Public sentiment regarding the Israel-Palestine conflict is sharply polarized. There are strong expressions of support for Israeli military actions against Hamas, mixed with profound concerns about civilian casualties and the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. While some commenters advocate for a decisive military approach to eliminate Hamas, a significant number criticize Israeli actions as genocidal and demand genuine peace that includes Palestinian voices. Overall, a notable mistrust of international negotiations, particularly those perceived to favor Israel, pervades the discourse, resulting in a profound demand for justice and accountability for Palestinian suffering.

Israel

Palestinians

United States

International Community

Post is flaired DISCUSSION. You are free to discuss &amp; debate the topic provided by OP

Please report bad faith commenters 

Your reply with your politics to my mod post is important to me. Please enjoy this elevator music until a human emerges to deal with your reply in  …  never.

VAWNavyVet

“A Trump economic development plan to rebuild and energize Gaza “ so casinos and tacky hotels?

surfryhder

Trump's too involved in the recovery, meaning it's going to be a massively corrupt failure.

Also, ehmm what the fuck:

&gt; "Board of Peace," which will be headed and chaired by President Donald J. Trump

Lets_Kick_Some_Ice

You give up all your guns

We agree to pretty please not kill you while you' re disarmed

We agree to pretty please let you come back when you leave.

we agree to pretty please let you maybe sorta kinda have a state sometime soon but we might say no.

Huh. I wonder why no one believes the US or Israel when they make a deal with a dark skinned owner of land for ownership ...

BigNorseWolf

Frankly - if implemented - it is a brilliant plan if both sides are **held to account**.

In exchange for peace, eventually, Israel must lift the blockade.

**NO ONE IS LEAVING** \- Neither Israelis or Arabs, neither Christians, Muslims, or Jews.

I support the plan fully.

 . . . .

Key points:

1. Providing a security guarantee - for both sides.

2. Rebuilding Gaza

3. Providing the Palestinians the dignity of self determination and a pathway to independence or at least autonomy

4. Accountability measures. **This one is the most difficult**

5. Mutual recognition of the existence of both sides.

neosituation_unknown

There's a whole bunch of stuff in here that sounds like Gaza having an Israel-run puppet government &amp; not a lot that sounds like enforceable guarantees of security for residents. I don't see this working.

Ace_of_Sevens

No way in a million universes will it be agreed upon, nor would it be followed if they did agree upon it, and even if it did get followed Trump can't be trusted to be involved in it.

Also there's no way Hamas just decides to voluntarily not be in power anymore. That's a joke. Why would they possibly agree to that? The best thing they get out of it is maybe some of them won't be jailed? What would make them give up control for that?

soloon

Good "peace plan" everyone, see yall for next one at the usual time again two weeks from now?

Wiru_The_Wexican

Its basically the same as his 60 or 70 "Ukrainian peace plans" in that he still hasn't figured out you cant have a peace plan unless you actually negotiate with *both* sides.


He keeps trying to negotiate with one, reaches an agreement they like, then seems shocked when the side he didn't talk to rejects it.

Like who was actually running the Trump administration all these years? Cause this guy doesn't look like he understands business at the high school level.

VanguardAvenger

It is a question if this plan gets followed through or not. During the Oslo Accords, Israel never stopped with settlement expansion in the occupied territories.

fuggitdude22

I could do without Trump sticking his name into it every other line.

I think it's a pretty fair deal given current battlefield conditions and war aims. Hamas thinks they can isolate Israel but unless a massive, flashy, world changing event is caused by Israel I don't see U.S. aid ending, ever. Israel cannot hope to actually absorb Gaza without a complete genocide which would destroy their economy. The best either side can hope for is a peace that gives them both part of what they want.

Do I think Hamas will go for it? No, not in a million years and not if you gave every single member ten million dollars. Their war aim is the complete destruction of the Israeli state and the United States just won't let that happen, not to mention bigger, better nations have tried and they failed every single time.

SMSaltKing

Trusting BB is for fools. Let me get a transcript of what he says about this in hebrew. That will be closer to the truth. The best Palestinians can hope for is being slaves in the Trump resort they are going to build.

Truth-Seeker916

This is just a wishlists for Donald lmao. 0 chance Hamas agrees and actually abides.

Hot_Ambition_6457

What do I think? I think it will last just about as long as the last one.

DarkMagickan

There is plan but Palestine was not in the discussions.

So as trump said they can take it  or we blow them up.

Human life means nothing to him.

MelissaMead

I don't like it.

It denies Gazans a democratic say in this process.  Instead it brings in foreign people, governments, and institutions to come and govern Gaza.  Gazans should not accept this.

It tells entire political parties that they are not allowed to participate in government because they are "terrorists". When we all know the word "terrorist" is just code for a party who is against American and Israeli interests and is willing to fight the occupation. The people of Gaza should decide who does and doesn't get to govern Gaza.  Not Donald Trump, Israel, or other foreign parties.

It has a double standard.  Gazans are forced to completely give all their arms and defensive capacities, and to disband their militias and militaries.  While Israel gets to keep its army.  Gazans cannot have self determination or even democratic control over their own territory if they cannot even have arms and an army to defend their borders.  To ask a people who have been bombed to smithereens and have lost as many as 200k of their population to a genocide to completely disarm themselves is egregious.

It does not explain what the consequences will be for Israel if they violate the treaty, which they will inevitably.

JadeHarley0

It's not a peace plan when Trump and Netanyahu are simply negotiating with themselves. It's another pr scam so they can claim they did something. 

Remember, Hamas agreed to a previous deal and Netanyahu ignored that and attacked Gaza city.

GitmoGrrl1

I think he’s involving it too much directly in the development of Gaza (especiallly given that he’s heading the board described in the plan) considering his son in law has stated wanting to turn it into a resort.  It would be more credible if it was more at arm’s length.

Gogs85

Big picture, if it happens if will be great. However I don't trust neti or rump to get this done

PropagandaX

You know how when you're younger you draft up a plan to make the most epic hotwheel track and how you're going to get all these tracks together that you don't have yet, and then you forget to include your parents in on those plans so without them buying the new sets your plans go no where. I feel like this is that situation. 

It would be a great idea if. Maybe everyone involved was agreeable to it. The first problem is you have a lot of international partners who have to take on a lot of responsibilities including potentially housing radicals. Which if you don't want them your partners don't want them. Second a large part of this is Hamas has to agree to disarm and withdraw, and dismantle, and then idk evaporate? How do you get it so Hamas disbands and never engages in public life again in any form. Even if you disband Hamas eventually the members will renengage in society and run for office. Plus you're asking them to go away because they are inconvenient for you. Not probable no matter how much killing continues. 

All in all it's a great plan if everyone is onboard, I don't think everyone will be onboard since they didn't negotiate this plan, they dictated this plan and then assumed everyone would agree. Angry guys willing to die to see you die don't work by dictate.

Low-Cauliflower-805

Nearby-Complaint

Trump and Blair are going to get to run a „country“ and play diplomats for a long time!

Pristine_Routine_464

Trump and Netanyahu bombed their counter party mid negotiations multiple times and hamas is a terrorist organization, just by nature of the parties involved its hard to imagine a 'good deal' and a trustworthy one, and even if you could its difficult to imagine one holding. 

  
if you could magically put that aside, it stops people from being bombed and frees people who have been held hostage. realistically, thats about as good an outcome as you're going to get in the short term.

Healthy_Razzmatazz38

I’m skeptical 
But all Arab countries accepting it + European + Israel + turkey makes me more hopeful.
The only two major players against it is Iran and Hamas which are both in poor condition

asafg8

I'm just sad.


Why does Gaza have to be the one place on Earth where they can't vote, can't travel, can't decide how their homes are rebuilt, can't get justice for their genocide, and instead get a foreign government forced on them? 


What is wrong with this world?

OdielSax

Forward-Past-792

It seems pretty one-sided. For example:

"A guarantee will be provided by regional partners to ensure that Hamas, and the factions, comply with their obligations and that New Gaza poses no threat to its neighbors or its people."

I don't see any verbiage about ensuring that Israel poses no threat to its neighbors. Israel is engaged in a slow-motion invasion and ethnic cleansing of the West Bank. They get to keep doing that? 

There's lots of talk about rebuilding Gaza, who pays for that? 

"For every Israeli hostage whose remains are released, Israel will release the remains of 15 deceased Gazans."

Well, Israel has killed 65,000 Gazans so far, most of them women and children. Hamas has 20 hostages, so Israel commits to releasing the remains of 300 Gazans? What about the other 60,000? 

"This committee will be made up of qualified Palestinians and international experts, with oversight and supervision by a new international transitional body, the "Board of Peace," which will be headed and chaired by President Donald J. Trump,"

Gaza is under the new committee, which is under Trump and other non Palestinians? So who's really in charge? Doesn't sound like the Palestinians will be.

"the conditions may finally be in place for a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood"

Oh, right, if everything goes well, the Palestinians might have a pathway to self determination, no promises though.

It sounds to me like Trump wants Gaza for his economic development playground. The Gazans if they are lucky can get jobs working in his hotels and casinos.

billpalto

If the biggest liar president in US history follows through on the proposal  as written, good deal.

But I suspect it's just cover for a piece plan - Trump gets a big piece, Israel gets a big piece, and the Palestinians get screwed.

dkorabell

shouldhavekeptgiles

**A lot** of Palestinians on the internet, minus some centrist leaning ones such as Ahmed Alkhatib, are dead set **against** it. They think the Arab stabilization force is a disguise and will be used by Israel, they also say that the withdraw to the Gaza border isn't fast enough and Hamas should not be forced to disarm at all. I get some of the concerns, they are an oppressed and impoverished group, but  rarely do you see people being "genocided" refuse and not take a deal that would stop the bombs, get prisoners back and have the enemy forces out the door. You would think the idea of an Arab-led stabilization force would be welcomed but it appears it is not? This isn't about a return to Gaza pre-10/7.  Neither the Israelis nor Palestinians want that. Israel wants more security guarantees and the Palestinians think these infringe on their rights as a whole. Secondly, let's be honest, 60% or more "Gazans" are actually from what is now Israel and are still insistent about a right of return to what they see as their land in Israel proper. This is difficult to compare with Kosovo yet there are many parallels. I think most Gazans just want the bombs to stop, IDF to leave and rebuilding to normalcy despite what the Palestinian diaspora and leftist big wigs say. We will see if Hamas is willing to listen to the voices in the territory they claim to govern or to appease the wider Arab consensus of continued armed struggle hasta la victoria o muerte.

Zealousideal_Rice478

Inevitable-Way-6599

Both sides should accept it and stop fighting. I'm not thrilled with sending money to rebuild Gaza though.

RogueCoon

I don't completely love it but I'm glad Israel accepted.  I don't expect hamas to but then don't complain when Israel finishes the job

metsnfins

Its amazing to see people go, this plan isnt favorable enough to the Palestinians which just in effect means continue the war and they keep dying.

Far_Introduction3083

Israel can't be trusted to keep a ceasefire because it has always broken every ceasefire either actively by just simply breaking it or by creating circumstances that require other people to break them in order just to survive.

BitOBear

Completely one sided and Netanyahu, if he doesn't stand trial, will continue to attack and harrass the non-jews of the middle East

ritzcrv

Let’s see what the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, neighboring Arab states like Egypt and Jordan, influential Arab states such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia, and international guarantors including the United States, the European Union, and the United Nations think. These two are a hundred times worse than the Tin Men of the past — manipulative “snake-oil salesmen.

ColdWarRedux2

how many hours until Israel violates it? 12?

AlmightyBlobby

Item #18 does not go far enough.  The population will need massive deradicalization.  No more UNRWA indoctrination.  The hostages need to be released immediately.

New-Conversation3246

The Palestinian people should decide. It's a travesty that it treats Palestinians as the threat. Depending on who will be on the board and how it will be run, it could easily serve as a defanging operation to completely rob them of any means to resist. Trump, Netanyahu, Tony Blair are all con artists who are notorious for being unreliable and untrustworthy counterparts. Many articles signal that they have given up on their dreams of annexing and/or turning Gaza into a riviera but just the fact that Trump&amp;Kushner will be in charge of rebuilding it supposedly "for the benefit of the Gazans" smells worse than how DonOld's diaper is described to smell like.

Again, it's up to Palestinians. They are the ones fighting and resisting, they decide when to stop. I'll support them either way. Ultimately, the only just and sustainable long term solution is decolonisation+a Palestinian-led one secular&amp;democratic state for all Palestinians and Israelis regardless of ethnic or religious background.

eta: Netanyahu should be at the Hague, not leading the table. Humanitarian aid/civil infrastructure being a bargaining chip tells you everything you need to know what this is all about.

ilimlidevrimci

Good plan, hamas should accept it too since they won't get a better deal.

qu_o

It’s a good plan, but we’ve seen this movie like five times already. Palestinians won’t agree to it. They don’t want peace.

Holofernes_Head


**As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_the_rules_of_.2Fr.2Fpolitics.3A).**

In general, please be courteous to others. Argue the merits of ideas, don't attack other posters or commenters. Hate speech, any suggestion or support of physical harm, or other rule violations can result in a temporary or a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.

**Sub-thread Information**

If the post flair on this post indicates the wrong paywall status, please report this Automoderator comment with a custom report of “incorrect flair”. 

**Announcement**

r/Politics is actively looking for new moderators. If you have an interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://sh.reddit.com/r/politics/application).
 

***


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

 Man I am just glad the head of Israel didnt pump money into Hamas. Could you imagine? That would be crazy!! Oh wait….. he did because he didn’t want the more centrist party in power

annacat1331

What do UN members think of this "deal"? Last time they tried to pull this didn't other nations get mad and said they should be part of the discussion? Or was that Ukraine...?

You can bet the first thing built will be a peace project tower right on the beach.

Briefly saw a map of withdrawal lines, and it looked like the permanent one went right down the middle.

Biodiversity1001

Peace is impossible when religious extremism is the dominant force in the entire region.

LordSiravant

Never understood the pro Palestine side and their reluctance to hold Hamas accountable. Do you think any American wants their tax dollars spent to rebuild Gaza if it has to get filtered through a terrorist group?  If you are pro-Palestine you should aggressively call for the destruction of Hamas. The worst thing that could happen is Hamas stays in power , there is a lasting cease fire and Gaza stays hell on earth because no aid gets in or is utilized properly because Hamas controls Gaza.

Organic-Street8063

Duh.  Hamas agrees and surrenders = peace, Hamas refuses and keeps fighting = war.

dbag3o1

We would have said the same thing about the Bosnians and Serbians twenty years ago, but it’s two decades later and even the Balkans are starting to stabilize, with Serbia even donating some vaccines to Bosnia during the COVID pandemic. That’s the Balkans, a region that was so universally hostile its name was treated as a byword for endless conflict for the last century.

Nowhere is hopeless, but it requires real work and help from the international community. If the US steps out of the way there is a real path that has been implemented across the globe.

Anonymous_1q

The solution is simple.  Occupy the weakest extremist government, ban their extremist elements for all time and attempt to foster a democratic society.

Go throw up a nazi salute in germany today and let me know how that goes for you.

"Peace"  doesnt always mean all parties walk away from the negotiating table getting what they want.  Peace is very often imposed on people.

Potential_Wish4943

You need to see this: https://www.wsj.com/opinion/new-palestinian-offer-peace-israel-hebron-sheikh-emirate-36dd39c3?st=7cuCn3

TL;DR: Some Palestinian sheikhs, led by Sheikh Wadee' al-Jaabari of Hebron, are seeking to break out of the Palestinian Authority, establish an emirate, recognize Israel, and join the Abraham Accords.

ScottBurson

You should zoom out a little bit... Things look bleak now but they can change. every generation has had shifts in attitude, although not always in the direction we hope, change has been a constant of political life.

As far as ending in a total genocide of one or the other - they've been fighting each other (this is including 5-7 Arab nation states committed to the elimination of Israel across the years) and by some measures trying to fully eliminate the other - for close to 100 years. No genocide yet. That's a pretty good precedent against your assertion.

LowRevolution6175

Some kind of two state solution (no idea what borders could possibly be agreed on) with a massive 50m wall all the way round constantly monitored by an independent party.

Powerful-Union-7962

Sure there is, and it's the most obvious and logical solution to this entire war.

Hamas surrenders, turns over all their weapons and their fighters.  Done . . . The war they started will end. . . it's as simple as that.

The Palestinians have been offered their own State and lands multiple times over many decades - every single time they refused.  They'd (or at least their leaders) would much rather focus on killing all the Jews and doing away with Israel - this is far more important to them that to have their own country.

generallydisagree

The only realistic solution or implementable outcome should’ve been done 60+ years ago but wasnt. 

What should’ve happened was that Israel stuck to the land it had bought originally from the Ottomans and what the Brits had laid out. Then Jerusalem should’ve been made an international city for both states to call their capital with oversight, happening from a combination of 5ish countries (Britain, USA, Russia, Egypt, and Saudi maybe?). This only could’ve been done if the UN actually was used as it should’ve been used and enforced this. 

There is plenty of evidence that proves that Jews were more than happy to work with Palestinians in the early days and vice versa.

But now that there is like 60+ years of violence from both sides nothing good will really happen. Unless there is an agreement made by countries in coalition to stop this and maintain some force/policing  in the region for a few decades to help ease up tensions from both sides, you are right in saying nothing good can happen here.

Safe-Storm6464

In theory, over the next 15-ish years, it's plausible Israeli iron beam defenses develop to the extent that they render rocket attacks, which is the most common Hamas attack, obsolete, and security in Israel becomes more relaxed as a result 

Jew_of_house_Levi

Are all tragedies equally bad? For example if Israel left Palestine, and Hamas was allowed to rearm and do more terror attacks resulting in X Israeli deaths, but the alternative was the status quo resulting in X+1 Palestinian deaths in the same time period, would both of those be equally tragic by your standards? I'm asking because I think saying there's no meaningful end to the conflict that isn't tragic seems to ignore the many small but meaningful ways the current tragedies could be mitigated. Even if there will always be deaths on both sides that doesn't mean we can't reduce that number.

Vesurel

I scrolled very far but couldn't find anyone mention this.

In a very recent development, the sheikh's of Hebron suggested leaving PLO and joining the Abraham accords (as per [WSJ article](https://www.wsj.com/opinion/new-palestinian-offer-peace-israel-hebron-sheikh-emirate-36dd39c3))

&gt; “We want cooperation with Israel,” says Sheikh Wadee’ al-Jaabari, also known as Abu Sanad, from his ceremonial tent in Hebron, the West Bank’s largest city located south of Jerusalem. “We want coexistence.” The leader of Hebron’s most influential clan has said such things before, as did his father. But this time is different. Sheikh Jaabari and four other leading Hebron sheikhs have signed a letter pledging peace and full recognition of Israel as a Jewish state. Their plan is for Hebron to break out of the Palestinian Authority, establish an emirate of its own, and join the Abraham Accords.

As far as I'm concerned this is the most promising news with regards to this conflict in a very long time.

&gt; The letter seeks a timetable for negotiations to join the Abraham Accords and “a fair and decent arrangement that would replace the Oslo Accords, which only brought damage, death, economic disaster and destruction.” The Oslo Accords, agreed to by Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization in the 1990s, “have brought upon us the corrupt Palestinian Authority, instead of recognizing the traditional, authentic local leadership.”

&gt; The sheikhs’ letter pledges “zero tolerance” for terrorism by workers, “in contrast to the current situation in which the Palestinian Authority pays tributes to the terrorists.”

If this deal materializes we will see a completely new development, and put the ball squarely in Israel's corner. It will also put Israel's claim that the Palestinians are not interested in a peaceful solution to the test, should it be implemented and tried. It basically calls for the end of armed resistance towards Israel's existence, mutual recognition and cooperation.

It is often claimed that as soon as a Palestinian leadership who's genuinely interested in peaceful coexistence rises up and offers it, Israel would accept and peace would materialize. I guess we'll finally see how that claim shakes out should this come to fruition.

dronten_bertil

Although I share your general sense of pessimism about the conflict, I'd challenge your assertion that it "will keep on going until one side eventually extinguishes the other." What are you basing that on? It's been over 75 years, and this hasn't happened yet; rather, the conflict just continues to slowly grind out, with both sides killing some percentage of the others' population but not coming anywhere close to "extinguishing" the other. The war in Gaza is one of the most sustained assaults by the Israeli military on Palestinians since the country was founded, yet it's only resulted in 3% of the Gaza strip's population dying. I don't mean to minimize those deaths, because it's still horrific, but it's also nowhere close to a complete extinguishing of Palestinians. 

If past is any precedent, it seems a lot more likely to me that the conflict will just continue as it has for the last 75 years than result in an all-out extermination of one side or the other.

BrockVelocity

[deleted]

Israelis are currently coexisting with 2M Arab citizens. I have no idea what you are talking about.

Ok-Pangolin1512

I will try to change your view. There are lots of examples where long-running, bitter, seemingly intractable civil conflicts, end.

The IRA in Northern Ireland. The Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka. The PKK in Turkey. The FARC in Colombia. These are all violent insurgencies, claiming to fight on behalf of ethnic groups or political ideologies, that fought for decades, and eventually laid down their arms or transitioned to political entities.

And this is SORT OF what the PLO did in the Oslo Accords, transitioning from a terror group to the Palestinian Authority, a governing body, and recognizing Israel. Obviously, they eventually resumed terrorism during the second intifada, but peace with the PA has mostly held since.

There are also long-running insurgencies that were defeated or eliminated, such as the Shining Path in Peru. In that case, the government brought a level of brutality that matched or exceeded the insurgency’s, which the insurgency couldn’t survive. This is what Israel is trying to do with Hamas in Gaza now.

The Israel-Palestinian conflict isn’t so unique, and there’s no reason it won’t end some day, just like all these other conflicts ended. No one expected Assad to fall so fast. Things can change quickly.

LateralEntry

giving the Indigenous ppl -palestinians- their land back, that's what every colonization ended with

Wise_Arrival_6801

Realistically the war will end with the total annexation of Gaza and possibly all of Palestine. A good solution would probably include forcing the Israeli population to move a location on one side of the planet to have as their own nation, and to force the Palestine population to the other side to have their own nation and then burning the entire region of Israel/Palestine to the ground. That would all but ensure either the hostilities ending or make hostilities extremely difficult

ConceptCompetitive54

As an Israeli I like to think that we are still heading in a more positive direction. Despite what I see in a the media in the US, Netanyahu’s coalition still polls below the threshold for a majority. I think we are heading towards a swing to the left (or at least center). His collation is seen as the fault for the lado in security for October 7, and ultimately why we are still this long into a war that we tired of. 

I think the question for Israeli society will be how can we maintain our security - does this mean we trade land for peace? Do we actually annex the settlements and swiss cheese the PA? October 7 really challenged even the most pro-2 state among Israeli society. The conversation has been one of how to maintain our security vs. finding a solution. The sentiment is strong that before we make a move, we want to see the Palestinians make a real effort and be a partner in peace. 

We’ve come incredibly close before and we can again. I just think we need to sunset the idea of a two state solution as we had envisioned and prepare for something different. Right now we wait - we wait for a change and see what we can do.

Majestic_Radish_9910

what exactly is unique about israel/Palestine when compared to Angola?

or even rwanda, Mozambique, south Sudan, Nigeria or Zimbabwe all of which had ethnic conflict as soon as they gained independence from colonialism. all had unforgivable atrocities committed on and by each ethnic group. but all are moving towards an Angolan style peace and away from an israel/palestine war?

saintRobster

I think a genocide/ethnic cleansing is less likely than the status quo. Periodic wars and ongoing violence.

There are many realistic paths forward to peace and eventually even this conflict will be history, but that may take generations. In the near term, Gaza ceasefire is being negotiated, Syrian-Israeli peace deal is being negotiated, expanded Abraham Accords, and Iran/Hezbollah/Hamas are all weakened, and new Israeli PM in 2026.

Weak-Virus2374

Takes a look at Israel , it has a growing Muslim and Arab minority, with Arabic as an official language on public signage, in schools, and throughout government services. Arab citizens serve as judges, Knesset members, doctors, lawyers, and in the IDF.

Now compare that with Palestinian society, where not a single Jew lives or holds any position of influence in fact, Jewish presence is explicitly unwelcome in many areas.

So no I don’t agree with the claim that Israel can’t coexist with other cultures. Yes, there are extremists in Israeli society (as there are in every society) but the structural inclusion of minorities in daily life, government, and national institutions speaks for itself.

Real coexistence is built on pluralism and mutual recognition and Israel, despite its flaws, has done far more to reflect that than its neighbors.

This to me is indisputable based on basic math and actually visiting the region.

Maple_Moose_14

There are several solutions that are possible. I'm going to disregard the political correctness factor and just suggest based on a practicality.

First a few assumptions:

(Israel)

1. Israel has an acute lack of strategic depth.
2. Israel is the most frequently attacked nation in the region. (#1 + #2 are intertwined)
3. Public gets increasingly hawkish and skeptical of a diplomatic solution over time.

(Palestinians)

1. Assume that narrative of non-representative leadership is true.
2. Will continue being hostile to Israel regardless.
3. They are never going to win a war and "exterminate Israel".

(All)

1. The goal is to allow all people to live peacefully, or at least significantly reduce friction.

Solutions (sorted by most complex and effective to least):

1. Relocation (fresh start) - Diametrically opposed cultures cannot coexist. Extermination is out of the question, so relocation remains as an option. The middle east is full of empty spaces, including some shorelines, that provide ample economical growth opportunity.
2. Relocation (Jordan) - Jordan is a Palestinian state with a non-Palestinian rule. It would still be hostile and bordering Israel, but largely separated by natural borders.
3. Buffer zones - Palestinians stay in Gaza and J&amp;S (West Bank), but give up some territory that serves as depopulated buffer zones that allow Israel to better monitor the borders and prevent attacks.
4. Proxy cycling - Israel assists in overthrowing Hamas and the PA, and lets other groups take their place. Rinse and repeat until the new groups agree to take sweeping de-radicalization measures. Once a population is largely de-radicalized (1 generation at minimum), it can be granted statehood and integrated into regional treaties like the Abraham Accords.

I'm sure there are more, but these are just 4 solutions off the top of my head, with varying levels of complexity and long term effect.

OkGuest3629

So assuming your conclusions are evidence based - they have to be- 

How did you come to the conclusion that Jews would never share land with the Arabs? 

If your opinion or conclusion is based on evidence, then your belief is flawed.. incorrect - it’s not accurate. And if your assumptions are incorrect then the entire premise is inaccurate therefore no matter what conclusion you come to- it will be inaccurate or a false belief. 

Why your premise is flawed?

All of the available historical fact about this proves your premise wrong; we have too much evidence the Jews have tried to share the land, therefore would have shared the land. If the Arabs would have agreed. 

The Jews wanted to share the land (as defined by action based evidence NOT feelings and intentions. As defined by what actually happened in the past.) 

FOR EXAMPLE:

There have been 8 official offers for an independent state for the Palestinians AND the Jews 

( not one offer was ever for the Jews to have all the land) 

The offers ranged from the Jews to have 15% of the land in 1936,  to 48% of the land. 

There have been 8 offers for the Palestinians to partition the land; for them to have their OWN country. 

For an independent Palestinian state or a path to statehood.

Last offer was in 2020 and the same thing happened as always happens. 

Jews accepted them all, Arabs rejected them all. 

Then the Arabs either declare war and invade or attack or escalate their violent terrorist attacks. 

Another thing is- every big violent outbreak and mini war they have had ? The Arabs started it. Every time..

As far back as you can go in this region- even to the seventh century- the Arabs always attacked the Jews first. 

Every war has been declared by the Arabs. On the Jews. 

Not the Jews on the Arabs. 

Jews never declared war on them. Not one time. 

So in reality the Jews have tried this entire time to share the land. 

Some of the modern offers were more generous than the UN partition plan. 

Also- another great point as far as this is concerned. After the Arabs rejected the Peel plan in 1936, WW2 happened and obviously the world was sad for the Jews .. the surviving Jews were sitting in refugee camps in Europe and there was a real life or death feeling about the Jews having this country of their own. 

The UN voted on it, it passed. 

Just as many other countries have been created - the same exact way. Splitting the land, population transfers. ( both the Jews and the Arabs would have had to do a population transfer ) 

Except this was less than 1 million people and the transfer was less than 20 miles. Not a big deal by any standards. 

So the UN declares the state of Israel and Palestine and guess what happens? 

The Arabs declare war, and eight different countries invaded- and that was after the UN forced a partition plan on them ( it was put to a vote and the vote passed) but they bucked it, even after that. 

Repeat this pattern many times. 

So now that we have our facts straight - we need to rephrase the question.

Lopsided_Thing_9474

There is a solution, though it would probably never realistically happen, especially now. Whether anyone thinks it's fair or not, change needs to start with Israel. They are the superior power and they are the ones in control of the region.

The only feasible solution is a two-state solution. Israel is never going to go away, and all of the people who think that Israelis should just "go back where they came from" don't understand that *most of them do not have anywhere else to go.* Even if they weren't born there, which a lot of them were, whatever property they had back in whatever country they came from isn't just sitting around empty waiting for them. Israel is their home, and creating 7 million refugees isn't a solution. Nor is a single-state solution viable. People like to call Israel an ethnostate as a derogatory term but they forget *why* it has the policies it does. It's not like the ethno nationalists in the US and Europe who are motivated by supremacist ideologies. I'm not saying those sentiments don't exist there, but Israel is a Jewish defensive ethnostate formed because they understand exactly what can happen to you when you are a minority in a nation that wants you dead. They will never agree to any solution in which a Muslim majority could seize political control of Israel, nor should they.

So the only way forward is a two state solution, but it needs to be a real proposal and Israel needs to make actual concessions to the Palestinian people. They need to abolish the illegal settlements. They need to rebuild all of the civilian infrastructure they destroyed. They need to allow independent investigators into their prisons to evaluate whether anyone is being held there illegally. They need to help establish independent routes by which aid can be delivered to the Palestinian lands which Israel cannot blockade. And they need to help build up a functioning Palestinian state. Just giving them the land and saying "here you go, it's your problem now" isn't good enough. That's how groups like Hamas gain political control.

This would not solve the problem overnight. There will still probably be terrorist attacks for years to come. Some people will never accept any Israeli presence in the region. But the longer Israel can show they are dedicated to a peaceful solution and the prosperity of the Palestinian people as neighbors, the less sway those terrorist organizations will hold. If Israel is not willing to do at least that much, then the fighting is just going to continue.

Crowe3717

100% correct. But the propaganda arm on this platform will shoot slogans and simply simp for one side. 



According to a December 2023 poll by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PCPSR):


82% believed Hamas’s decision to launch the attack was “correct”.


Over the past several decades, Israel has made or accepted multiple peace proposals aimed at resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. These offers often included the establishment of a Palestinian state, significant territorial concessions, and shared control over Jerusalem. In each case, the Palestinian leadership either rejected the proposal outright or did not provide a counteroffer. Various Arab figures and observers have, over time, expressed disappointment over these missed opportunities for peace.


1. 1937 – Peel Commission Plan

Proposal: British plan to partition Mandatory Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states.
Israeli Response: The Jewish Agency accepted the plan with reservations.
Palestinian/Arab Response: Rejected outright by Arab leadership.









2. 1947 – UN Partition Plan (Resolution 181)





Proposal: The United Nations proposed partitioning Palestine into a Jewish state, an Arab state, and an internationally controlled Jerusalem.
Israeli Response: Accepted.
Palestinian/Arab Response: Rejected by Palestinian leaders and the Arab League. Arab states launched a war following Israel’s declaration of independence.









3. 1967 – Post-Six-Day War / Khartoum Resolution





Proposal: After the Six-Day War, Israel signaled willingness to exchange land for peace.
Arab Response: The Arab League adopted the “Three No’s”: no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations with Israel.









4. 2000 – Camp David Summit





Proposal: Israel offered Gaza, 94%–96% of the West Bank, and shared control of East Jerusalem.
Israeli Response: Accepted with support from the United States.
Palestinian Response: Yasser Arafat rejected the offer and did not present a counterproposal.









5. 2001 – Taba Talks





Proposal: A more generous offer than Camp David, with up to 97% of the West Bank and all of Gaza, including shared sovereignty in Jerusalem.
Israeli Response: Negotiators reached significant progress, but talks ended due to Israeli elections.
Palestinian Response: Talks ended without an agreement.









6. 2008 – Olmert Peace Offer





Proposal: Israel offered 93% of the West Bank with land swaps, a Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem, and shared control of holy sites.
Israeli Response: Prime Minister Ehud Olmert extended the offer.
Palestinian Response: Mahmoud Abbas did not accept or formally respond to the proposal.









7. 2020 – Trump Peace Plan





Proposal: Included parts of East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state and economic investment.
Israeli Response: Accepted the plan in principle.
Palestinian Response: Rejected it immediately and refused to negotiate.
Meanwhile the Palestinians destabilized Jordan and Lebanon. 

Even among left-leaning or centrist Israelis, there is widespread resistance to negotiating peace immediately after October 7, for several core reasons:





1. 

Loss of Trust





The scale and brutality of the October 7 attack — targeting civilians, including women and children — shattered Israeli public trust, even among peace advocates.
Many Israelis believe Hamas exploited previous peace gestures (e.g. Gaza withdrawal in 2005) to build up weapons and launch attacks.






2. 

Perception That Palestinian Society Supports the Attack





Polls showing strong Palestinian support for the attack convinced many Israelis that the issue isn’t just with Hamas, but a broader societal hostility to coexistence.






3. 

Security First, Diplomacy Later





The dominant view — even among moderates — is that Hamas must be destroyed first before any peace can be considered.
There is fear that offering a peace deal now would reward violence and send the wrong signal.






4. 

Collapse of the Israeli Peace Camp





Left-wing parties and the peace camp in Israel, already weakened, were further marginalized after October 7.
Even voters who once supported two-state negotiations now see it as naïve or unsafe.






5. 

Fear of a “West Bank Next” Scenario





Israelis worry that any Palestinian state in the West Bank could turn into another Gaza — launching rockets or staging attacks.
There’s growing insistence on long-term demilitarization and tight security control, which Palestinians reject.

After October 7, many Israelis — including former peace supporters — see the conflict not just as a political dispute, but as an existential threat. Support for peace talks collapsed, not because of rejection of peace as a concept, but because faith in a viable partner for peace was shattered.

Dannidude16

I couldn’t change your view if I tried. I am 70 years old. I always read the paper even as a child I can remember being about 10 years old and seeing all the stuff about the “Middle East conflict” never understood it then never understand it now and it seems there’s no end into it.

moverene1914

If some future generation of Israelis and Palestinians finally have the ability to talk to each other without outside interferance and corrpution imposing a positive feedback loop on violence, then eventually their kids will play with each other and those kids will take over never intimately experiencing the violence of the past. After that, peace will be easy.


Despite the narrative that Israel is an occupying outside force propped up by the US/west, Israelis generally have nowhere else to go. Nothing will make them stop fighting except peace.


Despite the narrative that Israelis generally want to exterminate all Palestinians, the population of Palestinians has never stopped growing and they too have nowhere else to go.


There is corruption on both sides that fuels violence. Israel made peace with Egypt and Jordan, and all states and their people are better off for it. Seems like normalization with other Arab states is on the way, even Syria. There are obstacles on all sides, but as obstacles go away the opportunity for Israelis and Palestinians to talk and play together will fall into reach. One day the Islamic Republic of Iran will cease it's lukewarm war against Israel, and perhaps one day the Israeli version of MAGA will piss off other Israelis to the point that someone actually interested in peace takes office.

IceNeun

The conflict is already a tragedy, but I think you're wrong that it will end in a tragedy "finale". Not all conflicts have an ending, the conflict can continue for centuries with ups and downs.

Israel isn't going to genocide or ethnic-cleanse the Palestinians - putting morals aside, Israel has too much to lose, even if they can use Palestinian's vicious terror attacks as an excuse to do so. It's a developed country with a successful economy and still relatively good relations with most of the other developed countries.

Yes Israel builds and develops settlements in the West Bank but they're built over agriculture lands or uninhabited hills, the Palestinian villages and cities pretty much remain unchanged although their lives do become worse and worse due to these settlements and the security restrictions they bring with them, along with ultra radical violent settlers.

The Palestinians aren't going to ethnic-cleanse or genocide the Israelis, even if large parts of their population wish for that, simply because they're not powerful enough.

So your view is incorrect. I don't think there's a realistic solution to the conflict in the near future, but it doesn't mean that it's going to end in a genocide or ethnic-cleansing.

suckages

Upvoting not because I agree but because this post is important and extremely wrong and people need to see. Your post has a bunch of problematic assumptions. For one, the Palestinian side can't "extinguish" the Israeli side. The latter is too powerful and backed by the US. 

Second, The issue is not a religious one, genocidaires are doing the opposite of acting religiously. Third, having lived somewhere once, thousands of years ago, and leaving voluntarily, is so past beyond any statute of limitations, let alone evicting an entire nation of people. It would be one thing to try to live peacefully together, but that's not what happened. 

My question to you is: if you don't want these outcomes, are you doing anything to advocate for justice (whatever that means to you)? With politics, people usually don't do anything to advance their goals. They treat it like sports they watch on TV. Movements have the power to stop these kinds of tragedies, get involved.

FunnyDirge

It just takes time. Not one or two human lifetimes but possibly a few Centuries. That conflict is really so small that it is obvious to me that there are old generation leaders in Muslim World that want for it to continue and blow it out of proportion. With new generation of leaders coming into power in many Muslim countries a more pragmatic approach is already emerging. The way I see it; passions would cool with time and agreements will be struck. Mutual cooperation between Muslims and Jews and economic/technology exchange would benefit both sides.

Look at Turkey today. If we take religious zealotry view of Turkish state we would be on the streets screaming for "Two-State solution" and "Greek's right of return!". But no one in its right mind does that.

Rational minds prevail eventually. It just takes longer than human life.

OldAdvertising5963

I'll preface that I'm not unbiased, but the "extremes" on both sides are not equivalent.   The extremes on the Israeli side are largely nationalistic.  Some very fringe elements are religious, but they are quite fringe, even in the Israeli right wing.  On the Palestinian side, the harsh reality is that moslems, even the most liberal among them, are unwilling to allow even the smallest, most docile Jewish state to exist in the middle east, as that is an affront to the concept of the "ummah" and the "caliphate."  They consider the entire middle east "Muslim land," since it was conquered at one point, and any land conquered by Islam is considered eternally moslem.  Therefore, a non-moslem state can't exist in the middle east.

Excellent-Duty4290

That depends on your definition of "tragedy."

tolgren

It's easy to be pessimistic about finding a peaceful solution, but it's not impossible. One of the major barriers to peace is a profound lack of trust — polls have indicated that nearly 90% of both Palestinians and Israeli Jews believe that the other side wants to kill them and/or take their land. You can't build a serious deal on that kind of foundation.

I can't find the relevant polling right now, but it does appear that both Israelis and Palestinians are more willing to engage in serious negotiations for a two-state solution when it's paired with certain guarantees. Cracking down on extrajudicial violence against Palestinians, no funding for terror attacks, halting the expansion of settlements, and so on. 

Building the necessary trust won't be easy, and finding the political will to try will be even harder. It's hard to imagine that happening right now, but we're not even two years out from October 7th, and the war in Gaza is still ongoing. Slim majorities of both Israelis and Palestinians have supported a two-state solution within the past decade, and the biggest political leaders on both sides are growing old (especially Abbas). There's room for positive change, especially as the situation for Palestinians grows more dire and Israel's international standing deteriorates.

Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of barriers to this. Many attitudes are hardened, and I don’t see any viable future leaders that make me feel particularly encouraged. But peace is a realistic possibility, even if it's not necessarily the most likely outcome.

slightlyrabidpossum

Egypt and Israel fought for years, then they completely stopped.  

Egypt simply gave up on the idea of genociding the Jews, and that was it.  It has been almost 50 years since they last fought.  

Palestinians can do it as well. The fact that they still have the hostages is a good sign that they have not yet given up their genocide dream, but maybe soon!

Knave7575

I was gonna answer another comment who was blindly and simplistically calling for hatred against the Palestinians, but I'm writing my own comment instead.




I wish an Israeli leader had the strength, because yes, it takes a tremendous amout of strength, to come forward and say "we have made a mistake, and we've been perpetrating this mistake for 80 years. We're not going anywhere, but we'll stop colonizing the west bank, give a fair slice of the lands to the palestinians, and help rebuild what we have destroyed." They would win the hearts of the entire world, and the first people to renounce Hamas would be the Palestinians. 




Israel in its current state can't do that. Its only language is violence. Its only language is violence because its leadership is still represented by the poster children of the extreme reactionary zionist movements of the late 19th/early 20th centuries that were victims of the pogroms, except this ideology got exported in the middle east with nothing to stop it. It wins all the wars but it can't win peace. 




Netanyahu will never in a billion lifetimes utter such a statement, neither will his successor, neither the one after. Who knows when Israel will have a leader capable to make such a statement? 




I'm assuming most people will disagree with me. "It's ideology, it's islamism, they want all jews dead anyways". But Israel has never tried not munching on Palestinian land since 1967, has never tried not violently expulsing people from their houses in the West Bank, has never tried not imprisoning Palestinian civilians for arbitrary reasons, has never tried to not finance Hamas to dismantle the PLO. Again, its only language is violence. Can we really put the blame on ideology if everything the Palestinians know about Israel is senseless brutal murder? Have they tried showing humanity?

Unnwavy

tandemxylophone

Lets run through a few scenarios;


1. Netanyahu and his right wing party lose power. A moderate, or even left, party comes in. They work to de-escalate.
2. The rest of the world ceases supplying Isreal with support. Thus the conflict becomes far more costly for Israel.
3. The rest of the world actively takes a hostile stance to Isreal, sanctioning and threatening intervention.


Of course on the current trajectory with the current people in power and empowered (within both Israel and in Hamas) - the trajectory is not one toward peace. Neither side will back down.


But are you really saying that any of these is impossible?

wibbly-water

I understand why you would feel this way, but I can't accept this to be the case. Especially because succumbing to this idea is basically admitting that the side that would be extinguished in all likelihood is the Palestinians. Israel has all the firepower and backing of powerful countries. Even if Hamas or Iran or a coalition of Arab countries were to attack Israel in full force the rest of the world would come down upon them tenfold, which would in all likelihood result in the extinction of the Palestinians anyway.

People who think Hamas surrendering or being eliminated would end the conflict are wrong. As it ignores the deep-rooted Far-Right, Anti-Arab, and Ethnic-Cleansing-Zionist mindset that's rife in the Israel population. Regardless of Hamas there are powerful Israeli leadership that has majority support that want to expel Palestinians off their land and to colonize said land.

Any implementable solution would involve actual unified international pressure or force. The international community has coddled Israel and allowed it to suppress Palestinians for decades. There has never been a solution, treaty, etc. offered that did not favor Israel, and despite years of abuse and killing, Israel has been platformed as the superior side. Which has only led to more Palestinian oppression and more terrorism.

Your title says "realistically", and some may argue this is not realistic, but what needs to happen is international intervention and the US's withdrawal of Israel support – and responding with measures to halt active hostilities. This includes arresting and trying war criminals on both ends. The world needs to be faced with the conditions of the West Bank and the genocide in Gaza and shamed for them the way they were with the Holocaust. Maybe *maybe* then will a switch happen. Because Israel already has its support. Palestine needs its proper international support/allyship that steers its liberation away from terrorism.

ntt307

I always figured we could force them apart remove all governments and force them all to move to random countries with randomly assigned IDs. Then nuke the precious God land from orbit. So that if you truly want to meet God. You really will by going there.

🤷‍♂️

ShopMajesticPanchos

Your assumption is factually false when it comes to Israel and basically ignores the Israeli attempts to reach out for peace and the Israeli society.

How can you claim that Israel is being controlled by religious fundamentalists when it offered the Palestinians a separated Palestinian state?

In the 30's - the Jews agreed to discuss to Peel Commission offer even though it gave 60% of the whole land to the Arabs. The Arabs completely turned it down.

Then in 1947, the Jews celebrated the UN partition plan which granted both of the sides a separated state - the Arabs once again declined it and opened a war. 

In the 90's - the Israeli government sighed on the Oslo Accords while Arafat openly admitted that he never planned to respect them and compared them to the Hudeybah agreement, where Mohammad basically fooled his enemies.

When Bibi was elected for the first time  in 96' he gave the old Jewish city of Hebron to the Palestinians (PLO).

During the early 2000's Ehud Barak and Clinton offered the Palestinians a state over 90% of Judea and Samaria with a shared control over the old city of Jerusalem. Arafat turned it down.

Then in 2005 Israel completely pulled out of Gaza every single Jew - including the dead ones - and left it with green houses, investments from international groups, and the Europeans on the border of Egypt and Gaza. The Palestinian answer? Electing Hamas in 2006. 

In 2007 Ehud Olmert offered the Palestinians a state over 97% of Judea and Samaria including parts of East Jerusalem and a shared mamangmnent over the old city.  Abu Mazen turned it down.

As for the Israeli "religious fundamentalist society" - recently there was an attempt by far right groups to spark the idea of re-settle Gaza. The vast majority of the Israelis strongly opposed the idea - including the PM Bibi.

Echo693

There are multiple absolutely obvious solutions.  Not all palatable by West for various (mostly racist) reasons.

Option A: Genuine Arab strongman (preferably a King). Supported by Israel, Saudi and Jordan - maybe a splinter of the Hashemites or Saudis for a sprinkling of Islamic legitimacy. MUST be allowed to kill whoever opposes them. Doesn't sign a peace agreement right away, Hudna will do. Kick the can down the road. Once he is fully established, sign the peace agreement. 20 years.

Option B: Mordechai Kedar's emirates solution. Palestinians are tribal. Cities are their capitals. Treat each "emirate" independently, and they all roll up to a federated solution that has limited military capabilities and signs a peace deal. Refugees can go back to any emirate they want.  Hebron obviously wants this solution and has already agreed terms with the Settlers.

Option C: UAE or Jordan.  Takes ownership (again in the case of Jordan).

Option D: (My favourite) Palestinians actually become some form of Democratic.  To be clear, this is NOT "hold Elections", this is partly/fully free on the Democracy index.  No 2 democracies have ever gone to war with each other.  What's crazy is that the more Democratic Palestine becomes, the stronger they will become AND the more likely Israel will be to take risks and give up more at the negotiation table.    

Will these resolve all issues?  No.  Will Israel be left alone, likely yes.  Will Arabs still want to kill Js.  Probably.  But we are talking about moving things from where they are now to Greece/Turkey, which suffered an infinitely more bloody painful seperation/transfer 20 years before Is/Pale.

DefiantDistance5844

The wishy-washy way the world has approached the situation, attempting to implement the two state solution despite it obviously not working, trying to negotiate with terrorists like they are a real government, etc. Has made this problem so much worse. 

Instead of trying to turn Palestine into a real country that geographically is split into two unconnected bits, Palestine needs to just be absorbed into Israel. Give Palestinians equal rights and citizenship, focus on redeveloping the land and making the quality of living better, and continue to stamp out terrorists with overwhelming military force. 

And the Muslim community needs to get on board instead of trying to destroy such a militarily superior force. I'm sorry but they are not helping their people by perpetuating war against an opponent they can never beat. Sometimes you need to suck it up and surrender.

wholesaleweird

You may be right- it’s one of the more complicated ethno-religious conflicts in the world and various parties have attempted to solve it to no avail for decades.  However, I think the the biggest obstacle to even attempting to seeing what a peaceful co-existence or peace process would look like is the influence of Western powers (namely, the United States) and to a lesser extent other regional actors like Iran.  The powers that be need to take an interest in resolving and moderating the conflict, and that is not the case when one side has no incentive for peace or co-existence because they have the full backing of the most powerful country in the world.  Israel has nukes, and the iron dome.  Other than massive and awful security breaches like Oct 7, the truth is Israelis live in relative peace and security and there is just no real incentive for Israel to resolve this conflict diplomatically.  It is a complicated issue and it needs to be treated like it, not this completely one-sided support where violence of one side is terrorism and (much greater) violence from the other side is security.  I really do think if the United States (and others) exerted more pressure on Israel to actually come to a better solution we could at least try to see what works and how progress can made.  Tbh, we got pretty damn close with Bill Clinton.  But idk with the current influence of AIPAC in American politics and the Trump administration I do share some of your cynicism

sluttynoamchomsky

If the Arab and Muslim world accepts Israel, provides a living space for the Palestinians, and stops attempting to exterminate Jews, this conflict will end.

arrogant_ambassador

That's a very shallow view. It can absolutely be stopped. There's just no political will to do so. USA and western governments need Israel to destabilize the region. Maybe they feel the genocide is excessive. But maybe not. Either way they're invested. A strong middle east would be bad for their hegemony. Same reason they destabilize Latin America and Africa. Israel is just in the news more right now than those other places

mightymite88

Various middle eastern countries oscillate all the time between different levels of liberalism, "socialism", religious fundamentalism, non-religious authoritarian regimes. And all the time, you have various religious fights between christians, sunnis vs shiites, berbers, etc, as well as regions where all the religions get relatively along.



I wouldnt know why some fundamental shift like e.g secular iran couldnt happen in palestinia?



I agree that all those proposed policies that people are so gung-ho about are going nowhere, or currently just wont be accepted by people.



It would have to be some real social movement, propably spanning both palestine and israel. Perhaps some charismatic leader or grassroots movement or both, that is able to appeal to both sides, a sense of unity and peace on a non-religious basis. Something like that. It would be propably surprising to anybody in the current discourse.



So yes, i would agree that those activists that think they can just badger the us into the "correct" wonky policy and that will solve it are ignorant.


But i would try and change your view in the sense that this would mean its just doomed forever. Positive things could absolutely happen, why couldnt they?

SenatorCoffee

Israelis and Palestinians do co-exist peacefully within the borders of Israel. There's virtually no terrorism or violent extremism amongst the Palestinian citizens of Israel, who come from the same culture as those in the West Bank and Gaza.

If Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank had the same economic and political opportunities as their brethren within Israel the violent extremism would fade.

wefarrell

/u/PloppingSmock (OP) has awarded 2 delta(s) in this post.

All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1l9v7jh/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_the_only_likely_end_to_the/), in /r/DeltaLog.

Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.

^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)

DeltaBot

Since nobody seemed to read the actual post where OP said This is NOT a discussion of the morality and bothered trying to change their view, I'll chime in.

I don’t think Gaza’s total destruction is the only likely outcome—just the most extreme one. A more natural and historically consistent outcome is that, over time, the Palestinian population adapts. Romantic arguments about “you can’t kill an idea” make for great slogans, but history shows people abandon causes when the costs become generationally unsustainable.

Eventually—maybe after a couple more cycles of war and displacement—the dominant will likely shift from resistance to survival. That could mean accepting a much smaller, weaker, and more fragmented version of a state—far worse than what was on the table in 1948, 1967, Oslo, 2005, or 2008. Not because it's fair, but because it’s what’s left.

Obsidian1000

Israel has intensified its military operations in Gaza, leading to significant casualties among civilians and prompting discussions around potential ceasefire plans.

Israel-Palestine Conflict and Gaza Crisis

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want