[itishappy]

> But if this attack - that killed over a dozen militants (and in some Arabic telegram channels, possibly over 40 militants are being said) and injured 3000 more - prevents even one more attack like that which Hezbollah killed 12 Israeli children two months ago, then it was an astounding success.

This assumption could use some supporting evidence. We've been here before.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b5/Mission_...

[dotancohen]

The international news channels talk about a dozen dead Hezbollah. But the Arabic channels are talking about tens of dead militants, which they find unusual because such organizations (not Hezbollah specifically) usually inflate casualties. But Hezbollah, it seems (from what they say on the Arabic channels, I really don't know if it is correct or not) does not inflate casualties and almost always gives a name and a picture of every martyr. So them actually hiding casualties is unusual (among militant groups, not specifically Hezbollah).

[itishappy]

Hezbollah has tens of thousands of fighters. Hundreds of deaths, even thousands of injuries, would impact about 10-20% of their force. Don't get me wrong, that's a significant disruption! But will that really "prevent even one more attack like that which Hezbollah killed 12 Israeli children"?

It's been 23 years since the US kicked off the war on terror, and 21 years since the "mission accomplished" speech, so I think it's worth asking: How'd we do?

[simoncion]

Are the international news channels giving reliable estimates for the number of wounded Hezbollah? It strikes me as pretty important to know how many of the booby trapped devices failed to harm their intended targets and harmed a bystander instead.