Raze

Then an exchange would be agreeing to the right of return and letting Palestinians still alive from the Nakba return to Israel To remove their ability to defend themselves and have full self determination

In Barak’s deal it was 96% of what israel considered the West Bank, that didn’t include settlements, the Dead Sea, or the Jordan valley. Agreeing means israel annexes 10% of the West Bank and keeps temporary control of 12%. It also required permanent Israeli control of airspace, three Israeli controlled military bases in the West Bank, Israel presence at border crossings, and giving israel the right to invade when they feel necessary. The deal also didn’t allow Palestinian sovereignty in most of east jeresulem including Palestinian neighborhoods. It also required letting Israel keep some settlements in the Gaza Strip. The intifada only began after Barak announced that Israel had no plans to withdraw from the town of Abu Dis, as it had pledged to do in the 1995 Oslo II and Israel settlement building had increased 81 percent in the first quarter of 2000, then Israeli troops opened fire on unarmed Palestinian rock-throwers at the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, killing four and wounding over 200. When Israel left the Gaza Strip, they put it under a blockade that in their own words was designed to crush the economy and caused it to have one of the highest unemployment rates in the world , and controlled everything and everyone that got in and out effectively trapping the majority of people inside. So while they did remove Israeli presence from inside Gaza, they still controlled it outside.

It’s a myth https://decolonizepalestine.com/myth/palestinians-sabotaged-the-peace-process/ https://fair.org/home/the-myth-of-the-generous-offer/

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/12/26/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-strikes-takeaways.html

Leave and go where?

In public, what they say privately is a different matter

Historically there were many examples Jewish communities coexisting peacefully in Arab states for long periods of time. Many Jews actually fled to the Middle East from Europe to escape violence. Prior to Zionism Palestinians specifically were known for living peacefully with large Christian and jewish minorities.

When I say liberal Zionist I interpret it to mean they want a majority Jewish state with liberal values.

That’s not true, israel has regularly attacked first. Prior to the 1948 war israel was razing villages like at Deir Yassin. The famous 1967 war began with an Israeli strike. the PA in the West Bank hasn’t attacked israel in years and even works with the government, but Israel during that time seized more land, expelled more Palestinians, and allowed settlers to kill dozens every year. The recent direct conformation with Iran began when Israel bombed Irans embassy. So following your logic, attacking Israel in response is necessary because doing nothing could be worse.

Liberal Zionist is what they call themselves. How is that inaccurate or an insult? They are liberals who believe in Zionism.

By that logic anyone attacking Israel is justified because they can just presume if they didn’t Israel would attack them even more.

- Prior to the first intifada the population was so passive to the constant abuse that israel barely used anyone to guard it, when they finally reacted in the first intifada israel responded with mass violence, that is when Hamas was formed and when the terror increase. That’s like saying if I am beating you and you hit me back if I start stabbing you it’s your fault. https://btselem.org/statistics/first_intifada_tables These are the casualties of the first intifada, note the amount of Israelis killed by Palestinians in the first and second year compared to the amount of Palestinians killed. - Then why are there hundreds of thousands of settlers in the west bank if they want to give it back? And the settlements increased under liberal Zionist administrations. Even the two state deals offered by Israel, aside from their many other issues, required leaving settlement blocks. - They haven’t done a suicide bombing in years (prior to the attempted one after Oct 7) and hamas was expelled from the West Bank, yet the situation just gets worse. - The Arab peace initiative was offered and still is, and Israel rejected it.

Large responses don’t increase security. For example in 1982 they invaded Lebanon in a large response for security, but after sabra and shatila the shias turned against them and their security got worse. They did many large responses in Gaza such as 2008, 2014, and 2018, yet that just lead to Oct 7. Iran didn’t attack israel, yet israel struck their embassy in Syria to assassinate their general, Iran responded by sending a small strike with advanced warning that was intercepted and said the issue is over and they won’t continue, israel then bombed the capital of Iran. That’s not responding, it’s escalating. Regardless most security analysts say israel can’t destroy irans nuclear capabilities, at best it delays them but they will just move further underground and make them. Iran has offered deals to not make nukes multiple times and was rejected by Israel, and they still haven’t made nukes, so they could try engaging with those.

Terror attacks were a response to the occupation. The security situation only worsened as the occupation worsened. The global left is rejecting the Israeli left for apartheid.

They are Israeli people who are liberal zionists. The messianic zionists are also Israeli people. They are less liberal then liberal Americans because they by and large support the occupation of Palestinians without giving them equal rights.

Iran can already make nukes in a week if it wanted to. Bombing them will just send them deeper underground to make them. Other Arab states are currently not direct enemies of Israel. They could also just get them from another country like Russia or North Korea. Even if they didn’t get nukes large missiles pose enough of a threat to require the Samson option if there is a full scale war.

The USA can get israel to do whatever it wants in theory, so it could just threaten to remove all aid or sanction them unless it changes things, but Israel has a large lobby in the USA which influences which politicians get into power so only ones that listen to Israel get in government. Because liberal Zionist’s won’t work with the Israeli Arab minority as they don’t want racial change in Israel, I think that the messianic Zionist’s will slowly win due to having larger numbers, but this will overtime erode international support, so without having US pressure to fall back israel start to will rely on using its nuclear threat, which will cause other middle eastern countries to get nukes which make their enemies get nukes, and since Arab states have major internal issues which will get worse due to climate change some will collapse and be replaced by anti-Israel zealots radicalized by current events, since messianic zionists believe the state of Israel expanding and destroying the famous Al Aqsa mosque is part of the end times to bring back the messiah this will result in more large military confrontations. The now weakened Israeli military won’t be able to definitively beat them and won’t political change course due to messianic religious beliefs, so they’ll use the Samson optiom.

Some liberal Zionist’s support eventually creating a Palestinian state. However it’s less possible now because Gaza is destroyed, settlers moved into the West Bank, and Israel has a growing amount of messianic zionists who believe Israel needs to expand outwards and take those lands among others. And neither liberal nor messianic zionists support a one state solution where Israel annexes the land but gives Palestinians equal rights because then the Palestinian population will be half the country and it won’t be a state where Jews are in majority control. In addition Palestinians will resist it and then world opinion turns against Israel, which also causes wealthier Jews who tend to be liberal Zionist’s to leave making messianic Zionist’s more influential, but Israel needs support from western governments to maintain its military strength which they can lose if world opinion shifts enough away from them.

Doing it all at once is impossible, they acknowledged that. source: https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/06/middleeast/israeli-minister-smotrich-starve-gazans-intl/index.html But instead they do it slowly over time. https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/urging-occupation-smotrich-says-voluntary-migration-could-halve-gazas-population-in-2-years/

If anything it’s the reverse, prior to Oct 7 israel admitted it blockaded Gaza to keep the economy on the brink of collapse, continued to detain hundreds of Palestinians in prison without charges and refused to engage in any negotiation to release them, and continued expanding West Bank settlements, and even funded hamas themselves to hurt the PA’s negotiation position to end settlements. The goal is to keep slowly crushing them and when they occasionally lash out start rapidly crushing them until there aren’t any left.