I cannot think of a more contagious debate than the one about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The way you name this conflict is a debate in itself.
Avishai Margalit managed to write an interesting article about this conflict in a recent issue of the New York Review of Books: “Regarding the moral issue of violent struggle, Shulman cites Mordechai Kremnitzer, a law professor at the Hebrew University, whom we both regard as a moral force in Israel: Even if you accept the Palestinian reading of what happened at Camp David and assume that the Israeli proposals were inadequate, still it is impossible to accept the violence they have adopted as their weapon while still faced with an Israeli partner who wanted to reach a solution. It is not clear what the Palestinians want—for us not to be there [i.e., not to exist at all], in the territories, or for us not to be. They have the right to end the occupation, but not at any cost. But the Israeli Right uses Palestinian violence to its own advantage. Thus, worst of all, we may well find ourselves in a paradoxical, soul-destroying situation of having to serve in an army that is bent on illegal acts.”

I doubt – like many others from both the right and the left – if Annapolis will bring a solution. But then again it’s quite a miracle that Olmert and Abbas still exist as leaders of their people.