[oneolcop]

Just a thought: This is just a battle in the war. If you look at from that point of view, whomever comes out the "winner", the loser will try to get a rematch. In the interim, each side will try to get support from others. Ultimately, there could be a middle-east wide war with the added dimension of international terror. Forgive me if I've stated the obvious.

[Peach]

The only thing I'm not sure about is if Israel comes out appearing to be the loser by not disarming Hezbollah if whether they will try for a rematch.

I can imagine, I guess, that Israel may permit this to get resolved in the relatively near future, but I think one more attack, and the gloves will be off. Of course, I've thought that before, and been quite wrong, but there has to be an end point for Israel just accepting attacks on their civilians, tunnels dug under their land and soldiers kidnapped.

[EvilOverlord]

This is just a battle in the war

In my view, this is all part of the preparations for the battle in Iran.

If the United States or Israel attacked Iran in the past, they could have expected

1) Missile launches against Israel from Iraq under Saddam

2) Missile Launches from Hezbollah into Israel

3) Missile launches from Syria into Israel

4) Missile launches from Iran into Israel

And, possibly a ground assault from any of the above nations, as well as attacks from Hamas.

The US turned this 4-front war for Israel into a 3-front war, and Israel is currently attempting to turn it into a 2-front war. This will only happen if they finish off Hezbolla as a fighting force.

The next question is

1) do we neutralize Syria before attacking Iran

2) Will Syria sit out an attack on Iran

3) Do we take on Syria and Iran simultaneously

Note that this is just the way I see things, but I have no military background, and I have no idea what the US and Israel actually have planned.

Most days it seems like they just take things one day at a time, just like the rest of us.