The Israeli-Palestine conflict

[Mike88]

Picking up on the visit of Bibi Netanyahu to the US and the following press conference where Trump said that the one state solution is better, putting in cause all the diplomatic efforts of the last 40 years, i decided to create this poll.

Personally, it would be wonderful if Israelis and Palestines could live in a same state but i'm a realistic person and that's impossible. The two state solution is pretty much the only choice.

Discuss

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Mass murder of everyone on both sides.

I know this is probably just [/edge], but I feel compelled to say this is why I fully support Israel's nuclear program.

[Cashew]

My opinion remains unchanged.

Write in: 3 state solution.

There is not way that Israel will tolerate a truly independent, territorially contiguous Palestine. Instead of bantustans, have Jordan annex the Arab populates areas, while Israel keeps the settlements. Egypt should take back the Gaza strip.

[Mike88]

My opinion remains unchanged.

Write in: 3 state solution.

There is not way that Israel will tolerate a truly independent, territorially contiguous Palestine. Instead of bantustans, have Jordan annex the Arab populates areas, while Israel keeps the settlements. Egypt should take back the Gaza strip.

Not a bad idea. But i think the hardcore palestine supporters wouldn't be happy about it. Nonetheless, when this conflict is resolved, if it is resolved, it will always be a lose-lose situation.

[America Needs R'hllor]

In the current situation, we can either have one apartheid state, one binational state, or two separate states.the two first options are absolutely horrifying, so I think it's obvious.

[President Johnson]

Two state solution is obviously the best.

[SATW]

two state solution in a perfect world but in reality, it's so much more complex and I will punt the football on this poll.

[Devout Centrist]

I'm fine with one, Democratic secular state. But there's no way in hell Hamas and the Settler movement would tolerate that.

[America Needs R'hllor]

I'm fine with one, Democratic secular state. But there's no way in hell Hamas and the Settler movement would tolerate that.

I don't think the settlers can in any way be compared to the murderous terrorist organization that is Hamas.
But no, no one would accept this, not zionists Jews (certainly consisting more than 90% of the Jews) and not most of the Palestinians. What is far more likely in this scenario is an appartheid state.

[Devout Centrist]

I'm fine with one, Democratic secular state. But there's no way in hell Hamas and the Settler movement would tolerate that.

I don't think the settlers can in any way be compared to the murderous terrorist organization that is Hamas.
But no, no one would accept this, not zionists Jews (certainly consisting more than 90% of the Jews) and not most of the Palestinians. What is far more likely in this scenario is an appartheid state.

They're not equal, they're just included as examples.

[The_Doctor]

One Israel, under secular and democratic norms. Palestinians wishing for a separate homeland can relocate to other Arabic nations around the area.

[Crumpets]

The "Best^TM" solution would be a two-state solution, but I can pretty much guarantee it will never happen, at least not with Israel looking anything like Israel or Palestine looking anything like the West Bank and Gaza.

I think if we want to make any headway at solving the greater conflict, we should put aside the two-state solution as a goal, and instead focus on the reality of the current one-state situation, and how to make it workable for both sides. That leaves us with two solutions: 1) Either Israel grants all those living in the territories it controls the full rights of Israeli citizens or 2) Israel does not recognize them as citizens, thereby forfeiting the right to rule over them as a governing entity under UNSC Resolution 242.

Should Israel choose option 2 (seems more likely) the question then becomes one of who is the legal governing entity of those people. From there, I think there are three options: 1) The Palestinian Authority and/or Hamas become, effectively state governments with their own organized armies and police forces (scary). 2) A Bosnia-style solution with two sub-national governments and one national government. and 3) Some form of international/UN/regional control.

While the liberal in me really wants option 1 of these to be workable, I know that won't be the case, seeing how Gaza has operated in the past 10 years. Some combination of option 2 and 3 seems most reasonable and likely to me.

Anyways, that's my two cents. Again, it's not what I would want to have happen, or I assume what anybody in Israel or Palestine would want, just what I think a solution might look like if you came from 100 years in the future and asked me "Hey, just so you know, we solved the Israel-Palestine conflict. What do you think we did?"

[TDAS04]

Ideally the Holy Land would divide into Israel and Palestine, with Israel roughly consisting of it's pre-1967 borders and Palestine consisting of roughly the West Bank and Gaza Strip.  Unfortunately that is difficult right now, but the other options aren't great either.  I doubt that Israelis and Palestinians would be happy sharing a single state, but the status quo of Palestinians living in hardship with no country to claim their own is unacceptable.

[America Needs R'hllor]

The "Best^TM" solution would be a two-state solution, but I can pretty much guarantee it will never happen, at least not with Israel looking anything like Israel or Palestine looking anything like the West Bank and Gaza.

I think if we want to make any headway at solving the greater conflict, we should put aside the two-state solution as a goal, and instead focus on the reality of the current one-state situation, and how to make it workable for both sides. That leaves us with two solutions: 1) Either Israel grants all those living in the territories it controls the full rights of Israeli citizens or 2) Israel does not recognize them as citizens, thereby forfeiting the right to rule over them as a governing entity under UNSC Resolution 242.

Should Israel choose option 2 (seems more likely) the question then becomes one of who is the legal governing entity of those people. From there, I think there are three options: 1) The Palestinian Authority and/or Hamas become, effectively state governments with their own organized armies and police forces (scary). 2) A Bosnia-style solution with two sub-national governments and one national government. and 3) Some form of international/UN/regional control.

While the liberal in me really wants option 1 of these to be workable, I know that won't be the case, seeing how Gaza has operated in the past 10 years. Some combination of option 2 and 3 seems most reasonable and likely to me.

Anyways, that's my two cents. Again, it's not what I would want to have happen, or I assume what anybody in Israel or Palestine would want, just what I think a solution might look like if you came from 100 years in the future and asked me "Hey, just so you know, we solved the Israel-Palestine conflict. What do you think we did?"

Is it really that scary, though? An army can be easily crushed and decimated by the IDF. A terrorist force, like now... much more complicated.

[parochial boy]

So the issue with a "democratic and secular" one-state solution is that it would have roughly 6 million Jews, and 6.5 million Muslims.

Put simply, the "democratic and secular" one-state solution would effectively mean Israel ceasing to exist.

[Higgs]

Status Quo.