> lived alongside Arabs in peace throughout the Ottoman Empire

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 have cited sources that include a balanced account of Jews living alongside Arabs in peace throughout the Ottoman Empire for hundreds of years. Neither I or the source I cited indicates there was zero violence. If you read into it, you'll find violence started escalating in the 19th century after nationalism was introduced. Over hundreds of years, is there anywhere where anyone didn't encounter "multiple" violent confrontations? If zero violent confrontations is the standard we're judging by, I don't think any country will meet that standard.

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.