Zero.
Jews were in Israel under: Babylonians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Arabs, Crusaders, Ottomans and the British.
Look at the Al Aqsa mosque. See the giant thing underneath it?
Before 1948, they purchased land from Ottomans. After 1948 Arab states kept declaring war on Israel and losing, making Israel larger.
The historical timeline of Palestine leading up to and since 1948 is https://www.un.org/unispal/historical-timeline/
The timeline is good overall, but the four-minute video there is a good summary. A direct link to the video is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBjMbe24Vu0.
No. Multiple violent confrontations. You can find ample sources for this. Partition into jewish and Arab states was to avoid bloodshed.
> The historical timeline of Palestine leading up to and since 1948
This is a bizarre document that starts in 1885, at minimum you would start about 136AD with the renaming of Israel to Philestinea by the Romans. But then again, the UN is famously run by various tinpot dictators that raise more resolutions against Israel than themselves.
I'm not sure why a factual account of history is "bizarre" because it starts in 1885. The "Jews were there first" argument, the idea that we should redrew the world as it was 2000+ years ago (but ignore the subsequent ~1000 years), isn't a new one. I just always wonder why the logic only applies to Palestine, but somehow not the rest of the world.
> settler colonial
Dehumanizing buzzwords. People who were born somewhere are not "settlers". It implies they had some other choice about where to be born. Anyone born somewhere has an equal right to be there as anyone else.
Russians "settlers" born in Crimea have every right to live in Crimea even if their grandparents came there due to Stalin's colonial policies against the Tartars. White or Asian "settlers" born in the US have every right to live there even if they are on lands that were originally stolen from the Native Americans. And so on.
But we all know what you really mean. It's only the Israeli "settlers" that deserve what they get. The Jews who were kicked out of all the neighboring Arab countries and had their previous houses and lands "settled" in and became refugees in Israel with nowhere else to go can eat dust. The Jews who were living in Palestine/Israel before the creation of Israel, and their children, can also be classified as "settlers". We know what you really mean behind this soup of buzzwords.
> And, Israel does not have the right to defend itself.
Rhetorical language games. Should all 9 million Israelis be killed because they are "settlers"? If you answer "no", then you disprove your own claim. If you answer "yes", then you discredit yourself more than I could ever have done.
I'm far from being unabashedly pro-Israel, you can see my comment history here for yourself. But this buzzword-laden dehumanizing language needs to be called out.
Yes, Israel does not have the right to defend itself against Palestinians.
>Should all 9 million Israelis be killed because they are "settlers" No one said that.
So just to be clear, a Palestinian is totally within his rights to come over and murder me, my children, and the rest of my family, because... why? Because I was born in Israel and haven't moved to another country voluntarily, despite actually not being legally allowed to move to another country since I was born in Israel and only have Israeli citizenship?
I mean that sincerely, in my position, what do you think I did that justifies someone coming over and killing me?
And, Israel does not have the right to defend itself. Israel is the settler aggressor. The biggest terrorist is Israel. Israel is a settler colonial racist Apartheid regime.