Comments by "l" (@l-uk3xm) on "Former USS Cole commander reveals what Israel's next 'target set' may be should Iran respond" video.

I am not military so I don't really understand this logic. Israel didn't hit Iran's important sites that would've damaged Iran the most. How is it a wise move? They let them off the hook, where is that wisdom? If Iran chooses to respond, the commander said, Israel will hit them then since this time they've removed their defenses thus exposing them to the next strike. And what exactly would happen if Iran didn't respond or didn't respond immediately? What exactly would happen if by the time Iran does respond, it will repair all the damage done today and reinforce their important sites? Like I said, I am not military, having a really hard time.
1
@briansilva4165 Well, thank you for your detailed reply. Like I said, I am not military and not privy to any other info than that which is available to everybody, but 1. the US is not on Israel's side, otherwise, they wouldn't have provided Iran w/unlimited money while withholding even the promised weaponry from Israel, withholding political backing and pushing Israel to surrender w/o a fight on all fronts. 2. How would hitting Iran hard bring about a war if Iran wouldn't have any weapons left w/which to fight? Iran has no border w/Israel either and can't put boots on the ground. 3. Why would the US be obligated to get involved? B/c they want to? But that would be their choice. 4. The same w/Russia. There have been wars in this region in the past but none evolved into a bigger conflict. So I think that it's just propaganda that aims at stopping Israel from not only winning the war and defending itself, but from its very existence and the US is leading this charge. Just my 2 bucks here.
1