Israel the aggressor - FB conversation

I posted this on FB:

"GAZA (Reuters) – Four members of the same family – four-year-old twin boys and their parents – were killed in an Israeli air strike in Gaza on Monday, the Hamas Health Ministry said."

So the "Hamas Health Ministry" is now a legitimate news source, according to Reuters?

B.R.: Can you give me a brief overview of your perspective of the Israel/Hamas conflict?

Me: Two groups of people who hate each other are bombing the shit out of each other.

B.R.: Oh good, then we share the same perspective. Do you have an allegiance or bias toward one or against the other? And if so, why?

Me: Probably toward Israel. They won the 1967 war, and to the conqueror goes the spoils. But also, they are a tiny nation surrounded by their enemies who want their land, not because they're entitled to it or even need it, but because they want to wipe them out. I frequently end up rooting for the underdog, it seems.

B.R.: Cool, thanks. Have you seen any compelling arguments that Israel is actually the bully in this present-day conflict?

Me: Israel is aggressive when it launches attacks. In a sense I respect that. Much better than the namby-pamby way we waged the Iraq war (not that I supported that war, I didn't. I just figured that once we were there, we ought to have played it to win and kicked ass.) Thing is, the issue is way beyond who started it. Israel has its country, established by acclamation, and their enemies can't stand that. Israel will do what it deems necessary to protect that. We might not agree with their methods, but it's really none of our business. The US needs to keep its nose out of other nations' business. Your perspective?

B.R.: I'm completely impartial; I have neither the information nor the emotional attachment required to take a position. I'm trying to learn more, but the more I learn, the less I want to side with either group. It's very tricky to weigh in on the US' involvement in other countries' military actions. On one hand, I want to intervene in Syria. On the other hand, I don't. I'm very glad we entered World War II, in fact I wish we'd entered sooner. There doesn't seem to be a simple line between the instances we should stay out of and the instances we should enter into. Or at least, with every president, that line either shifts or becomes fuzzier.

Me: I understand the intervention difficulty. WWII, we were attacked. That is a good reason to enter a war. Oil, well, I'm not so sure.