If they stated that though, there would be no evidence to support it, making it a pointless claim.

That's true that they didn't have to leave, however, when they came back the UN granted them some of the Palestine's land. The Israelis have a right to some of the land because of this.

I agree with this because there isn't one piece of strong evidence supporting that one state should have control over all of the land. I agree that they should split the land and keep Jerusalem a neutral place.

I don't think that Israelis should have their land taken away because the Palestine have more holy sites. I don't believe that a number of religious sites should be taken into consideration in this decision. If the Israelis get kicked out of Isreal then they will end up with no holy places, and that isn't fair to the Israelis.

The Israelis fought many wars to defend their land. Because they have fought so hard to keep their land safe, they should be granted half of Isreal.

Just because the Arabs could go to other countries, doesn't mean that they are going to want to. They have occupied that land for a very long time, and they aren't just going to give up their land. The Israelis shouldn't have full right of the land.

The Palestine deserve some of the land because unlike the Jews, they never left Isreal. Even though they were never declared an independent state, they were always there on that land. However, the Israelis were given part of the land so the land should end up being slip fairly between the two states. Israel should be split down the middle vertically so that one of the states doesn't have to have part of its land be a desert. This way, both states have to deal with the desert portion of the land. Also, holy places like Jerusalem should be neutral to both states.

I think the Israelis should have some of the land because they were given land area. In 1948 the United Nations gave the Israelis land, so they have a right to at least a part of Isreal.