Hizbullah is still something of a question. Many people want to link their actions directly to Tehran. The only evidence they have, however, is the fact that Hizbullah is close to Iran and gets weapons from them. By that logic, the United States must be responsible for the Israeli assault on Lebanon, something none of these commentators are suggesting. Furthermore, in order for Iran to demonstrate Hizbullah's military capacity, they would have had to foresee the scale of Israel's response, and if they did that, then it's not clear why Hizbullah would go along with it given the price they are paying. If foreign interests are involved, and Husni Mubarak definitely claims there are, then Syria seems much more likely to be the major player, and certainly its interests align more closely with those of Hizbullah regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Lebanese politics.
Finally, Juan Cole has a good post for the "I Hate Everybody" school of thought. Because two of his specialties are Shi'ism and Lebanon, I take his opinion pretty seriously.
(Crossposted to American Footprints.)