No, they’re not okay. But Israel’s history does put it in a unique position, and your attempts to draw parallels to it from recent history pretty clearly failed.
And in what democratic nation would a majority community say to a minority group, “please, by all means, begin unfettered immigration to our country, and turn us into a demographically insignificant minority.” In order to be a “Jewish” state, Israel would have had to, at the very least, disenfranchise the Arab population, as their representatives certainly would not have authorized the racist immigration policies of the Zionist state.
According to actual census data, in 1945, Jerusalem District had 253,270 residents of which:
102,520 were Jews (40%)
104,460 were Muslim (41%)
46,130 were Christians (18%)
Which means an overall breakdown of ~40% Jews and ~60% Palestinians.
Palestinian refugees and their descendants are registered with the UN Relief and Work Agency for Palestine Refugees. In any case, the point is moot - Palestinian refugees have never been given the right of return, whereas its completely clear that the Jews settling in the West Bank and East Jerusalem do not, by any stretch of the imagination have to be descendants of people expelled during the war.
It also doesn’t change the fact that, despite forming a minority of the population, the Zionist state received most of the state’s fertile land and most of its coastline, in addition to most of the Naqab desert.
Yes, we all know Israel sees ethnic cleansing as its birthright, and couldn’t care less about the opinions of the international community.
Yes…illegal immigration, massacres of entire villages of unarmed civilians, and ethnic cleansing are all considered illegal in the rest of the world.
And we’ve already demonstrated that processes that lead to the creation of Israel are fairly unique in the modern world.
Really? The unarmed civilians were expelled en masse because if they hadn’t been ethnically cleansed, they would have “thrown the Jews into the sea?” That explains why villages that had entered into peace agreements with neighboring Jewish settlements were massacred (Deir Yassein), and why the expulsions began in villages that had openly declared their neutrality in the conflict (Qisarya).
They know full well that they purchased homes on land that has been taken illegally from the Palestinians, and that outside of the Zionist govenment, no nation or major international body considers their presense there legal. In fact, many settled there precisely with the intention of illegally and irrevocably altering the demographics of the region.. They came to the West Bank because they’re militant Zionists who wanted to be actively lead the movement of seizing Palestinian lands in contravention of international law, and to ensure that no viable, contiguous Palestinian state could ever be formed from those territories. Tell me, how many of those extremists would even WANT Palestinian citizenship if it were offered to them?
I have precisely as much sympathy for their proprietary rights as I do for those of museums and private collectors who purchased works of ark knowing that they were likely stolen from victims of the Holocaust by the Nazis. If they wished to stay in a Palestinian majority state (in the unlikely event that one is ever made in those areas) then arrangements should be made for them to do so - perhaps after fairly compensating the desendants of the people whose land they stole.