You're right but that doesn't mean we should accept it. Why we didn't accept it when Saddam invaded Koweit or when Russia annexed Crimea?
Colonization of Palestine has very negative direct and indirect consequences on our world.
We threw some sanctions on them... that appear to be fairly toothless.
That means, formally, Israeli actions in the OPT are even less accepted than Russia's annexation of Crimea. Practically, begrudging acceptance seems to be a very apt description, arguably of the latter even more so than the former.
Besides the comparaison with Crimea, the point was that borders throughout history have been shaped by colonizations and invasions but that cannot be used to justify colonization itself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Crimea#1954_Transfe...
Not that Wikipedia itself is a good source, but thi has a bunch of references:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_bar_Kokhba
> In the aftermath of the war, Hadrian consolidated the older political units of Judaea, Galilee and Samaria into the new province of Syria Palaestina, which is commonly interpreted as an attempt to complete the disassociation with Judaea.
If you're denying that colonization even exists it will be difficult to have a discussion based on facts.
You’re also confusing a religion with an ethnicity in your comment. The issue is Arabs and Jewish people not anything to do with Islam, Christianity or atheism.
Religion has a lot to do with the issue. Religion and ethnicity are often strongly related especially for Jews. Judaism is the main element that identifies Jews together and the vast majority of Arabs living in Israel/Palestine are Muslims.
More Jews (eg, non religious Jews) are ethnically Jewish than spiritually Jewish (eg converts, which are generally quite rare).
Take Crimea for example: the Russian Empire only conquered it in the late 18th century (relatively recently too). Should the Turks claim it next (as the Crimean state was the Ottoman Empire's vassal before) or maybe Mongols, Greeks, or descendants of Goths, Huns?
There's a reason for avoiding forceful border carving in the modern world for "historic justice". It is a phony cause and leads to a chain of generational violence. Too bad the modern world never acts to efficiently prevent it.
And by the way, Stalin was already dead by 1954 — difficult to "give" anything in that state. Not even mentioning that "giving" in USSR is just an administrative re-arrangement of a territory within an empire. By that logic, all the states ever being part of any empire have a "historic claim" on the other parts.