A little surreal

http://news.monstersandcritics.com/middleeast/article_1135142.php/Israel_Hamas_PM-designate_could_be_target_for_assassination
It is interesting that an organization, Hamas, dedicated to violent overthrow of a country would consider a threat to reply in kind as "blackmail". While I do, in a sense, agree with that statement, the fact they themselves are participating in these actions, with their self-admittance the threat or use of violence to get their way, is nothing more than blackmail. Does that not remove all legitimacy?
The real irony here is that when Hamas started there WAS a legitamacy to their actions. In fact, the return of Israel to their ancient homeland, while initially peaceful and prosperous in the lte 19th century, turned ugly not too far into the 20th. The development of Israel was done with numerous groups, both Arab and Jewish, very much like Hamas. The names and groups who took part in the wars over Palestine are a veritable whos who of terrorists from the 1930s and 40s.
When did that stop being a legitimate way to war over the area? Never forget, Ariel Sharone was a top commando in similar violence.
Still, as the situation devolves and charges and counter charges of terrorism fly, as suicide bombings are replied to with "precision" missile strikes that do in more civilians than militants. So the path to peace for everyone is to strike and kill and maim and hurt and scare the other. Strange that the "relative obedience to the cease fire by Hamas is considered acceptable...and that the retaliations by Israel are not. The coverage in this country has a slant...as, I would argue, it should to an extent...sadly, the slant is obscuring truth these days.
If I lived in Israel, I would enact much more violence than they do in my struggle to maintain my security. Is it the right answer? No, but that situation is so surreal I don't think there even is a right answer anymore. When the outlaws (Hamas) become THE law, what more can happen that is good?