Things can only get better when the various parties act intelligently rather than reactively.

It is irrational to imagine that violence achieves an end to violence in response. The only result of Israel's last war on Gaza, aside from the enormous destruction and heartbreaking loss of life, most of it of totally innocent people, has been that Hamas is stronger today than it was then. (Though that leaves aside what I find it impossible to avoid seeing as a mainspring for Israel's action - political success for the Natanyahu administration, facing a fresh elections in a few weeks.)

Arguing in terms of where the cycle of violent atrocity and counter-atrocity begins is pointless. The only way to end it is for one side to refuse to continue the cycle. The people with whom peace will be made are the people who have been involved in organising violence. That is always the case. You don't reach a Good Friday Agreement by assassinating the likes of Gerry Hawes and Martin McGuinness (together with any unfortunate people who happen to be near them at the time of your "surgical strike").

The best comment on the killing of al-Jaabari is what Talleyrand said about a political killing carried out by Napoleon: "It was worse than a crime, it was a blunder." And that goes for the whole Gaza policy of Israel. (As well, of course, for the grotesque business of the futile as well as lethal missiles launched so ineffectually by Palestinians.)