass extermination on this scale would require resources beyond what any military could sustain. It would demand continuous success, near-perfect precision, and the suppression of both immediate resistance and long-term insurgencies that would inevitably arise. Moreover, international pressures and external powers would impose serious limits on such an operation's feasibility.
Even at an extreme death rate, the logistics make total eradication of their enemies impossible for Israel.
This is why they rely on terror bombing—not to wipe out entire populations, but to intimidate and suppress resistance, destabilizing the region and subduing its people. They understand the limits of full-scale extermination, so their strategy focuses on control and fear rather than outright destruction.
The "5D Chess" belief you cite seems to be a common theme in so much of the reporting not just in this area but on all the modern conflicts. But I think the fact of the matter is that around the world, the quality of the leadership class is plummeting, and very few are clever enough to be capable of that kind of thinking. If it looks like a mistake or failure, it probably IS.
Andrew, what are you talking about. You've been way off base on some of your previous analysis, but It's been interesting to read for at least an alternate take. This analysis though is in the realm of ridiculous.
Just because one side has no moral standing and is willing to commit war crimes and conduct genocide, it doesn't mean that they are winning the war. Also, as Vietnam showed us, one side can win almost every battle but still lose the war.
In short, just because Israel is killing more people doesn't make them the winner.
Also, the pager terror attack mainly killed and injured civilians, many of them healthcare workers, not the Hezbollah command structure. You couldn't even get this right. Not good, brother.
If we think inside a Hollywood mindset, of course you are right. An eye for an eye, vengeance, hubris, etc. The Jew’s way of thinking. But if Israel is bankrupt, Israelis are leaving, Haifa is not working, companies are fleeing or closing, investment is dead, then why to enter in a deadly arm confrontation with them?
I remain neutral on all these conflicts because I am a peace promoter regardless of culture or beliefs. Everyone, each individual, is a member of God's family and due to respect and acknowledgement of their internal world map that everyone carries. All are right in their own world.
Thank you Andrew for an excellent analysis yet again which surely nails the truth of the matter.
Yep, I was a believer in the might of Hezbollah. Not because I knew, had researched it or something, but just because I believed our alt media gurus. The 'clerisy' of alt media.
More and more I realise that they are little better than the MSM.
I slowly became aware of how many simply drone the same message every time they are interviewed. Then how many of them were talking sheer rubbish off the cuff in their 'analysis' of battlefield and such.
Then how many based their prognostications on published 'facts' - a childish error one struggles to believe they could have made.
And so on.
I am down to checking a couple of TG channels every morning now and that's about it. On a daily basis. When he writes I check John Helmer.
That's it. There really, really is nothing.
I've long said it now and I'm saying it stronger and stronger: those at the top are lunatics, the mass at the bottom are asleep, those we might hope/expect some help, information and direction from: the self styled clerisy, they give nothing.
So I hold them to be at major fault.
The half million dead in Ukraine are dead not because of the lunatics in Kiev and Washington and not because of the zombie apathy of the masses but because of the pathetic behaviour of the clerisy.
The same with Palestine.
The same everywhere.
We desperately need a real clerisy with thinking sensible caring and dynamic people who can illuminate the way and spread truth.
When was the last time you ever got any suggested direction from anyone anywhere in the clerisy?
They still universally refer to it as 'helping Ukraine' etc. when - surely I don't need to point it out ? - helping a civil war perpetuate never helps the nation. Half a million dead didn't get helped did they?
The West is ruled by evil cynics, but they are not stupid.
Norman Finkelstein has an interesting take on this, from this interview: "Prof. Norman Finkelstein: An Israeli Ground War Against Hezbollah Would Be A 'Catastrophe'"
..EXCERPT..
Israel is hoping it can knock out Lebanon by air. The Hezbollah strategy is perfectly obvious: they will keep shooting rockets at Israel; however, they're not going to let out a huge blitz. Every time Israel declares victory over Hezbollah, they will fire more rockets. Israel will then inflict more aerial destruction, declare victory, and then Hezbollah will fire more rockets in order to make the situation politically untenable for Israel. They'll have to launch a ground invasion. Now, if you listen to Nasrallah's last speech, he literally said, "Please invade, please invade. We welcome the invasion," which is true. Whether it's 100,000 or 75,000, the Party of God longs for, yearns for that invasion so they can finally settle the score with that satanic state, man to man, in hand-to-hand combat.
The Israelis dread the land war. Hezbollah longs for it, and the only way it can force the land war is to keep its rockets and missiles in reserve and deny Netanyahu the chance to declare victory. That's what happened in 2006. Israel amassed the troops on its border with Lebanon, and it wasn't until 72 hours before the 33-day war was over that Israeli troops entered Lebanon. Condoleezza Rice had already gotten a UN resolution through to end the war because Israel begged the US: "Get that resolution, get that resolution because we don't want the land invasion; it will be a disaster." And, speaking as a complete military know-nothing, speaking as a complete military ignoramus, I would say with 100% certainty, if it comes to pass, it will be a catastrophe for the state of Israel because those people have no fear, no dread of giving their lives to finally settling the score with that monstrous state that has inflicted so much death, destruction, agony, and anguish with all the haughtiness and arrogance of the Übermensch.
...
So the question is, how much death and destruction will Israel inflict from the air, and secondly, whether they will be forced to act because Hezbollah will deny Prime Minister Netanyahu the ability to declare victory. I should note that in the 2006 war, Hezbollah, on the very last day—on the 33rd day—fired more missiles and rockets than on any other day in that 33-day war. I think—correct me if I'm wrong—it was 10,000. Hezbollah wanted to transmit the message: "You lost." And I think they're going to do the same thing this time. They will hold back—that's my guess.
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arUHCv1iXgk
... and here is the full discussion with Prof. Norman Finkelstein on Rumble: https://rumble.com/v5g6zvd-gaza-is-gone-prof.-norman-finkelstein-on-israels-destruction-and-war-goals.html?e9s=src_v1_ucp
One can drag one's military underground, but one cannot drag its population underground. This is a weak spot for all these pseudo-state actors. However, the human intelligence and counter intelligence failure, and perhaps signal intelligence failure as well, are defects that have to be fixed before folks against Israel can seriously think of a military confrontation.
Andrew greatly oversimplifies Hezbollah’s situation and misunderstands how resilient and adaptable these organizations are, which is surprising, given his usual penchant for overly complicated frameworks that rarely map to reality.
Anyone familiar with the region’s history knows that Hezbollah, along with other Shia paramilitary groups like the IRGC, has a deeply ingrained culture of martyrdom. This isn’t just rhetoric—it’s a core part of their operational strategy. The assassination of figures like Abbas al-Musawi in 1992 didn’t lead to Hezbollah’s collapse, and General Qasem Soleimani’s death didn’t dismantle the IRGC. In fact, both groups grew stronger, using martyrdom to fuel their cause and recruit new members. Killing Nasrallah—or any other leader—won’t break Hezbollah, as they’ve shown time and again they can replace leadership and continue operations with minimal disruption.
Andrew also downplays Hezbollah’s well-established continuity plans. These organizations are specifically designed to withstand leadership decapitations, expecting and planning for such moves. Hezbollah didn’t falter in the 1990s when it was less organized; today, it’s far more sophisticated and well-equipped.
Given Hezbollah’s long history of surviving and growing stronger despite military and political efforts to dismantle them, claims of a decisive Israeli victory are overstated. Hezbollah has faced significant setbacks before and emerged more resilient, and there’s no reason to believe they won’t do so again.
I suppose the response is "then let them be martyrs".
It’s exactly this kind of misguided thinking that has led the West to repeatedly lose conflicts against so-called "rag heads" and "goat herders." I suggest researching the concept of "Insurgent Math" put forward by General Stanley McChrystal.
Simplistic comments like "let them be martyrs" reveal a fundamental misunderstanding of the enemy. Martyrdom isn’t just accepted in groups like Hezbollah or the IRGC—it’s celebrated, fueling their cause, rallying new recruits, and strengthening their resolve. Killing their leaders doesn’t weaken them; history shows that it often makes them stronger.
People from cultures like Israel, where fear of death is deeply embedded in both society and its military philosophy, struggle greatly to grasp this. Not every culture has the same paralyzing fear of death they have. For many, especially in organizations built around martyrdom, death is seen as honorable and even necessary for their cause. Simply removing leaders won’t end these conflicts because groups like Hezbollah are designed to survive and adapt in the face of such losses.
If all of Israel’s leaders were killed, it might indeed end the war for them—because they are total cowards—but for groups like Hezbollah, that’s exactly what they’ve prepared for.
It would be interesting to know how this cultural “fear of death” arose in their nation. Is it a cultural belief that existed when they were in the diaspora, that they brought with them when the current entity was founded in 1948?
Israel has no problem with mass extermination on a hitlerian scale.
Edit: I shoulda added, that I am abundantly aware of the Shia culture of martyrdom, of Imam Hossein and Karbala, as well as how killing insurgents creates insurgents.
I agree Israel has genocidal intent, but the idea that they could "completely eradicate" their enemies is logistically implausible, even with sustained military operations.
Take the combined populations of Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Iran—around 169.5 million people. Even assuming a death rate of 37,697 civilians per month (based on the reasonable assumption that the actual Palestinian death toll is 10 times the reported figure of 41,460 over 11 months), it would still take over 374 years to eliminate these populations. That's years, not months. This doesn’t even factor in birth rates, migration, or increased resistance.
Focusing solely on the Shia populations of those areas—about 119 million people—would still take 262 years at a rate of 37,697 civilian deaths per month.
Executing mass extermination on this scale would require resources beyond what any military could sustain. It would demand continuous success, near-perfect precision, and the suppression of both immediate resistance and long-term insurgencies that would inevitably arise. Moreover, international pressures and external powers would impose serious limits on such an operation's feasibility.
Even at an extreme death rate, the logistics make total eradication of their enemies impossible for Israel.
This is why they rely on terror bombing—not to wipe out entire populations, but to intimidate and suppress resistance, destabilizing the region and subduing its people. They understand the limits of full-scale extermination, so their strategy focuses on control and fear rather than outright destruction.
Israel has more than genocidal intent, they are actively committing genocide right now.
The "5D Chess" belief you cite seems to be a common theme in so much of the reporting not just in this area but on all the modern conflicts. But I think the fact of the matter is that around the world, the quality of the leadership class is plummeting, and very few are clever enough to be capable of that kind of thinking. If it looks like a mistake or failure, it probably IS.
Israel wants Iran and Hezbollah to escalate, in order to run screaming to its American thug.
This creates a no-win on the part of Iran and Hezbollah.
Israel is taking on one by one. May be after Lebanon again syria. It isn't israel everyone is afraid but USA which is ready to wage war
Andrew, what are you talking about. You've been way off base on some of your previous analysis, but It's been interesting to read for at least an alternate take. This analysis though is in the realm of ridiculous.
Just because one side has no moral standing and is willing to commit war crimes and conduct genocide, it doesn't mean that they are winning the war. Also, as Vietnam showed us, one side can win almost every battle but still lose the war.
In short, just because Israel is killing more people doesn't make them the winner.
Also, the pager terror attack mainly killed and injured civilians, many of them healthcare workers, not the Hezbollah command structure. You couldn't even get this right. Not good, brother.
If we think inside a Hollywood mindset, of course you are right. An eye for an eye, vengeance, hubris, etc. The Jew’s way of thinking. But if Israel is bankrupt, Israelis are leaving, Haifa is not working, companies are fleeing or closing, investment is dead, then why to enter in a deadly arm confrontation with them?
I remain neutral on all these conflicts because I am a peace promoter regardless of culture or beliefs. Everyone, each individual, is a member of God's family and due to respect and acknowledgement of their internal world map that everyone carries. All are right in their own world.
Thank you Andrew for an excellent analysis yet again which surely nails the truth of the matter.
I think iran announced it wanted good relations with west over a month ago.