I don't actually want a two state solution, I want all of Palestine in Palestinian hands. But if I thought there was the slightest chance of a two state agreement that gave Palestinians a chance to form a viable state I would call for that. There isn't, so of the two wildly unrealistic options I'm going to call for the one I actually want instead of the one which is "more" realistic, whatever that means if you know it is not going to happen.

[–] usernamesaredifficul@hexbear.net 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Eventually Israel are going to have to give in something because there are about as many Palestinians as Israelis so they can't maintain this level of oppression forever. They also can't put the palestinians in death camps because of the level of arab backlash they would face (pre Ukraine I also would have said this might upset western support) so the eventual result will have to be some kind of two state solution as things can't be unsustainable forever. I hope that's now instead of a hundred years from now. But in Israel the government are all hardline fanatics so them taking the obvious solution seems unlikely. Western support for Israel obviously extends the time they can maintain the current state of affairs as well

[–] Utter_Karate@hexbear.net 6 points 2 years ago

They can do, and are doing, a slow genocide. And even that phrasing depends heavily on what you consider "slow". That will absolutely turn hot before they agree to anything even approaching a realistic solution. In 2018 they killed about 1.5 % of the Palestinian population for peacefully protesting. This year will be much worse. But if we just disagree about how realistic certain unpalatable compromises are and not about how morally all of Palestine should belong to Palestine we can just agree to disagree.