I'll ask again because you dodged the important question - Does Palestine have the right to defend itself like Israel and what would that look like to you?
Which specific 2 state solutions are you referring to? I assume it's the ~1994 deal that collapsed because Israel couldn't stop their terrorism and assassinations throughout the negotiations, and the Partition Plan that violated the UN charter with respect to national self-determination and carved out the majority of the territory to the minority Israeli population.
To defend the genocide of Palestine as a necessary lesson reveals a let's say... interesting moral framework - particularly as Israel escalates aggression against Iran and Lebanon. Putting aside the obvious genocidal intent, rhetoric, and action, how does an exterminated population learn any lesson?
Your argument is the best possible case one could make for the genocide of Israel - they are the regional threat and aggressor - they are the ones that (by your sickening logic) need to be exterminated to teach them a lesspn. The outcomes of the actions you're defending have civilisation-ending consequences one way or another, and zero benefit - why do you hold these positions?
It's not complex - bigotry is bad, genocide, as the most extreme possible outcome of bigotry, is far worse. Some bigotry in a population isn't justification for a genocide - that would be an apocalyptic prescription if applied consistently.
You do understand why people would look at your prescriptions and think that you're either a world-ending lunatic or genocidal piece of shit, right? Why would we be wrong?