One of the arguments against anti ballistic missile systems during the Cold War was that they encouraged one side to use nuclear weapons without consequences.
When power is wildly asymmetric, you can act without consequence.
Back in April (and again now) some analysts argued that Iran presumed that most of the missiles would be intercepted, making ballistic missiles a viable option for a calibrated, restrained response intended to “send a message” without causing widespread destruction.
And clearing your inventory of old clunkers that have a bad cost-benefit ratio.
… the other one being that the technology of the time could not possibly have achieved the mission — it was just a scam
Whether it was the enemy being scammed, or the taxpayers, was open to interpretation 
ETA: UNIFIL has hundreds of troops from countries Israel probably can’t afford to alienate, including France, Germany, Italy, India and China.
Axios:
Scoop: U.S. wants to use Hezbollah’s weakness to elect new Lebanese president
https://www.axios.com/2024/10/04/israel-lebanon-hezbollah-new-leader-us
