Robb's Read

Robb points out a key to Hizbullah's strength:

They [Hizbullah] are as happy to fight under occupation as they are to rule temporary autonomous zones in Lebanon (same goes for Hamas). Their primary loyalties are actually strengthened under occupation, unlike a state that requires territorial control, a conventional military, and a functional economy for legitimacy. Defeating them conventionally won't matter. They will merely move to guerrilla warfare.

Which is why for myself, and many other watchers of the conflict I've conversed with over the last 48 hours, it seems like Hizbullah's (and by implication, Iran's) goal here is to bog down Israel into guerrilla warfare in Southern Lebanon (and if they can get Hamas to play likewise, all the better to tie them with strings in Gaza as well).

With the US already on overload in Iraq, sucking Israel into a reoccupation plays to the strength of "the resistance"... more importantly, it puts Iran firmly in control of the timetable for the next 6-8 months. That's why the recent Ghajar actions (though predictable) are at least worrisome. Israel's reaction was completely known, and the test run of this back in 12/2005 provided the color to Hizbullah and Iran.

I don't see the US and Israel doing anything other than flying on a rather disorganized auto-pilot at this point. They aren't setting the terms, and if the playbook isn't quickly changed, Iran will be holding yet another face card.