zlacker

> Sadly, I think we are going to continue with the one state with Apartheid

The situation is not like Apartheid in South Africa.

In Apartheid, the white minority controlled South Africa, and did things like denying the black majority the vote.

In contrast, Israel has a ~20% Arab minority (excluding Gaza and West Bank). The rights of that minority are respected. Arabs can vote in Israel, and in fact there is an Arab party in the Israeli parliament.

Gaza was largely self governing until the Oct 7th attacks. Israel has not shown any desire to "rule" Gaza.

>>marcel+(OP)
> In contrast, Israel has a ~20% Arab minority (excluding Gaza and West Bank).

I'm reminded of an anecdote (probably false) of when someone was asked in an interview why all manhole covers are round. He replied that not all manhole covers are round. They countered "Well, just consider the round ones".

>>ilitir+Ya
Well Gaza is self governing (or was, until Oct 7th). Israel can't (couldn't) impose apartheid on Gaza any more than France imposes apartheid on Germany by being a separate country with borders.

West Bank is more complicated, but the same concept applies.

If Israel was motivated by racist or other tendencies to want to impose apartheid, they would start with the areas they have full control over. Why would they allow Arab voting if they are trying to impose apartheid?

>>marcel+rd
> West Bank is more complicated, but the same concept applies.

"OK don't worry about oval ones. Just consider the round ones."

All this aside, I don't think you understand what is meant by Apartheid. This is coming from a South African who grew up during that era.

>>marcel+(OP)
All analogies are wrong, but humans use them as thought devices.

Let's just say that on a scale of 1 to apartheid it's not a 1.

>>marcel+rd
> separate country with borders.

Gaza does not have borders it controls, Israel controls Gaza's air and sea borders.