Don't be fooled by Nasrallah's apparent apology for the latest Hez'bollah war. Listen to that deceptive babbling:  It was really just meant to be a kidnapping, he whined during a Lebanese television interview; had we known the Israelis would actually retaliate and fight back we  really wouldn't have done it.  So  defensive was he, even offering a feeble justification——without proof——that the kidnapping was a pre emptive move against a future Israeli attack planned for October because the Lebanese public, even his own Shiites, are not really backing him.

Instead they believe the purpose of the attack was not for the glory of Lebanon or even the Shia but rather,

in the interests of a foreign power rather than any specifically Lebanese concern....

Following the declaration of 'victory,' Hezbollah tried to organise a series of victory rallies in the Lebanese capital. These were poorly attended, with only a few hundred people turning up even to the event held in the movement's stronghold of south Beirut.

Even his own Shiites oppose him as demonstrated by,

an article by a prominent Shia academic, Mona Fayed, in the an—Nahar newspaper, in which she castigated Hezbollah as a servant of a foreign power, namely, Iran. In the same newspaper, a prominent Shia cleric, Syed Ali al—Amin, who serves as the Shia mufti of the city of Tyre and the Jebal Amel area, declared that "I don't believe Hezbollah asked the Shiite community what they thought about starting the war...."

However there is no cause for optimism because

Hezbollah's status within the country remains secure, at least for the moment. This is due to the threatening position the terror movement continues to hold, with its Iranian arsenal and Syrian support.....

Ethel C. Fenig   8 30 06