Yeah I can understand that philosophy. But I'm not saying whether or not there should be a homeland for Jews, I am simply pointing out the unavoidable choices when considering that policy, and potential conflicts inherent in it. What about the non-Jewish Israelis? What happens if political trends make Zionist Jews the minority? What happens if demographic trends give Israel a majority Arabic population? Surely you can see that the only way to avoid these possibilities is by implementing distinctly undemocratic and illiberal measures. The only way to control political opinions of a populace is by force and repression. The only way to control demographics is to control people's rights to reproduce or acquire citizenship.
An ethnically based state will run into the same issues as a state that tried to be a haven for black people or Afrikaners i.e. the only way to maintain ethnic homogeneity is to stop ethnic mixing of any kind. And the only way to keep the people of this ethnicity "on course" is to eventually control their political views or force the monoethnic views upon them.
The only way to combine protections for Jews without incurring contradictions of this kind is to have a state which protects liberties for everyone, not just those of one ethnic group. That is a much more durable solution, and hence more secure for the long-run safety of Jewish people or other ethnic minorities. For example in the USA demographic trends suggest a majority will be non-white later this century. Because the USA's notion of nationhood and citizenship is based around ideals and values rather than ethnicity, this will not be a problem. Whereas your conception of Israel specifically will run into this problem eventually. In any case, consider that a libertarian Arab is more likely to protect your rights than an authoritarian Jew.
Finally, you should consider that even a Zionist Israel is no guarantee of security. There are no guarantees in this world except death. Jewish people are just as safe in places like the USA or UK as any other ethnic minority, and they are far less likely to die as a result of being successfully invaded or bombed by middle-eastern states or terrorist groups. If a new Hitler arises, and wins the resulting WWIII, do you really think Israel would be safe because it is a nation state? Having a nation only provides an illusion of safety, if there is one thing that history shows it's that nations rise and fall with the wind. Even the mighty Roman Empire collapsed eventually. A single nation, especially a tiny one surrounded by enemies, is no guarantee of safety at all. The only things that endure indefinitely are ideas and ideals, and there is thus far more long-term safety in the ideal of liberty and inalienable rights than in an ethnic homeland.
