Really?

My history teacher asked us, as an assignment, whether or not we thought Israel should have the right to exist. The assignment was meant to be one hundred and fifty words. A kid who is in the same class as me complained today about how "the question had no point" and the article we were to read in order to base our opinion "had no useful information" in it. Really?!? Firstly, this is an important question, especially since we've just finished studying WWII and the Holocaust. And secondly, the link he gave had TONNES of information. I'll attach it at the bottom if you're so inclined to read some of it.
But does Israel have the right to exist?
Consider, firstly, the context of why Israel was formed in the first place: approximately six million Jews had been systematically exterminated and thousands more were displaced with no resources to their name. The Jews had every reason to believe that, without a state of their own, the refugees would be remain displaced within Europe, or that another wave of concentration camps would rise out of the remains of the Nazi party/army. This fear, sadly, seems to still be applicable. Palestine and Israel were meant, originally, to exist in tandem; the Arabs were the ones who initially attacked the Israelis and, subsequently, proved the Israelis' original claim of needing their own country in which to seek asylum. Israel easily could've continued existing in partnership with Palestine, but the Arabs attacked the Israelis first.
Just from reading the quotes provided, none of the cons list concerns for who originally owned the land; they all appeal to the "satanic" nature of the Jewish state. The "satanic" nature of a country is, to borrow cliché, in the eye of the beholder. If this sort of opinion could be considered legitimate, then, admittedly at a stretch, the USA should be handed over to the Natives since the Arab extremists also view this land as satanic.
Disregarding the ludicrous claim that Israel is satanic due to the nature of its religion, the secondary concern seems to be that the land in question belonged historically to the Palestinians. However, this hardly seems to be the case. The land belonged to the Jews. Moses led the Hebrews out of slavery in Egypt and into the Promised Land. The Hebrews lost Israel, but David won it back from Goliath. They lost it once more during the time of the Romans. After the Holocaust and World War II, the Jews were awarded the land by post-War powers in the spirit of bipartisanship as a dual state within Palestine.
Also consider the ramifications of the post-1948 treatment of both Jews and Arabs on either side of the ceasefire line. The Jews on the Arab side had their property seized, were evicted from their homes and exiled into the Jewish state. Interestingly enough, the Arabs on the Jewish side faced no official persecution and many were given citizenship after 1948.
Where do you stand on this issue? Should the Jews be allowed to occupy that land? Should they have the right to exist?


http://israelipalestinian.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000339