The use of civilians as shields seems to escape some that simply see everything Israel does as wrong.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,402483,00.html

Hamas will continue the cycle of "truces" to recruit and Katyusha and Qassam launchings to provoke an israeli response unless something is done.

Much is talked about the "closed border" - yet they do not seem to be running out of missles or other weapons on that end. Interesting.

It would have been better if he just issued the "one president at a time" yarn and let it go at that.

Well, gee whiz, Barach, we're all just "troubled," and have though the entire region a "source of deep concern" for generations now.

Wow! When does the guy do the water walking thing? Is that January 20th - or the day after?

In the meantime

Light 'em up, Israel! What's a few more slaughtered children more or less?

-- doubledave27

They have moved their little yellow star from hanging on a string to becoming an ARMBAND!!

Your arguments are *exactly* the same as those used by the Thatcher government when it refused to negotiate with the political arm of the IRA, Shin Fein. The way forward was a 10+ year negotiation effort which started to marginalize the more extreme factions of the IRA. There are similar splits which can be exploited in Hamas. The problem now is that this action has so inflamed the situation that any negotiations are going to take even longer. As the other commentator said, Obama has dropped the ball.

Are you trying to make us believe that Hamas really puts the care of the Palestinian people before Hamas' political agenda? Really?

Because I don't buy it, and I don't think any educated person does.

If Hamas (or the PLO, for that matter) really cared about food, water and medical care for its people, all they need to do is to say "Stop killing Israelis. Israel has a right to exist. We will work together." I am as heartsick as anyone over the slaughter in Gaza by the Israeli government, but if the Palestinians stopped the terror attacks, it would be over.

What would you do if you were Hamas, you ceased firing, and the people you were elected to represent continued to go without adequate medical care, food, and political/social freedom?

On another note, when was the last civilian death in Israel? Has Hamas actually killed anyone outside of the IDF in the past 4-5 days?

Obama is predictably dropping the ball; he will work to broker a peace agreement in his first term, but when push comes to shove, he's not going to make Israel concede much of anything. If he even considers it, there's always Hillary and Rahm to steer him back to the golden path.

Do you think Hamas would honor a cease-fire? Doesn't seem likely given their refusal to extend the previous cease-fire, and their continued peppering of rockets even when the truce was in effect.

Let me ask it a different way: What would you have Israel do if they cease fire and the rockets keep falling?

And if Hamas wanted a cease-fire they wouldn't have started attacking Israel this month right? They had a cease-fire before attacking.

An immediate cease-fire would stop the deaths of civilians - at least 30 today. The US is preventing a UN resolution for such a cease-fire.

I have no doubt the Administration gave Israel the green light for this entire operation. It has provided a lot more than arms over the years.

Of course Israel has the right to defend itself but not through massive wars to ostensibly target terrorists like this one and Lebanon. Imagine if Britain has invaded Northern Ireland in a similar manner to fight the IRA in the 70's and 80's?

It is idiotic and most likely driven by the upcoming election - and enabled by Bush and his good/evil simplistic decision making.

A sustained peace effort is the only option - Clinton almost managed it - if Bush had continued the process with similar vigor and intelligence I bet we would not be in this position now.

I would not think that Obama would do more or less. Other than rhetoric it's hard to see what he has to offer. Now the mainline of people here will interpret that as a conspiracy, that the Israelis secretly control the US government, etc. But in reality there are few practical options. I suppose we could embargo them. Then the US loses a vital intelligence asset. Moreover many US medical and high tech companies would lose going operations there and all the intellectual capital they garner. It seems like an outside option for the US to bomb Israel. They couldn't very well attack IDF ground troops w/o killing the same Palestinians they purport to save. Bombing inside Israel is, what? A rational pragmatic option? In either case we do still only have one President and the shooting will be over by the 20th. After that, who knows?

of Reagan during the final days of the Carter administration, talking about the American hostages in Iran. Having dueling presidents played right into the hostage-holders' hands. Obama seems smarter than that.

While the president-elect waits for Inauguration Day, he is in kind of a reverse lame duck situation. He has to do as much as he can to take over the reins of government while maintaining a united front to the rest of the world with the sitting president.

It would be extremely difficult to discuss any definition of culpability for the situation in Gaza that is not in line with that coming from the White House. Even when your predecessor it one of the worst presidents in the history of The Republic, the president-elect must avoid contradicting his foreign policy.

My guess is that Obama plans to handle it very differently. Once he is officially in charge, he will begin immediately to implement those new plans.

Until that time he contradicts the current White House at the country's peril. Such an act would immediately polarize the world into pro-Bush and pro-Obama factions, to the detriment of all.

So Obama says nothing. When he finally speaks, he decries the deaths of civilians on both sides, and declares that he is working towards readiness for the 20th.

What else could he say? I don't want Bush and Obama publicly battling over foreign policy. That would drag Obama down to Bush's level, make him look as weak as Bush. I would like a strongish president for a change, thank you.

I am sorry for all who are suffering and dying on both sides. I wish it were feasible for Obama to do something but there is nothing. Bush wins by default until the 20th. Obama wins by default after the 20th. We have to wait.