A common debate in politics is the discussion of what to do in the middle east as it pertains to the Israel-Palestine conflict. Both groups of religious people, seek one home for their organization of believers. The Israelis believe that they belong there since they resided in the territory the longest time ago, but the Palestinians believe that since they have lived there for the past thousand or so years, they have claim to the land. Quite simply, a two-state solution presents the best chance of achieving peace in the region and putting an end to conflict, because Israel would not be able to overpower Palestine, they have tried to coexist, and failed, repeatedly, and Palestinians would be reimbursed for their losses. In a two state solution the land and landmarks are …show more content…
While some may argue that the Palestinians and Israelis can coexist in one unified nation with a parliamentary government, history shows that conflict would most likely arise and this theoretical government would struggle with equality. One of the more obvious reasons a two state solution would be the most promising for ending conflict, would be the taming of Israel’s ability to overpower Palestine. According to a set of maps of Israel and Palestine, beginning before 1948 when the territory was 100% Palestinian, over the course of 20 years, Palestine was completely overpowered and eradicated by Israel to the point where only 12% of Palestine remains(Document 1). Through the use of military power and strong alliances, Israel has asserted the idea that if both groups were asked to share the area of land, Israel would assert dominance and overthrow Palestine once more. In a two state solution, both countries would be separated into different lands, and conflict such as this in the past would be avoided. Another keen example of