This is where your logic and case falls short. If you maim or murder someone with a billion dollar weapon, or you maim or kill them by biting their jugular with your teeth, or randomly maim or kill them with an exploding, home made bomb, they are just as maimed or dead. So, who are you appealing to with the idea that expensive, sophisticated weapons causing human misery is somehow worse than the human misery from death by primitive weapons?
Sophisticated weapons are supposed to hit their targets precisely. Why do they end up hitting, if not intentionally targeting, crowded civilian neighbourhoods?? Israel says its targets (mind you, only Israel allows political assassination, even on foreign land) hide behind civilians. Well, they don't. They live there. It's exactly as suicide bombers blowing up restaurants frequented by Israeli military personnel. The only difference is Israel can target militants in action away from civilians while Palestinians can't target Israeli soldiers in action by their primitive projectiles.
Your prior argument regarding the reason why the Palestinians have not built up Gaza and made it a better place to live, which was that the Gaza strip was occupied, is also flawed. Since the Palestinians have been living their for so long, wouldn't it follow that before the area was occupied it could have been built up?
We have to also go back in history a bit. In 1948, Gaza Strip received scores and scores of refugees expelled from the land now known as Israel. Today, refugees make up two thirds of the population. In comparison, the number of refugees in the West Bank was considerably less and the West Bank is much larger, therefore, conditions there are much better. This is another important factor. The occupation is gone now, but a lot of work is still to be done and the previous governments didn't do much and the world didn't mind as long as the peace talks with Israel were carried on. Certainly, the current blockade didn't help at all. Israel made sure Hamas will not be able to do anything.
I visited Gaza in the 1980s. I remember my uncles, who were in their 20s then, would arrange to clean the streets with the youth of the neighbourhood eevry now and then. That was something they could do so they did it but what about the sewage and other municipal things that were in terrible negligence by Israel?
I return to my prior analysis. The "Palestinian People" have yet to be a coherent group, coherent enough to establish a stable political identity with leaders empowered to make binding decisions other than to perpetuate the chaos and violence. Until that happens there can be no peace. If Hamas is the means to that political identity and stability and authority, more power to them. I don't have any money bet on the outcome, and would prefer the US would just butt out. As long as there is no real political authority, there will be no peace. As long as one "authority" proclaims peace while another promotes violence and goes untouched, there is no credibility for the one proclaiming peace.
I don't know what you mean by Palestinians having to be a coherent group. If you mean politically, I think Palestinians, like any other people, have the right to political diversity. The last thing we want our much waited state to be is another dictatorship in the Middle East. When Hamas was first elected, I remember friends from Egypt, Syria, Iraq, praying for the day when opposition parties in their countries can achieve such progress. It's a shame now that even the US that have always promoted democracy is pressuring Hamas to step down by putting more pressure on people, some of whom have not even voted for Hamas in the first place.
There are two ways to go. If Israel really wants peace then it's time to make some compromise and give Palestinian negotiators something real to take to their people. The Quartet or whoever should make sure that donor money goes to Palestinian people not some bank accounts of peace negotiators just because they're friends of Israel's, else people will elect Hamas again.