Hezbollah’s Hudhud Drone Mission in the Eyes of Western Media

Hezbollah’s video, broadcasted under the title "This is What the Hudhud Brought Back," Hudhud meaning Hoopoe in Arabic language, showed high-resolution images of highly sensitive “Israeli” occupation sites, including a military industrial area. This area contains factories, warehouses, and testing fields where components of air defense systems are manufactured and assembled, all of which were supposedly considered top secret.

In an extended clip lasting over 9 and a half minutes, Hezbollah's Military Media presented aerial inspection footage of areas in northern “Kiryat Shmona”, “Nahariya”, “Safed” [occupied Safad], “Karmiel”, “Afula”, passing through “Kiryot”, and reaching Haifa and its port, where warships and important “Israeli” economic and strategic installations are stationed. Not only that, but Hezbollah also even stated that the drone returned to its base in Lebanon without being detected by “Israeli” air defense systems. So, you can imagine how the media along with the “Israeli” leadership reacted to such a security breach.

Beginning with Becky Anderson on CNN who could not even believe the words she herself was uttering when asking CNN reporter in Beirut Ben Wedeman about the significance of such a move by Hezbollah and how the resistance actually managed to fly their drones in such a “strategic location” according to Becky.

It truly struck me to hear and see CNN actually allowing its Beirut correspondent to tell the truth on live TV without manipulating the way the information was presented to the audience. It was clear, concise and up to the exact point of the warning message that Hezbollah was intending to send to the “Israelis”.

Obviously, this was not the case in other western broadcast media channels who were trying to analyze whether or not Zionist “Israeli” would be able to handle the heat that will be coming from Hezbollah in the event the Zionists decide to risk it all and launch an offensive against Lebanon. Here is how Sky News Australia decided to analyze the escalating tension between Hezbollah and “Israel”.

Ok…where do I start? How about we begin from the end…did you know that we as Lebanese are “not” supporting our own resistance who is protecting us from warmongering Zionist psychopaths but apparently Hezbollah does not want to hear us and that after this round Hezbollah will completely lose its political weight in Lebanese politics? Or maybe you have not heard of it yet but apparently “Israel” which is not able to even attain its announced goals in Gaza...the 365km2 Gaza...but will completely outmaneuver the well-armed and well-trained Hezbollah across the entire southern Lebanese border?

Moving on to ABC News Australia where actual fake news was reported because ABC decided to lie by omission by claiming that Hezbollah secretary general Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah threatened to target Cyprus if “Israel” attacked Lebanon with not context whatsoever about the role Cyprus is playing that pushed Hezbollah leader to issue that threat to begin with. ABC News failed to report to its audience that the European island country usually allows “Israeli” forces to use Cypriote airports as military bases to launch attacks against Lebanon. Here is how ABC reported the escalation:

It is worth noting that amid careless efforts by the US and its allies to reach a ceasefire agreement in Gaza, a full-scale war with Hezbollah would significantly exacerbate the regional crisis and draw the United States even deeper into the conflict to maintain the existence of Zionist “Israel” at a time when the US is neck deep in its own political turmoil ahead of the anticipated US elections in November.

How Digital media covered Hezbollah’s Hudhud

US officials repeated several times last week that Washington is concerned about Zionist “Israel” rushing into a war with Hezbollah without a clear strategy or consideration of the full implications of a broader conflict.

The White House even in a statement last week announced that a ceasefire in Gaza is the only thing that would significantly de-escalate tensions on the Lebanese border with occupied Palestine.

Tensions have risen in the past 10 days amid an exchange of statements hinting at a "full-scale" war that both Hezbollah and Israel have so far avoided. Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah warned last week that no place in “Israel” would be "safe" from resistance fighters' missiles in the event of a war and that threat came after the very famous HodHod episode 1. It was a thriller indeed for “Israel” is who could not believe their eyes as they realized that Hezbollah was watching them.

Neither did MSM with The Jewish Independent asking in an Op-ed the following question: “Is ‘Israel’ Hezbollah war unavoidable?”

One Omer Dostri, from the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security, who is also a writer for the Jerusalem Post said in this Jewish Independent piece that:

It is “Not a question of if, but when” claiming that:

The State of “Israel” has no choice other than to embark on a large-scale and comprehensive war to defeat Hezbollah in order to provide security to its citizens, change the strategic picture, and reduce the threats against the state.

Dostri then added that:

Hezbollah is currently the most serious threat to the “State of ‘Israel’”, bar Iran. If “Israel” does not manage to address this threat immediately, it will receive an 'October 7' in the North in a few years.

Dostri ends off saying:

An all-out war with Hezbollah could lead to severe damage on the home front. This scenario involves the launching of thousands of missiles per day across all parts of the country, with a reasonable possibility of hitting critical infrastructure such as electricity and water supplies.

So, Zionist media does acknowledge the very heavy price that “Israel” would pay in the event of an all-out war with Hezbollah, but they still advocate for an offensive against Lebanon which baffling if you ask me.

We then have another piece by The Conversation by Simon Mabon Professor of International Relations, Lancaster University, entitled: “What would war between ‘Israel’ and Hezbollah mean for the Middle East? Expert Q&A”

Mabon asks the following important question:

How well prepared is “Israel” to fight a war on two fronts – perhaps even three, as violence is also increasing in the West Bank?

Mabon then answers:

There are serious doubts as to whether “Israel” can engage in significant conflicts on two fronts. Rising violence in the West Bank poses an additional challenge for “Israel’s” security apparatus.

These settlers routinely engage in acts of violence against the Palestinian population and largely depend on the IDF to keep them safe.

Any shift in the security landscape would pose serious challenges to the IDF.

Then Mabon asks another question:

How much international support can “Israel” count on if it launches a major offensive against Hezbollah?

To which he answers:

"Israeli" officials have repeatedly said that they can – and will – operate alone if the situation calls for it. But with international bodies becoming increasingly critical of the catastrophic war in Gaza and the devastating death toll, allies are beginning to waver in their support. Votes in the UN have suggested growing anger at “Israel’s” conduct, while international bodies have explored legal avenues to end the suffering of Palestinians.

Many other western MSM actually warned “Israel” that Hezbollah has “ten times the arsenal of Hamas” if not more, implying that any conflict would be a similar order of magnitude greater than what “Israel” had to face during their genocide in Gaza.