I just finished this report last night, along with those "Lessons Learned" pieces on the subject by CSIS - Cordesman. Based off what I read, it appears that Hizb'allah did a considerable amount of damage regardless of the fact as you point out, that there is no mention of the use of mortars or SAMs. However, the report estimates that they were able to engage 48 of 400 tanks that were involved in the operation, and hit over 6,000 homes/business with their rockets, killing or wounding 4800. Thus, while incapable of mitigating the damage done by the Israeli Air Force, they certainly could counter a ground offensive. In the end, our friends the British, Germans, Vietnamese, and Serbs all demonstrated that a determined foe can survive and thrive during a sustained air campaign in the absence of a credible ground threat. In the end, Hizb'allah surely appear to be the "winners" if there was one.
While Hizb'allah is on the short list of FTOs with the US, I definitely think it would cross-over into a different category with the US and the EU if they received a significant quantity of SAMs. I would imagine that the "most-likely" nightmare scenario for most counter-terrorism folks remains a civilian airliner being downed by a missile fired from a lone gunmen (SAM operator).
Bookmarks