It's the worst it's been for a long time.
One thing I personally want people to understand is that the Northern Ireland "peace" process is NOT a model that can work in Israel, Gaza and West Bank. One of the reasons for that is PIRA were very much on the ropes, so the security forces achieved their ends. A terrorist group doesn't go from wanting outright victory to agreeing to a peace process out of the goodness of their hearts. Now, the reason you don't really hear the British Government making explicit the role of the security forces in the peace process is because our Government has been pushing the propaganda of the peace since 1998. Something we know from a document some years ago where the Government used the media to push that. There is nothing in the Belfast Agreement that concedes a single demand to PSF/PIRA they spent decades murdering.
Hamas, on the other hand, has not been infiltrated and weakened from the inside out the way PIRA was. Hamas is still strong enough to carry out terrorist attacks for a long time to come yet. Today was a surprise attack on Israel which, from Hamas point of view, worked.
But Israel will not make the same mistake twice. You have to remember Israel is very good at security and counter-terrorism because it has had to be with FIVE hostile States surrounding it. The Arab world isn't exactly in favour of Israel's right to exist as a State.
Combine that with how Hamas uses civilians and civilian infrastructure as a shield against Israeli attacks in order to attack Israel via rockets, lawfare and global propaganda.
You can appreciate how and why Israel is well armed in a variety of ways.
Hamas cannot defeat Israel, but Israel has the capability to defeat Hamas. However, Israel is constrained by Hamas use of lawfare and global propaganda which seeks out useful idiots globally, especially in the West,to support Hamas.
As I said to the OP @mids2019 earlier, how do you think Israel can show its targeting Hamas when Hamas are using civilians as a protective shield?
So, Hamas thinks its winning the propaganda war and that sustains its ideology of "Palestine will be free from the river to the sea". If this sounds like a threat, the Israelis certainly take it that way based on history. For example, in 1966, Syrian leader Hafez Al-Assad, insisted in no uncertain terms that, “We shall only accept war and the restoration of the usurped land … to oust you, aggressors, and throw you into the sea for good.”
If those who advocate a "free Palestine" really believe it doesn't mean this, can they explain why the very slogan does NOT suggest a unity of Israelis and Palestinians?
The reality is those who are pro-"free Palestine" believe the Israeli Jewish population shouldn't be in the Middle East. If they did, their rhetoric would stress a unity of both peoples who both have long history in the Middle East.
The slogan itself is similar to PIRAs propaganda of pushing the Brits into the Irish Sea. And that didn't mean the Government or Army alone as it included Protestants and Catholic "collaborators".
Make no mistake, the Northern Ireland conflict is nowhere near as complex or as complicated as the Israeli-Palestinian one. It's popular to connect the two, but it doesn't hold up as they are very different.