As has already been explained elsewhere, reasonable people have no dog in the current
flare-up over Israel. It goes without saying though, that many folks are not that astute:

I find myself inescapably drawn to the notion that not only is the Israeli action warranted, I now think there is no good reason the IDF should avoid attacking targets of strategic value to Hezbollah which are located in non-Hezbollah areas. Moreover, I would urge them to follow the logic of that position and start striking targets in Syria and (above all) in Iran in order to impose a cost on those governments for their actions in enabling Hezbollah.

Much as I support the idea of a modernist secular Lebanon, perhaps that is simply not within the power of non-Islamists in Lebanon to deliver until military realities have altered the political realities. In short, if the other factions within Lebanon do not want Israel to completely demolish the national infrastructure that Hezbollah also uses, they need to realise that they, as well as Israel, need to declare war on Hezbollah. As long as ports, roads and airfields in Lebanon can be used by Hezbollah, neutrality is simply not an option for anyone. (emphasis mine)

Uh, yeah, because that is working so well in Iraq…

What isn’t realized by hawkish types is that relations are never as obvious as they think. It’s not a matter of some middle easterners being super-liberal & others being stereotypical bloodthirsty animals of some sort, there’s a spectrum. Hezbollah actually has enough support in Lebanon that it holds seats in the Parliament there, as if they were a regular political party. Ask yourself: is that because the Lebanese are a bunch of jihadist whackos? There are some, but anyone who remembers the sea of cleavage visible in photos from the much-publicized protests of Syrian influence knows they don’t rule the roost.

From here, it looks like Hezbollah has the position it does because some of the lebanese think they’re serving a defense purpose — despite them obviously being inadequete for such. In effect, they’re running a protection racket. Think about it: when something happens on the border between Lebanon & Israel — even if they in fact started it — they point to it as proof that they’re needed. It works similar to how the mafia would send some thug to a store they wanted to extort to rough up the owner, after which their people would show up to offer “help”.
Now, considering their role, would escalating attacks on Lebanon’s infrastructure & increasing the amount of collateral damage innocent people caught in the crossfire convince people in the middle of that spectrum that they should toss Hezbollah? Or would they say to themselves “sure, Hezbollah kills innocent people over there, but the Israelis are killing innocent people here”?

A note: I am NOT — NOT!!! — in any way whatsoever saying that they are justified, nor that rating lebanese lives over israeli lives is morally correct. If it were me….well, I’d be getting the hell out of Lebanon. All I’m saying is, the way people tend to think they underrate what their neighbors do to them and overrate what “outsiders” do. Ideally, Hezbollah would be destroyed by the lebanese, leaving israel completely out of the matter: needless to say, it’s kinda too late for that. However, considering it some sort of aid to the liberals of their society is ridiculous, since the side effects may well discredit them in the eyes of fence-sitters on the matter.