• theotherverion@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I don’t know how organizing terrorist attacks from time to time and then refusing 2 state solution can be considered a resistance. EDIT: To me it seems like they chose the all or nothing route.

    Also, it is still counter productive for Palestinians to attack israel when they are reliant of them.

    • ???@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I don’t know how being an apartheid state all the time for 75+ years then refusing a two state solution can be considered a democratic legal state…

      You make it sound like Palestinians are dogs fed by Israelis… if you colonize a nation, you are obliged to provide for them. If Israel doesn’t want Gazans to be “reliant” on their “generous donations” of food and water, they should not have sieged them and abused them day in and day out.

      • theotherverion@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Issue with this argument is that there was never a palestinian state. It was ruled by Britain and then Britain left and let UN decide. UN decided to create 2 news states that never existed before. It was not like someone had a state before and then UN came and chopped part of it.

        • ???@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          And yet Jews in America in 1936 were like:

          Palestinian identity existed all along. They would have gotten independence like Jordan or any other distinct group around them.

          Instead, the Nakba happened. I wonder why…