Any collateral damage here is orders of magnitude less than what Israel has done. There’s no debating that.

I don't have to debate that point, because it addresses an argument I didn't make. The problem is how deeply unmoored your argument is from reality. Exactly why is it that you believe Hezbollah's attacks are characterized by a high degree of targeting? It's clearly not true. Can you explain the logic and the sourcing you used to make that claim?

I already explained it with video evidence. I’m not sure why you hate Hezbollah so much, but I don’t share your animus. In fact I’d consider them an ally from an enemy of my enemy perspective. You don’t have to agree, but that’s my POV.

You didn't, at all. I didn't look at the videos you provided; I simply stipulate that they're real and depict what you say they depict. That doesn't demonstrate anything at all about Hezbollah's rules of engagement. When they have a clear firing solution on an IDF tank, they take the shot? Ok. And?

At the point where you're declaring Hezbollah a moral ally, I think the conversation has run to its logical terminus. Ask the Sunni Arabs in Syria how allied they feel with Hezbollah.

It isn't collateral damage. Hezbollah's goal is to kill Israeli civilians.

Unfortunately, the IDF also doctrinally enshrines killing Israelis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannibal_Directive

Accountability on both sides is needed, for the violence to end.

I don't understand how that is relevant to this situation.