Nasrallah: The bet on a military victory is futile and destructive and will not achieve anything http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/99395-hizbullah-chief-sayyed-hassan-nasrallah-in-televised-address-on-latest-developments 
 [ed notes;scroll down to timeline,to get the unbias speech quotations...since top part is edited by the usual pundits...
 I call on you to put the grudges aside and think of your interests and the region's interests. I call on Saudi Arabia, the Gulf countries and Turkey to reevaluate their stance.   Isn't Syria occupied by the tens of thousands of fighters you brought from all countries? Today, the Coalition has started to raise the voice against them. Those speaking of the occupation of Syria must not ask the world and its armies to occupy Syria. They want to cover up for their failure in Syria ... Failure has been haunting this camp since two years and a half and they are using the excuse of Hizbullah's occupation of Syria while ignoring the fact that there is a regime, leadership and people in Syria who are confronting the challenges. How many fighters did Hizbullah send to Syria? Would any reasonable person believe that Hizbullah has the ability to occupy Syria?
Some Gulf states, specifically the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, are insisting on accusing Hizbullah of occupying Syria. To end this debate, I recommend the formation of a national unity cabinet based on the political weight of each party and enough with delaying the interests of the country and enough with the bets on regional developments. This formula is not realistic because it is actually an 8-10-6 formula, since the premier-designate is a member of the March 14 forces and the minister he is supposed to name would abide by the same political decision, which would technically mean that March 14 would have 10 ministers. The 8-8-8 cabinet line-up formula is unrealistic We are willing to discuss any topic, including the intervention in Syria. We are willing to discuss this issue more than any other topic. We want to understand what does intervention in Syria mean. Isn't it intervention when some leaders urge, contact, exert efforts and write articles in some media outlets to called on the American president to wage a military aggression against Syria? An aggression that would have dangerous repercussions on the region, the world and Lebanon. Is this neutrality? Is this self-dissociation? Which is more dangerous? This move or the sending of Hizbullah fighters to specific locations in Syria? Some said that Hizbullah does not want to discuss the intervention in Syria, but on the contrary, we want to discuss this point and we agree on Speaker Berri's agenda. We agree to discuss who started the intervention, its forms, the timing of our intervention and whether there is a national interest in it. Those who are obstructing dialogue in Lebanon are well-known and we are willing to take part in dialogue regardless of the issue of some parties' participation. We see a national interest in dialogue regardless of the possible outcome. The head of a Lebanese party claimed that the wired telecom network was breaching people's privacy and he should ask one of the officers about this network, which is primitive and incapable of spying on anyone. The Bekaa is part of the battle with the enemy and we need to have communications with the Baalbek-Hermel region. Years ago a cable was installed on Zahle's outskirts and what has recently happened is that our young men were repairing it and that's the whole story. Unfortunately, some parties are seeking stunts and illusionary heroism. Hizbullah has never sought to install a telecom network in Zahle.
I call on the Lebanese to be cautious while launching such accusations, which might have repercussions on everyone. I categorically deny these baseless accusations. These accusations have dangerous repercussions on Lebanon and on all people. The thing is not like transporting wheat, flour or conventional weapons and some parties in Lebanon joined the media campaign and said they fear that the chemical weapons might be transported to Lebanon. The U.S. defense secretary warned that chemical weapons might be transferred to Hizbullah and on the next day the Syrian Coalition claimed that the Syrian regime has delivered chemical arms to Hizbullah and some "smart" officials claimed that we have received a ton of chemical agents and this is a laughable accusation.All the details were passed on to the relevant state authorities, which must take the necessary measures, especially against the culprits who are inside Lebanon. We have managed to identify the culprits of the Rweiss bombing and their handlers. Of course it is a Takfiri group that is affiliated with the Syrian opposition and which is based in Syrian territory. Security agencies also reached this conclusion. Today, you are entrusted with the Dahieh region and when Dahieh entrusts the army and security forces with its blood, security and safety, this is the most precious thing that one can put at stake.  I thank all the brothers and sisters, all the families, all the people. I thank the army, the security forces and the Palestinian factions, especially the family of the martyr Mohammed Samrawi over their noble stance on the regrettable incident in Burj al-Barajneh. Only the state is responsible for security in all regions and we will leave any point to which the state might send forces. Today it happened in Dahieh and tomorrow it might happen in Baalbek and we welcome and cooperate with any efforts that contribute to the success of the mission. Those who believe that Dahieh is not threatened do not live in this country or in this world. Allow me to say that they would rejoice at the death of people in Dahieh and Tripoli and that they would be saddened by our efforts to prevent that. Those who accuse us of seeking a mini-state condemned the measures and attacked them with the aim of demonizing this sincere national endeavor. From the very first day, we contacted the state and asked them to shoulder their responsibilities, but they said that they had a personnel problem and we expressed our understanding. Some parties said that this is Hizbullah's plan and accused the party of seeking autonomous security to "complete its mini-state scheme," but today's deployment refuted their claims, as Hizbullah would have rejected this issue if it was seeking autonomous security. From the very first moment, statements rejecting autonomous security were issued ... Some parties rejected autonomous security in principle and we respect and back this stance. We are advocates of this stance because we reject autonomous security and it has never been part of our agenda and we have never practiced autonomous security. We only resorted to this option when we found that there is a security vacuum and we only intervened to prevent the entry of booby-trapped cars. Following the August 15 attack in Rweiss, we shouldered a big responsibility and our men exerted efforts to prevent the entry of any booby-trapped car into Dahieh. We hope these security forces and state authorities will shoulder their full responsibility and assume all the intelligence and preventative missions  I call on everyone to deal with these security forces in a spirit of national responsibility. These men are shouldering a very big responsibility and they are performing a major mission for which they must be thanked.  I call on all the residents of Dahieh and all visitors and passersby to show the highest levels of cooperation, respect, acceptance and responsiveness to the security measures, and I ask them to offer all the assistance and support needed to help them perform their mission. We support the pleas voiced by Tripoli's leaders and we hope all towns will be protected by the state.