And given that the Palestinians initially sought the destruction of Israel at birth has no bearing. Israel fought to survive against the Palestinians and the Arabs.
Ultimately, the place can't be both 'Israeli controlled' and 'Palestinian controlled'.
So yes, the same way as if a million Jews declared Manhattan to be their new Homeland and no longer part of the US, the US would pursue 'the destruction of that new country', the powers in the area sought not to have a new Jewish state created by outside forces in that location. You make that sound pretty terrible.
Who was terrible? People 'defending from having land taken for another group to form a new state', or the people creating that new state against the locals' wishes?
Locals who had been dealing with Western invasion, power-mongering, violence, creation of states to suit their interests at odds with the local people for a century?
Remember the mentality of the time - this was following decades of the west dominating the region for oil interests, shortly before incidents like the installation of a brutal dictator in Iran (the US helping the British) or the Suez crisis with Egypt (where even the US refused to side with Britain).
Shortly after the British had been doing things like building up the radical Islamicist groups to 'divide and conquer' the region fighting the nationalists.
If a bank robber took hostages and insisted on starting negotiations that it was his bank now, and any resolution had to recognize that, how far would that work?
Well, if he had a nuclear weapon, maybe he WOULD be given the bank. That's the sort of force used to 'settle' the issue of Israel - who has the power to get their way?
It's a messy situation any time you have two groups each with claims to a land.
The Palestinians took the loosing side multiple times and finally were abandoned by their allies. Land that the Arabs previously controlled was lost in combat but handed over by the Arabs to the Palestinians when it was no longer under the Arab control. When it was under Arab control; there was no though of a Palestinian state.
Your first comment is nothing more than 'might makes right'; your second is the 'two wrongs don't make a right' issue.
Let's say the arabs didn't treat the Palestinians right, and the Palestinians had legitimate grievances against them. Does that justify other wrongs?
Both sides have made mistakes; the majority have been fro the Palestinians who are still willing to act as puppets.
Sounds like mindless ideology to me, not based on facts, 'acting like puppets'.
Getting a state will be the worst that will happen to them. There will be an incident manufactured from Gazaand then Israel will have every right with no restrictions to retaliate.
Plenty of legal international precedent. State against state.
Hardly. Did the drug cartels killing the American in a lake or any other number of crimes 'give the US to retaliate with war'?
If the Palestinian state launched war against Israel, that would be another thing. If rockets were launched by independent groups, Israel could attack those people.
Maybe there could be some 'UN' type government or shared government put in place - where the co-exist - but neither side seems to want that. At least Israel doesn't, I think the Palestinians might be open to it. Israel does support a limited amount of including Palestinians - some are Israeli citizens - but it seems only as a minority, and where Israel keeps moving Palestinians out of Jerusalem bit by bit.
Normally this might be an issue for the UN to help with - the whole start of Israel being put back in that location goes back to the League of Nations - and the UN has been in the middle of it since first creating the plan for Israel after WWII - but it's compromised by the US using its veto over any plan basically.
The original plan was for the UN to control areas with Jerusalem - seems useful.
It's Israel who also has had hostility to the UN, saying 'UN peacekeepers will never be allowed on Israel controlled land', not just the UN sanctioning Israel.
The Israeli settlements in Palestinian territory have basically been an ongoing act of war for decades, always pushing for more Palestinian land.
Many of these settlers make the KKK look like schoolchildren in their armed hatred for Palestinians it seems.
Water provided only to Israelis, highways only for Israelis, and so on.
It's a hard situation but it seems Israel, with some reason, thinks time is on its side as it just gradually keeps gaining more land.
Some arab groups are also hardliners about Israel.
I'd think the US could play a useful role, allowing the UN to play one, to look for a negotiated agreement.