Quote from gkishot:
Any land might be or might not be controversial. Unless it's on the moon.
It all depends on the political power behind the controversy. How come the Druzes were never offered their state? Simple because they don't have enough political clout. They didn't have the backing of hundred of millions of Druzes around the world. Or how come the Tamils were eventually defeated in Shri Lanka? People around the world could care less about their plight.
By this token Arabs have no right to claim the state in the West Bank because this land is controversial. It's not about whether land is controversial or not. It's about willingness to make compromises in resolving the disputes between nations.
Palestinians homes/land are in current Israel (in addition to current Gaza and Westbank).
Israel is the only state that is built on stolen land, and the majority of its people have no relation with that land except being a zionist who live and/or his ancestors lived in other parts of the world (west europe, russia/etc).
The zionists very well know that it is not their land, and that they are lying. They seem to think that by spinning they will get people to believe in their lies. Since they know it is not their land over time, they might move back where they came from since men always go back to their true lands. Majority of Israelies who came from other lands would realized it overtime and move back.