As I mentioned before, if mainland Europe had not turned Jewish refugees away after the second world war, perhaps there would have been an argument for saying the Jews should not return to their homeland. Perhaps. The simple fact is, prior to 1948 there were hundreds of thousands of Jews, Christians and Muslims living in what was previously known as the geographical location of Palestine.
By the same token ,you can't give land to a people that is already there.The state of Israel did not negate the creation of a Palestinian state, which is what the original two-state solution was all about. The Jewish people accepted the idea of a Palestinian state from the outset and concentrated on the rebuilding of Israel. It was the Palestinians who attacked the Israelis and who have been the aggressors throughout history. Nobody thought a bunch of holocaust survivors, who weren't very well provisioned for by the rest of the world, could win that war because the Arabs had the numbers and the military firepower, but Israel did win when by all odds they should've been driven back into the sea.
You see, if there's an argument land was somehow denied to "Palestinians" there's an argument that the two-state solution denied the Jews who'd always inhabited it, land. But the logic is never applied this way because of widespread bias.
