Who wins and who loses after Hamas's Haniyeh's assassination?

The Soros family will not like this: GrrrGraphics

Settling All Family Business? | Power Line  "Lots of observers are remarking on social media that Israel’s strikes against Hezbollah commander Fuad Shukr in Beirut and Hamas commander Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran resemble the climactic scene in The Godfather when Michael Corleone “settled all family business” with the simultaneous assassinations of his mob rivals.

"It’s looking like a more apt analogy this afternoon with breaking news reports that a senior Iranian commander has been killed in Damascus. Asianet news reports: . . ."

Israel strikes twice  "The Obama/Biden team administration is doing its best to protect Hezbollah from retaliation by Israel for its murder of 12 Druze children in the rocket attack on Majdal Shams over the weekend. Obsma/Biden seeks to preserve both Hamas and Hezbollah as Iranian assets. See, for example, this current Reuters story.

"Israel struck back yesterday with a pinpoint attack that killed Fuad Shukr in a suburb of Beirut (according to FDD’s Mark Dubowitz, on a visit to his mistress). The IDF attributes responsibility for the Majdal Shams attack as well as the killing of numerous Israelis and others in years past to Shukr. Shukr was Hezbollah leader Hasan Nasrallah’s military adviser and right-hand man.

"A limerick awaits: There once was a terrorist named Shukr…

"In fact, the United States had its own claim on Shukr. The Department of State had a $5 million reward out for information on Shukr. See the State Department Rewards for Justice Post on Shukr here (“Shukr played a central role in the October 23, 1983 bombing of the U.S. Marine Corps Barracks in Beirut which killed 241 U.S. military personnel and wounded 128 others”). Israel could put in for the reward but I’m sure it would be satisfied with a congratulatory message that will not be forthcoming." . . .

For some reason, the NBC News story on Shukr’s termination omits our own interest in Shukr. In its rolling coverage of the strike, CNN links to the State State Department Rewards for Justice post on Shukr. The New York Times only vaguely allows that Shukr “was said to be a close adviser to the group’s leader and someone wanted by the U.S. government for his role in a 1983 bombing attack that killed roughly 300 American and French soldiers in Beirut.”

Who wins and who loses after Hamas's Haniyeh's assassination? - The Jerusalem Post   . . ."The Biden administration: President Joe Biden has seen his outspoken support for Israel tested during the war in Gaza, as he has pressed for limiting civilian casualties while still providing arms to Israel and defending the prosecution of the war. For months, critics of the administration have seen the Biden administration as complicit in Gaza’s mounting death toll. Haniyeh’s assassination, by contrast, puts administration officials in a relatively comfortable position: Israel achieved a key objective in a war Biden is backing without civilian casualties. U.S. officials say they are working to prevent a broader war but stand by Israel’s right to defend itself." . . .

. . ."And here are six people, places and ideas that stand to lose out" . . .  "Israeli hostages and a deal to release them: As recently as a few days ago, U.S. and Israeli officials indicated that they were close to a deal that could see Israeli hostages in Gaza released in exchange for a cessation of hostilities. Haniyeh was negotiating on Hamas’ side; his death seems likely to undercut continuing talks around the more than 100 Israeli hostages who remain in Gaza, of whom dozens are thought to be alive. “How is David safer now?” one hostage family member asked on social media, even as she called Haniyeh “a monster of terror.” But some hostage families praised the killing, saying they hoped it would increase pressure on Hamas to make concessions. U.S. and Israeli officials say they do not want to abandon the negotiations, though John Kirby, Biden’s National Security Council spokesman, said, “Reports coming out of the region certainly don’t make it less complicated.” . . .