Lebanese politics are famously labyrinthian, shaped as they are by all sorts of complex ethno-sectarian dynamics. But, at its best, Lebanon is a vibrant democracy. And this despite the myriad ways Iran and Syria attempt to interfere in her affairs via Hizbullah. Yet it’s clear that for the majority of the people and in spite of Iran’s machinations, Hizbullah’s vision for the country is unacceptable.

And Eamonn, you are correct: the results are, indeed, a direct rebuttal to all those observers who claimed that 2006 bolstered Hizbullah’s credibility and allowed it to consolidate its power base in Lebanon. BUT, I would still hesitate to say that, mutatis mutandis, the same outcome would necessarily result were Israel to preemptively attack Iran. Iran is not Lebanon. Sure, the educated and urban segments of Iranian society may, in the event of a strike, reason that the IRI, not Israel, is ultimately to blame (for nuclear brinksmanship, for belligerent rhetoric, etc. etc.).

Of course, this is all speculative and I may yet turn out to be wrong. Anyway, even if I were right, the benefits associated with a preemptive strike may far outweigh such costs from an ‘existential security’ perspective.