Preemptive war and regime change is still a terrible option. If you actually want to solve the problem you have to get to the core of the problem, and decapitating leadership has a consistent history of making things worse.

Take NK for example, how did it get to where it is now? In the Korean War, America bombed everything. We bombed hospitals, schools, water treatment, power, factories, homes. Douglas MacArthur complained that there was nothing left to bomb. Then we set up a brutal sanctions regime, effectively cutting NK off from the rest of the world for many decades.

The Kim dictatorship tried everything they could think of to lift the strangling sanctions. Diplomacy has made some gains with Russia and China, but very little with the West. The Kim regime has been taught that the only way to receive Western goods is through threats, missile tests, and nuclear capabilities.

If we would decapitate the Kim dictatorship and keep the sanctions regime in place, then another brutal dictatorship would just take their place. I'm certainly not a fan of the Kim dictatorship, but regime change war is not a solution, it would just make everything worse.

I find it interesting you mention Saudi Arabia. They are a client state of America, why would we want to decapitate them? There is a mutually beneficial relationship- we get oil and regional influence, they get military toys and legitimacy. This mutual benefit is so strong that we let them get away with 9/11.

Mentioning ISIS is curious too. ISIS is not a state, so the UN was able to vote to attack them. The UN (along with Iranian forces) did decapitate their leadership, multiple times.

Here I don't agree - I think the 1988 Hamas charter is utterly indefensible.

If the only thing you know about Hamas' history is one line from one charter, then you haven't read enough to form a comprehensive opinion on the subject, and I would encourage you to read more.

Blaming 'older Gazans' for the way they voted is utterly ridiculous. You do know that Gaza has been an open air concentration camp since at least 2012, right? Their vote has little effect on matters. Gaza would still be a concentration camp if Fatah had won instead of Hamas.

And as for the 2006 election that you blame 'older Gazans' for, did you know that election was orchestrated by George W Bush and his "democracy promotion in the middle east"? Are you aware that he was warned Fatah would lose to Hamas? Israel committed many horrific war crimes as they withdrew from Gaza in 2006, so Gazan voters were feeling especially radical at the time. Bush needed a victory so he pushed for early elections. I think Bush has more blame than 'older Gazan voters' for the outcome of this election.

How George W. Bush Helped Hamas Come to Power