I'm saying they have a valid claim on land that they were given through the UN in '48, and they have a valid claim on land taken whenever anyone declares war on their basic claim, and to redraw their borders wherever they may be most secure after each such war. This claim is valid without redress to any ancient references except that Israelis have deeper historical roots in the area than anyone else. I do cringe whenever a religious (Jew) cites these old scrolls as some kind of title deed. But Israel has been built up by atheistic socialists as much as the religious. And this is because of the general inhospitality meted out over the world at various times, regardless of one's religiosity. If only it was inhospitality, but too many times it has been downright dangerous to be any kind of ethnic Jew anywhere in the world. And don't even get me started on the fact that the most religious in Israel have somehow carved out an exemption from the mandatory service in the IDF that any young person has to get through. Arguably, the nation is at war partly because of the religious appeal to the supposed authority of these old scrolls. Indeed, Israel was initially established on the basis of war, by those tribes who were apparently returning from Egypt after some centuries of maltreatment. Alot of that area would already have been acquired, typically by purchase, as not all tribes of Israel decamped for greener pastures in Egypt. Acre for acre, the tribes of Israel probably purchased more land than Southern Arabs (versus local Caananites-Phoenicians) had ever purchased in their conquest of the middle east from 632AD onward. At some point, around 3000BC, the majority of land may have been considered acquired, by Israel, through warfare, and worse, warfare in the name of a god. The Arabs don't have any better claim, they having acquired 99.9% of the Muslim world through warfare in the name of a god, and some very nasty warfare at that, as their god sanctioned the most brazen kind of booty taking and tribute milking. Fast forward to modern times, the Jews have been tempered and moderated by time and have sought a patch of land mainly for self-protection, as is the main purpose of any nation. And they have sought it in the most humane way possible, through the purchase of property, and through deed handed down by internationally recognized authorities which represent theoretical civilization. The land they accepted by deed, supplementing the land they had already purchased, was a lot smaller than anything they had taken going back to 3000BC. And by accepting limits on what they were deeded back in 3000BC, versus what they were deeded in '48, they represent less of a threat to the world than do the Arabs, till this day. Because the Arabs are still motivated by a world-wide deed of ownership, granted in about 632AD by a religious fraud that was as fraudulent, or more, than any fraud that gave the land to Israel in the first place. In brief, Israel is operating in a modern world as a modern state, indeed a republic, while the Arabs are still operating by the Mandate of Mohammed, taking as much as they can handle, by sword and the rest by outbreeding (fuckers gonna fuck around) any competition. This is why when presented with a parcel of land for themselves, by the UN in '48, the Arabs of the West British Mandate decided to decline any declaration of acceptance, and rather, roll the dice with neighboring Arabs like TransJordan (who had accepted an allotment from the British-League-Of-Nations already) and Egypt, in a putsch to ignore the UN and take whatever they could get through war. They've had an all-or-nothing double-down martingale kind of gambling addiction for as much as they can take, completely ignoring any effort by modern civilization (British, League of Nations, United Nations) to regulate the disbursement of these deeds. In losing that war, in '48, the local Arabs lost their land to what was the East British Mandate, or what had then become "TransJordan". Other local Arabs lost their land to Egypt. Arguably, TransJordan actually gained some land in that incursion, and maybe even Egypt. Half of Jerusalem landed in the hands of Jordan. Through several wars now, Israel has, imo, broken the laws of war by returning land, to the enemy, that they had lost during the war. This in exchange for some kind of peace, or what turns out to be some kind of temporary ceasefire, until the enemy rebuilds it's military lethality again. So no, you can't tell me that Israelis just want "the land" and Arabs don't, or that Arabs have more of a claim to it than Israelis do. They don't. Israelis want a safe place to call home. Arabs want the entire globe to themselves, for their dusty dictatorships, and for their own interpretation of 7th century laws. But enough of these words! See you Saturday, high noon. Be there or beware.
Before putting that out there, he left it up to Israel to decide how far they want to take that. I too pointed this out from its inception. Read more closely. So nothing unexpected has happened. Israel decided to accept the three minimum they were expecting. Note, only recently has Israel received all weaponry and munition re-stocks they've been expecting since the last administration put holds on them. Months overdue. That could have gone into the calculus how to handle this occasion. So long as the Asses of Ham are not being resupplied through Egypt, Israel is not losing anything by the time it takes to collect back their people three by three. That is, as long as they never repeat house to house urban warfare tactics due to extra booby trap likelihood. Not even a 100:1 hostage prisoner exchange rate is a loss if Israel intends to finally finish this war properly and completely until capitulation .