You may or may not be correct in what you say. There is much with which I agree.

I am not sure, however, that "it is not humane to kill...nor a natural instinct. A fear or hate must be installed."

History, i.e. time continuum in which we live, would strongly suggest otherwise as would the fact that we are Primates and, as Animalia, must eat other things.

If you are suggesting that human beings are not born with an inherent tendency to kill their own, I agree. However, we do appear to have an inherent drive for survival and where scarce resources or any of myriad other factors are involved, we will kill to survive and even kill our own species and eat them. Indeed, for some, cannibalism has been a 'norm' of life.

Hate and love are abstract constructs and, as such, open to much variance in definition. Personally, I believe in neither of them and consider most common interpretations and understandings of their designations to be counter-productive to rational and logical understanding of human relationships.

I do agree with you that human beings create all manner of excuses, (which they label: 'reasons'), to justify their behaviours. They do it from an early age and for small or petty actions or views as well as for very serious, damaging and destructive ones.

In my view, the ubiquitous understanding of what constitutes 'love' and its association with a 'God' are completely inconsistent.

Should there be some omnipotent entity, such as various religions claim, then on the basis of history, one cannot conclude that such an entity is anything remotely close to a "God of love". Indeed, the very conflict that motivated my story and the various responses, would not be happening if an omnipotent and loving entity actually exists.

The reality is that religions tend to create division rather than collaboration and togetherness. If one reads the 'sacred' or 'holy' books of the many religions, with or without the imagined same god, (humanity has worshipped over 8000 gods), what one discovers is that war. privilege, horror, persecution and mistreatment by humans of other humans is a constant and primary theme. It is not surprising therefore that in war, it seems that every group has 'God on its side."

This conflict, as has been common throughout history, is primarily about hierarchy and the arrogance of few charismatic influencers acting largely for their own benefit and/or belief and about the survival of many, at least as they see it.

These causes are as true of one side as the other but it is also important to remember that the context and environment that promoted its likelihood was created with the human perfidy of other individual power-brokers who saw advantage for their own nations, (and probably themselves), in acceding to the lobbying of a relatively small zionist group.

These are the very nations that, having given away Palestinian lands to create Israel, now have the gall to defend and support Israel whilst labelling Hamas as terrorists.

You finish your comment by saying: "hardest things in the world is to imagine something that in no way conceives of killing or hate as a solution for killing and hate."

I can't agree with that. As a long time educator, my experience tells me that 'example'; 'positive modelling'; 'acceptance of difference'; honest transparency and examination of events; acting to identify and resolve causes, rather than symptoms; compssion; sharing, equity, and putting others first - i.e. standing in their shoes - are relatively easy things to do and would significantly reduce, if not eliminate world conflict.

"Vengeance is mine" sayeth the Lord. - We don't have to model that and we shouldn't.