I was under the impressoin that those riots were due to the fact that England was already considering the whole Israel idea, not the cause of it.

No, it was because of Zionism and the rapidly growing Jewish population, which the Arabs correctly understood to be a threat to the existing character of Palestine. Each side accused the British of supporting the other, especially after they bungled the security situation, but that was neither here nor there. Violence between the two sides was inevitable.

I agreed with the fact that England were fools. However thew jews weren't in the right to just move in and demand that land back, and England should never have decided to appease them. They lost that land a long time ago, from people who didn't use extrenal help with anything (like the Assyrians and then ROmans, etc.). The Palestinian population however had been there for jsut as long, in fact they were the very same jews who just happened to stay and assimilate.

It would be like native americans going up to DC or New York then demanding they have their land back, then have all of the EU give it to them and supply them with armaments to somehow smash the US army. It's jsut dumb, they lost their land and that's that, there is no good claim to it whatsoever.

The jews should never have gone back to the middle east since they had no claim to the land whatsoever.

You seem to have an rather peculiar understanding of what happened. It's not as if the Jews ever vanished entirely, every time they were deported they eventually trickled back in, and they were already the majority within Jerusalem before the Zionism-inspired waves of immigration even began in the 1880s.

Just because they trickled back in does not mean they can claim the land as theirs. Can the Mexican immigrants claim any part of the US as theirs? They have certainly been trickling in as of late. Hell, some of them can even make the claim of ancient home, especially with Texas and other south western territories.

It's really not analogous because there already is a Mexican homeland: namely Mexico.

True. However we are talking about a specific region, and I really don't see how whether some peoples' posessoin of land or not has to with with claim to other land. As it stands, Mexicans have claim to Texas (which I don't agree with, just to make it clear).

Because Jews faced persecution basically worldwide, so they were naturally drawn to a city to which they felt a strong connection and which already had a Jewish majority? That's rather different than if Mexico - which increasingly resembles a failed state - were to try and reclaim the quite functional Texas, which legitimately seceded for the purposes of self-determination and fought a revolution to that end.

You do realize there have been countless cultures who have disappeared throughout the ages correct?

Furthermore, there is no reason for the jews to feel a strong connection with that part of the world given how much their asses have been kicked there, and how many times they have been driven off. Just because they "feel" like that's their place, doesn't make it so. I "feel" I deserve a billion dollars, yet I don't see the UN giving it to me.

As for Texas, it was nothing like what you say. Mexico decided to be nice and let Americans in. THen the Americans started to bitch about Mexico and wanted to become part of America again, but without giving up their property in the middle of Mexico. The US had zero claim to Texas (prior to the whole, let's invade it with our dumb cowboys).

so all israel has to do is expel all the arabs and then call it a day.  because theyve been kicked out and therefore they dont matter at all.  might as well expel them from the neighbouring countries while they are it.  keep a nice large couple thousand mile buffer zone between them and the people who want to kill them.  its a good idea, vlad, got to hand it to you for coming up with it.