Yes, they're tactics. Tactics to create a false equivalency of suffering between the occupied and the occupier.
These groups don't call for ending occupation as those words mean, they mean leaving the West Bank. If Israel exists as a Jewish supremacist ethno-religous state on stolen Palestian land, the occupation isn't over. If they dismantle all their checkpoints, if they tear down the wall on Palestinian territory, if they remove their soldiers and stop shooting out children for sport, they're still occupying our land, our only access to the ocean, our oil, our fresh water sources, our fertile lands, our grandparents' graveyards, and our homes to which we still have keys. The "two state solution" is a liberal Zionist tool used to make the colonization of Palestine palatable for western audiences.
Ending occupation means a free Palestine from the river to the sea, and these groups aim to twist the meaning of words to make forcing us into a small land with no military and choking us economically so we continue to leave in search of better life. They want to end "occupation" so they can focus on colonization.
Of course the more extreme don't like that plan, they want to exterminate Palestinians and get it over with as quickly as possible. That's where their opposition comes from, not from a principal disagreement on the existence of a Jewish only state on colonized land, they all agree on that part.
And you can meaningfully debate with other Palestinians their efficacy or on diversity of tactics but I don't think the jury is out on that debate
You know, we aren't just sitting around debating these issues a few times a year when Israel is in the news. We spent decades thinking about this, and we have a very mature body of literature on the topic. Ghada Karmi, Ali Abunimah, Yousef Munayyer, Mouin Rabbani, Hani Faris, Edward Said, and Ghassan Kanafani are just a few Palestinian intellectuals/authors you could read to better understand this very much settled debate.
The existence of collaborators and propagandized Palestinians who aren't well read on their own history (as a product of the ongoing colonization) doesn't mean the "jury is out on the debate", they aren't part of the debate.
such that would compel outsiders to declare something like this a meaningless joke.
Yet you feel compelled as an outsider to speak with such authority and conviction.