part 1
the first part of reasoning is saying israeli are the legitimate owners of the land because palestinians dont belong there but the refugees that came there? thats like saying germany should be owned by their refugees.

also its saying israel has the right because it is backed by western nations hence winner of the war, and the winner gets to keep everything and thats the way it is. (if you ignore the international law that prohibits anexing territorial gains that was done as a result of the second world war to preserve peace). also palestine was british colony. with that logic israel might aswell colonize all british colonies and make apartheid continue.

Also isreals "forced into war" was a strike on planes of egypt making them unable to fight that would not dare to attack in the first place because USA threatened to join if they attacked first. israel was always under the protection of USA and got its support. you cant really call it "fair gains".

part 2
reminds me a lot of apartheid logic of "black men can never govern a country". there are problems with democracy but its really hard to tackle that problem if there is another problem bombing them. the palestinian government does not actually support BDS because they need the conflict to stay in power.

part 3
why would israel support terrorist then? orthodox extremists killing palestinians, or USA supporting terrorist groups in Syria just to destabilize the country.

part 4
just because of hamas does not make the entire palestine not worth living. the lifes there have value too. what israel wants is eradicate palestinians. this is genocide. if israel annexes palestine what will happen with the palestinians????? you think they will get citizenship? i dont think so. what gives israeli the moral right to treat them like animals or stray dogs, not allowed to live in house and get killed on the street by anyone who pleases.