A striking feature of the ongoing Israel-Palestine violence is the completely contradictory accounts being offered. There is an epistemological rupture between “the most moral army in the world” defending itself against anti-Semitic terrorism and livestreamed images of the deaths of Palestinian civilians. These competing interpretations are being formally contested at the highest level in charges of war crimes and genocide at the International Criminal Court and International Court of Justice. This chapter critically analyses this breakdown of consensual reality by contrasting perspectives from the West and Global South. It moves beyond the popular moral dichotomy: decide who the good guys are, who the bad guys are, and interpret everything through that simplifying reductionism which leaves no solution except the annihilation of one side or the other. Instead, it offers an alternative that takes three theoretical tools seriously: first, how accounts of violence are socially constructed, depending on power, social and psychological interests, and the available discourses through which they can be narrated; second, how violence can be understood through a trauma-informed lens, where experiences and accounts of victimisation and vulnerability legitimate further violence; and third, how experiences of social justice are shaped by histories of colonialism and colonisation, with Western and Global South perspectives drawing on opposing intergenerational understandings. This analysis thus explores the polarised understanding of the catastrophe in Palestine from a critical, trauma-informed, anticolonial, and Southern social justice perspective, opening the possibility of shared accounts of conflict and solutions to intractable violence.