system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: Ultimately, it was a bad idea to instate the nation of Israel.

As someone who has just recently learned about the whole 'Israel-Palestine' conflict, please bare with me as i have only an elementary understanding of the deeper facts that surround the issue.
I will explain what i know so far and my subsequent conclusion:

After the second world war and the genocide of the jews, the world felt pretty shitty about what had happened to their people. The United Nations saw that it would be a good idea to give the jews a homeland, they agreed to carve out a section of land from one other country and instate it as the jewish motherland. 
(So you are aware, i have read the Bible and the Torah and know the history of jerusalem and holy-land. I am fully aware of the 3 thousand year old shitstorm that that place has experienced)
They decided to give the jews the land they had been longing after for so long, and thus the state of Israel was born.
The Palestinians however, were understandably upset, as the whole world had agreed to take away their land.
Conflict ensued, as the Palestinians sort to drive them of the land they once owned, a conflict that still exists to this very day.

Now here is what all the fuss is about...

As far as i know, there are now differences in opinion about whether or not that land is rightfully Palestine's, or rightfully Israel's.
To what i can tell, people in America completely support the state of Israel. Anyone in the public eye who doesn't agree is labeled an antisemite by the American media, no matter if you are left or rightwing. 
I find this terrifyingly similar to what happened when Reagan was in office. Anyone who did not support wars against communist states was declared a communist-sypathizer by the media, no matter what your arguments may be. 
This may be because of the few people who own and control the media, a few people who are also disproportionately jewish. 
Other than America, opinions in the matter differ greatly and can be very conflicting.

Here's my view:

I think that, although the principle and sentiment behind the idea was indeed correct, the practical implication of the idea was foolish and inevitably doomed to fail. Historically, the land most rightfully belongs to the jews, but no matter how you spin it, taking away someones land and giving it to someone else will cause conflict.

Please know that i am only somewhat familiar with this issue and am yet to solidify my opinion, as i am only aware of the history and not of the data. I know this issue can get heated and i apologise in advance if i made any illogical generalisations, but academics can write thesis' on this topic and i didn't want people reading a pile of text.

Please change my view!
gpt
>After the second world war and the genocide of the jews, the world felt pretty shitty about what had happened to their people.

You are missing a lot of history building up to this. Starting in the 1880's a movement known as Modern Zionism began whose goal was to rebuild a nation for Jews. After a bit of debate the area was decided to be Israel so Jews began to buy up land in the British Mandate. The Jews bought up land in the desert and there was lots of violence both ways. It is also important to not that Jews were also kicked out of their homes when Israel was founded and that Palestinians were offered citizenship when Israel was established.

In addition, Israel has been a technological boom in fact the computer you are using to type this thread has tons of Israeli tech. Israel has also been a world leader in humanitarian aid being the first to responds to natural disasters across the world. They also are a world leader in medical technology. 

I think it is important to talk about what would be different if there were no Israel.

1) There would be no democracy in the Middle East. Israel has it's flaws but all it's citizens can vote.

2) They Middle East would lose one of it's most secular country. Yes Israel has laws pro-Kosher and doesn't have public transit on Shabbat but it they have freedom of Religion. Muslims are free to practice and their holy sites are protected. 

3) Whatever country would replace it would likely be another fundamentalist Islamic republic ruled by the likes of Hamas.