Except the situations aren't really analogous, now are they. The State of Israel (unlike the United States) currently seeks to expand itself into (and maintain

Except the situations aren't really analogous, now are they. The State of Israel (unlike the United States) currently seeks to expand itself into (and maintain its unlawful occupation in) multiple places which aren't, according to the international community, "Israel". And on top of that -- it (more precisely its current ultranationalist government) even tries to use its own names (Judea and Samaria) in reference to a certain very large chunk of this illegally occupied territory, even in internationally-directed communications. As if it thinks that will fool anybody. So as long as its successive governments insist on playing naming games with the international community (and in their internal propaganda) -- given this, along with its perfectly abhorrent conduct in these occupied territories, it shouldn't be in the least surprised to find its own name for itself is brought into question as well. In fact, this is exactly the response it should expect. Additionally, understand this violent expulsion was quite literally in response to the population [or rather its non-elected governing polity] declaring war on their newly [declared] state. What would you expect? The answer is obvious -- that the civilian population be allowed to return to their homes, and retain full title to their property, as in the aftermath of any post-1945 armed conflict. According to the principles of international law, to which the State of Israel is itself a signatory.