Is a two-state solution better than a unified one for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

Asked by: LebLeft
  • There is too much bad blood between the two, one state for all will never work!

    The two state solution is the only solution that could possibly work, but it has a small chance of working. The issue of a shared or split Jerusalem must be solved in some creative way, as the entire state of Israel, Gaza and West Bank are contested by both sides. The Israeli claim is very legitimate to the Israelis while the Palestinian claim is just as legitimate to the Palestinians. The problem is that both claims go back to a time, that neither can be reliably verified. As of now Israel is recognized as being Israel proper (before land gains from wars initiated by Israel's neighbors), and future Palestine is Gaza and the West Bank.
    There is no solution to who's was what, and when. The only solution is what is now, and how to divide it. The one state solution won't work because each side is afraid the other will hijack the other society's character, as apparent in Jerusalem right now. Maybe in a distant future when both sides realize they are biblical brothers, will the one state solution work, but not right now. There is too much bad blood between the two sides!

  • The one state

    Solution is the most appropriate one.
    The one state solution will reduce the Israeli terror on the Palestinians and put an end to illegal settlements.

    Al Quds, common capital for both Israelis and Palestinians is a must.
    Of course the land and the capital belongs to the Palestinians and only them but with these cruel conditions a unified state is the solution.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.