That’s pretty naive. There are never unambiguously good and bad sides in a civil war. Case in point: the ANC terrorized and massacred Zulu nationalists.

Okay that’s fine — call it naive. Way would you call condemning the Gazans for fighting against occupiers while white washing the long history of crime and abuse by Zionists?

Israel hadn't 'occupied' Gaza since 2005.

The majority of Gazans are refugees displaced from other parts of Palestine which are indeed presently occupied.

If you care to find out how they were displaced you might be shocked at how the living space for Israelis was created.

I have family in Israel (some of which go back to Roman times) and am quite familiar with the current nations founding. 'Palestine' is a modern convention from 1967. Prior to that, it was a regional term to refer anyone living in the area (including native Jews).

No disagreements there. I have a friend who grew up in Lebanon who told me how his fathers best friend in high school was Jewish who later came back to invade Lebanon and supervise martial law in the same city they grew up in.

It’s the way of the colonialists. Outsource the occupation to a local minority and your occupation can last a lot longer because the colonial power will be shielded from the inevitable blowback that will follow from the dirty work of colonization. The minority will always be keen to retain your support so you can retain most of the benefits which attracted you to the colonial project for a lot longer.

The world should push for a one state solution. Enough bloodshed already.

You seem to be implying that "genuine liberation movements" cannot use terrorist methods, which is rather obviously false.

I get that morally it may feel different, but the Irish separatists used identical methods to the Israeli separatists to gain independence (bombs and violence).

In fact, the Jewish separatists explicitly used the same approaches against the British post WW1.