Ah, you're dragging the bottom of the barrel now. Still, let's try and answer you question.

Does Israel have a right to exist! Sure it does, now. It is an established State under a UN mandate.

The question should have been: Should Israel have ever been established at all.

We go back to the Balfour Declaration, promising a land for the Jews, in fact promising them part of, the then existing, Palestine. At the same time it was promising the Palestinians complete autonomy (Laurence of Arabia, and all that).

The Balfour Declaration was an agreement between the British Govt, and the Zionist council, that, if they would bring the US into WW I then, their reward would be a portion of Palestine, to call their home.

Of course, politicians don't really expect to have to implement their promises.

I'd point out that those comprising the Zionist council were not ethnic Jews but Eastern Europeans who had adopted the Jewish religion, IE: Khazars, whose ethnicity was probably Celtic.

Therefore, the propaganda; "A land without people for a people without a land" has no basis in fact.

I believe, and I may be wrong, that there is only the remnants of one Jewish tribe left; the Cohens. For the Khazars you might like to reflect on: "Another respected Austrian historian, Matisyohu Meises, questions, "Could it be that the generally accepted view, according to which the German Jews once upon a time immigrated from France across the Rhine, is misconceived?" Meises, who knew virtually nothing about the Khazars, was perplexed at the fact that no Yiddish linguistic roots whatever could be traced to Western Europe. He also noted that, inexplicably, there was a large geographical gap clearly delineating the Yiddish spoken by the Eastern Khazar transplants from any spoken in Western Europe. 54

"The evidence," Mr. Koestler nicely summates, "...adds up to a strong case in favour of those modern historians -- whether Austrian, Israeli or Polish -- who, independently from each other, have argued that the bulk of modern Jewry is not of Palestinian, but of Caucasian origin. The mainstream of Jewish migrations did not flow from the Mediterranean across France and Germany to the east and then back again. The stream moved in a consistently westerly direction, from the Caucasus through the Ukraine into Poland and thence into Central Europe. When that unprecedented mass-settlement in Poland came into being, there were simply not enough Jews around in the west to account for it; while in the east a whole nation was on the move to new frontiers." 55

With the overwhelming evidence that the modern Jewish population is of Khazar origin, Koestler remarks that this would clearly indicate that "their ancestors came not from the Jordan but from the Volga, not from Canaan but from the Caucasus, once believed to be the cradle of the Aryan race; and that genetically they are more closely related to the Hun, Uigur and Magyar tribes than to the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob." This conclusion would then logically render the epithet "anti-Semitism" "void of meaning," Koestler says.

The latter conclusion is a position Palestinian Arabs might well dispute with Mr. Koestler due to the fact that this revelation ironically places the modern Jew, currently occupying Palestine, in the unenviable position of, themselves, being anti-Semitic -- an historical mockery of somewhat amazing proportions. 56" You may like to read a precis of the Khazarts and Jewism: <link> you may learn something about history.

So, the people who wanted to re-establish an Israel had never had any connection with that piece of land, aside from having adopted one of the religions associated with it.

You look on the Palestinians as terrorists. Were the Jews, who resisted the Roman occupation, and committed mass suicide at Massada heroes or terrorists? You can't say that one bunch were heroes for resisting occupation, and, another bunch resisting a similar occupation are terrorists, can you?

In present day Israel ethnic Jews complain about being treated as second class citizens by Khazar Jews.

The phrase in the Bible (OT) states that the Jewish people (ethnic) are Gods' chosen people, do you think that that rank is conferred on those who have chosen to adopt the Jewish religion? If you do, why haven't you taken that choice?

Israel, as a State, was defined by a UN charter, sorry, not a mandate. They were given 51 per cent of Palestine, a rather generous gift imho. Anything outside of that charter is illegal. Do you accept the illegal acquisition of land? Would you accept a foreign mob taking your land. or would you fight against them?

You ask about Israel having a right of defence, you make no mention of the Palestinians right of defence! After all, who has the greater right, those being deprived of their legal rights to land, or those who are illegally taking that land? And, by Illegal, I don't just mean by international law, I mean also by Israeli law.

In the recent Israeli operation "Cast Lead" Between 1,166 and 1,417 Palestinians and 13 Israelis were killed. More than 400,000 Gazans were left without running water, while 4,000 homes were destroyed or badly damaged, leaving tens of thousands of people homeless; 80 government buildings were hit. Out of the 13 Israelis killed, 3 were civilians, and 10 were IDF, 3 of which were killed by their own forces. So, the Palestinians killed 3 Israeli civilians, and 7 members of the IDF - I wish that my little wars had the same casualty figures. That wasn't a war, that was a massacre.

Oh, and according to Israeli propaganda, all of the Israelis were killed deliberately by the Palestinians, whilst, all of the Palestinians civilians were killed accidentally - shit, that's what we should be doing in Afghanistan, don't try to deliberately kill the Taliban, just do it by accident!

I'm only just writing points off the top of my head, if you really want, I can go a darn sight further.

You have no moral, religions, or legal, arguments to justify the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians,