The two are hardly the same, not morally equivalent in any way. It is superficial to the extreme to say they both do bad things, or to use that sappy phrase, “cycle of violence,” which implies they are equally culpable. Hamas is evil and wishes to destroy Israel and murder Israelis; Israel tries to defend itself, while engaging in the most civilized restraint and making generous and often dangerous compromises time after time. Every time, agreements are broken by its enemies and the aggression by the enemies continues. (Kind of like the Soviet Union, which is not merely coincidental since those who supported Israel's enemies over Israel also in the past supported the Soviets over the USA and demanded we make one-way compromises and concessions, as if we, like Israel, were the bad guys.)

This is a chicken and egg story. Who did what to whom first. Which is action and which is reaction.

Hamas says terrible things and some Israeliis have said terrible things.
The only relevant thing now is how to break out of the impasse,. Or do we jjust continue the cycle of violence until it escaltes beyond control.?

No one refutes that suicide bombers are reprehensible.
Israel, like all countriess, has a number of choices, however, regarding methods used to stop attacks. Some are counterprocuctive, and i that's something Israel and its supporters should reconsider.
Some methods currently used to counterr terrorism end in producing more terrorism, and the popularity of Hamas grows. That tells me that some current strategies are counterproductive. and should be reexamined.

If the end goal is peace, not retribuiton, then it really is time to appraoch the problem with fresh thinking.
If the end goal is retribution, then there is nothing to talk about or xomplain about.

Zahar: We have 200,000 suicide bombers
Hamas leader says Israel will pay a heavy price if it rejects the Egyptian cease-fire initiative.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1208...

Not talking, on the other hand, is much more likely to produce bi-lateral paranoia and otherwise preventable overreacions. I've heard, speculation, for example, that one reason Iran is so tenaciously pursuing its nuclear program is that it fears an attack by the US, especially after the Axis-of-Evil talk in the wake of the Iraq invasion.,
There is no way to know if talking could have changed Iran'ts course, but the results couldn't have been worse that what not-talking has produced.

Now, of course, the challenges are much greater. Once an opportunity is lost, it's lost forever.