I don't see why you insist on Talmud or Torah support for or against your post. It should be clear to a thinking person that there were arguements for both the "religious conservative" Jews position which you cited and the Zionist position. But don't think that the Zionists went for their position with a bloodlust. They asked for the support of the UN and got it. The religion of the Jews has ample room for discussion and disagreement. This is what Talmudic scholarship is about. That so many could take a position that resulted in death, (and results in death today) is of interest. But more of interest to philosophers don't you think? I believe that the Jews have been seeking a just response to war from the day they declared their statehood. There were reasons for forming that state then, and they persist today. To seek a "lasting Middle East Peace" one must do more to address today than to look into the past and ask what might have been. This is what Islam is doing today, offering peace if a hundered years of western culture would be pulled from "their" lands. It is a worthy experiment that they propose, but only that. Real life is played outside the laboratory.
Because it is the premise of the speech.