Just two, perhaps pedantic points:

Ehud Barack was Israeli PM in 2000, not Olmert. Barak is also the current defense minister.

The Israeli strike was not in retaliation to the killing of one Israeli, rather an effort to end the months and years of Hamas rocket attacks.

"then Prime Minister Ehud Olmert (the current defense minister)"

I believe you mean Ehud Barak

The Hamas charter states that Israel shall exist until Islam destroys it.

Why should the United States waste any of its diplomatic resources "negotiating" with such a party?

For example, I would rather have my Secretary of State negotiating more mutually beneficial trade agreements with Chile and Argentina.

I would wish for Hamas to behave in a way that could credibly lead to peaceful coexistence with Israel. But I also would wish for Bush never to have attacked Iraq. The latter can not possibly happen and the former seems almost equally impossible.

Why is this being framed as what Hillary has to do to jumpstart peace negotiations? Why isn't it being framed as what Hamas has to do to jumpstart them? If their starting point for "peace negotiations" is that they're calling for Israel to be destroyed, and they state ahead of time that that point is non-negotiable, then what kind of a moron would try to negotiate peace with them?

It's just illogical, and would be a waste of our precious resources.

Hamas schmamas. The best thing to do would be for the US to cut off all foreign aid to Israel until they agree to a humane peace with the embattered Palestinians. People turn to extremist groups because Israel is building a wall around them, confiscating their land through settlements, diverting water and essential goods away from Gaza. Basically keeping the people in a state of dire poverty. Hamas fills these needs, so of course the people vote for it. If the standard of living in the Palestinian territories was what it is in Israel, the violence would abate. People turn to desperate measures when they are living in desperate straits. Many Israelis wish for peace with Palestine, but unfortunately the radical elements are running the Israeli government. American taxpayers should be ashamed that their taxes are being given to warmongers.

Here here

Oops. It was Ehud Barak, not Ehud Olmert, who was Prime Minister in 2000 (and Defense Minister today).

When Hamas learns that Israel includes people of "the book" as Mohammed put it and renounces violence and terrorism, and the moderate Muslims police the radicals giving them no shelter or quarter, only then will there be negotiations for peace. Otherwise, the Muslims are not genuine in wanting peace.and are cherry picking the most homicidal parts of their book for evil means.

It's hard not to be pessimistic. How long have these people been fighting? 3000 years? I realize it's a lot more complicated than that, but how does one not conclude that that's what this is really about? One incident after another, starting all the way back in biblical times has written hatred and animosity toward one another into the very cultural DNA of both of these peoples. How in the world WOULD they live in peace? They've literally hated each other for so long they don't know how to do anything else.

I'm no conservative, what if they just can't? What if there's no way that these two groups are ever going to get along? What if the world's not big enough for the both of them? What then?

Here is another "neutral Muslim" writing about the ME conflict like he's not taking sides.

Hamas has been firing rockets on a daily basis into Israel without provocation for 3 years now making life unbearable. No one reports on it and nobody complains until Israel strikes back.

When the Lebanese army needed to fight Palesinian extreemists in one of their refugee camps it took them 8 months and they distroyed the whole camp displacing 60K people.The Muslim and arab world didin't say shit. The job Israel has to do is 100 times more difficult.

The author should just state honestly "I hate the Jews and whatever is done to them, they have no right to fight back" instead of pretending to be neutral.

And to the last poster. It's not 3000 years. Islam is about 1400 years old and for most of it's history it has actually been OK to the Jews, relatively speaking. If you don't have something smart to say try to shut up.

The people who live in the Gaza Strip are some of the poorest, least represented people on earth. They have a non-functioning economy, no freedom of movement, very little opportunity. What Israel is doing is lopsided, premeditated, and lethal. You want Hamas out so you obliterate a refugee shelter? Israel has a great intelligence agency and state-of-the-art weaponry. The Palestinians have sling-shots and pipe-bombs. This is David and Goliath.

Strangely enough, these people have not been fighting each other for 3000 years.There have been extended periods during which they not only coexisted but worked with each other.
During the 15th century, the Arabs of Spain and North Africa were the "warriors" of that part of rhe world and the Jews handled their business matters for them and they lived together in harmony and peace. The problem today is that Israel has to defend their homeland against the Arab desire to make that entire area of the world Muslim. I think it unlikely that the problem will ever be resolved and Israel will eventually be facing a crisis when the Israeli Arabs, whose birth rate is in excess of 6.2 per family begin to outnumber the Jews whose birthrate (like most Western countries) is under 2.

A gordian knot which looks highly unlikely to be resolved.

I find it interesting that this piece is titled, "Hillary's Gaza Problem" while the other headline is "Obama's Gaza Challenge." Who's president here?

Hey Lizzzz - Gaza exists only because the Jews pulled out some two or three years ago and no Arab country is willing to absorb these people and those of the West bank into their general populations

As for what Israel is doing, how else to respond to the continual rockets that Israel has been exposed to? Soon, the Arabs of Gaza will be equipted with rockets capable of reaching even more distant targets and exposing more Israelis to the danger. How would you respond to that kind of terror? The Israeli response is the only language they nderstand.

Israel shouldn't take their anger out on civilians, but the Palestinians need to mobilize and do something about Hamas. If they won't fix the problem, the Israelis will attempt to...and that's just the way it is.

How can one author get so many things wrong? A blitzkreig would kill 330 people an hour, not over three days. The 'carnage' is not 'ostensibly' in retaliation for one death; military action is being taken against Hamas to end thousands of rocket attacks over years. The Obama administration was already saddled with The Middle East; Israel defending its citizens adds nothing new. The 'danger' of the 'death' of the peace process is rhetorical nonsense; thousands of rocket attacks bely any IslamoArab-participation in any peace process. Any victory in February's elections by the Israeli Right is made *less* likely by Israel defending itself, not more; Israelis are accustomed to being shot at, but they are not accustomed to not shooting back. If Israelis believe that the international community will support defensive action, they are *more* likely to pursue a two-state solution, not less.