Does the US really want to declare war on Hizbullah?

Hizbullah clearly has not wanted to declare war or to engage in war with the US during the years of Nasrallah's leadership.  In fact, Hizbullah did not, as far as I can tell, engage in operations against US interests since mid-1980s (the TWA plane was the last attack although Hizbullah says that it never formed as an organization until after 1985, which is a way to distance itself form past attacks).  The publication of the role of the US in the assassination of Mughniyyah in the Washington Post today will lead the party to reconsider its stance toward the US.  It has been clear that Israel has always wanted the US to adopt the same enemies that Israel has.  Hamas has also never engaged in attacks on the US or its interests but Zionists in the US government want the position of the US to mirror that of Israel.  The US role in the assassination should be read in that regard.  That the US decided to adopt Israel's enemies, and to ensure that they become enemies (foolishly or calculatingly) of the US will have consequences that the policy makers who decided to involve the US in the assassination didn't consider.  But, hey, we are talking about the brilliant minds of Bush and Cheney here.  There are several problems with the article in the Post today: 1) why do ignorant US media still insist that Muhammad Husayn Fadlallah was a leader of Hizbullah?  He never was.  2) the chronology of the deeds of Mughniyyah in the chart are not accurate. The kidnapping and killing of Col. Higgens in 1988 was NOT perpetrated by Mughniyyah but by a small off-shoot of Amal Movement called "The Faithful Resistance" led by Mustafa Dirani.