If you follow the hype, Hezbollah kidnapped two IDF soldiers in order to force Israel into a prisoner exchange.
It is crazy to believe that.
Just last week, Israel demonstrated its unwillingness to make such deals, and in fact re-invaded Gaza to once again show how heavy a hand it can weild.
So why would Hezbollah think this would be any different?
Answer: They didn't. Israel showed how they would respond with Gaza, and it was exactly how Hezbollah wanted Israel to respond.
This most likely is a direct continuation of the Al Qaida strategy. Al Qaida credits Islamist forces in Afghanistan with bleeding the USSR into its ultimate collapse. Osama has openly stated on several occasions that his strategy is to repeat this with the US, by making us squander our resources chasing Al Qaida throughout the world. Iraq was the biggest gift we could have given Osama, and he has thanked us by not attacking the US since. He hasn't needed to, we are doing everything he wanted us to. If we pull out of Iraq, you can bet he'll start looking for new places to provoke us.
Hezbollah has apparently decided on the same course with Israel. There is no other reasonable explanation for why Hezbollah would pull a kidnapping off immediately after seeing it fail to achieve a prisoner exchange so spectacularly in Gaza.
Israel appears vulnerable to this strategy for the same reasons the US appears vulnerable to this strategy (note that I'm not saying it will ultimately be successful, only that there is an apparent vulnerability). Isreal carries a large foreign debt, and requires additional funds to meet its budget shortfalls every year. Isreal spends about 20% of its national budget directly on defense, and certainly much more on overall security. It has run large deficits for ages, and now even surpasses the US with a national debt over 100% of its GDP.
Israel still believes the heavy hand of its military can intimidate insurgent/terrorist organizations, and that it can sap the will of its enemies by attack their civilians and infrastructure. Why they persist in this belief is unclear, since 50 years of it has utterly failed to bring them security. But it is still reliably in effect, as demonstrated by Gaza.
So Israel now re-enters Lebanon. That didn't work out so well for them the first time, though many hawks in Israel dismiss its ultimate failure to bring peace in the same way hawks in the US deny the failures of Vietnam. Israel spent a fortune occupying southern Lebanon, but northern Israeli setllers still feared rocket attacks and often spent nights in shelters. They lost many hundreds of men in the effort.
Ultimately, the new attacks are unlikely to get their soldiers back, and will not force the government of Lebanon to "crack down" on Hezbollah. The government of Lebanon does not have the power to crack down on Hezbollah, especially when it is also responsible for repairing the damage done to it by Israeli airstrikes. Hezbollah might lose some support from its weak supporters initially, but prolonged airstrikes from Israel will only empower Hezbollah. In this regard, the Israeli strikes are far more likely to create more instability and threat for Israel, not less.
Supporting the bleed out, Israel is already considering a call up of soldiers. This will cost it more money, and weaken the economy at the same time.
There were "proportionately" overwhelming ways Israel could respond to the provocations, but Israel doesn't do proportionate. It consistently weilds sledgehammers for jobs a ballpeen would be better for. As Israeli Security Cabinet Minister Isaac Herzog said today, "We are taking strong measures so that it will be clear to the Lebanese people and government ... that we mean business."
They are totally playing into the hands of their enemies while doing it.
Today, there are reports that Hezbollah wants to transfer the soldiers to Iran. That sounds insane - Iran would be crazy to involve itself so directly. But Hezbollah would love for Israel to strike Iran, as it might provoke Iran and the rest of the mideast to strike back. It would swell the ranks of Hezbollah. It would isolate Israel further. It would cost Israel a fortune.
The common response to criticism of Israeli methods is "Israell has right to defend itself". Well, duh. But it should defend itself smartly, which it consistently has failed to do. It should defend itself in a way that neutralizes the threats against it, not working to empower them. Military responses to terrorism and insurgency have consistently failed to achieve results in the past half century.
Can Israel really bleed itself out? I don't know. The US will support it until the bitter end, but the US is also stretched thin right now. It is interesting to speculate whether this is a coordinated effort to affect both the US and Israel at once, or if Hezbollah simply thinks the US will be less supportive since it is currently pre-occupied. To most Arabs, Egypt would have defeated Israel in 1973 if not for the fast resupply the US gave it for the enormous quantity of equipment egypt initally destroyed. It is possible they even hope for a repeat of the Yom Kippur war in the near future.
Short term, Israel can support this effort for many years. But the Islamists in Afghanistan patiently resisted the USSR for a decade, and if Hezbollah is employing that doctrine now, they have accepted it is a long term strategy. It is a strategy of weakening the enemy for future opportunities and circumstances, not necessarily to deliver a crushing blow at some defined point. In that regards, it may well be successful.