I’d call them refugees if they are living in refugee camps, or the equivalent.
I assume you’ve tried driving in occupied territories, or betwen them.
It’s a thorny problem, exacerbated by radicals on both sides.
Regardless, Israel, a religious democracy, will before long have to decide which of those two it will continue to be, as the demographics change from primarily Jewish to primarily Palestinian.
We’re not quite to the “end of history.” 
Israel is not a “religious democracy”. It’s a nation based on 19th-20th century European notions of ethno-nationalism, like (say) Germany. Only the ethno-nationality in question is Judaism.
The alleged demographic pressure - that Israel will be majority Palestinian - is bunk. In reality, birth rates between the two populations have stabilized and the current “demographic scare” among Israelis is not from Arabs - it is from ultra-Orthodox Jews:
See, for example, the crude birth rate and total fertility rate tables here (and below):
Demographics will not, in the foreseeable future, create a Palestinian-majority Israel.
My understanding is that the right of return might include compensation but no return of specific land.
I also thought that the one state solution was acceptable to the palestinians.
They were being arbitrary and carpicious about what they were letting through. The way they were operating their blocakde was indefensible. They were keeping out things like chocolate and spices.
You REALLY want to use German as an example? Of national racial purity?
Not so. Compensation is only for those who choose not to get their specific land back.
What do you have against today’s Germany? 
Ethno-nationalism has nothing necessarily to do with “national racial purity”.
At base, it is simply the notion that certain ethnic groups should have their own countries - so, for example, Germans should have Germany and the Slovacks should have Slovakia; Indians should have India and Pakistanis should have Pakistan.
Naturally, one glance at the history of the 20th century demonstrates that this concept can lead to all sorts of horrors, but it is absurd in the extreme to think that Israel is somehow unique in being based on ethno-nationalism - or that ethno-nationalism-based countries must of necessity commit horrors. Hence, the example of modern-day Germany.
Here is a short history and some insight from an Arab: http://www.arabnews.com/arab-spring-and-israeli-enemy
The author of this article (who is a rabbi) states that Gazans are doing quite well: As Syria bleeds, 'Human Rights Activists' can only target Israel | Fox News
Did you link to the wrong article?
Cooper never claims that Gazans are “doing quite well”. He merely claims they’re not starving and claims Hamas leaders are hoarding money for themselves.
I think that’s where it came from.
I think rabbi jumped on some stuff like NAZI being “NAtion socialist” and “ZIonism”…
instead of National Socialist Gearbeit-Something…that no body would buy.
So the notion of condemnation is foreign to the peace process? You can’t just pay these people for the present value of what was taken from them?
I’m not really sure what you mean by ethnocentrism.
If Germany behaved the way Israel is behaving wrt maintaining a majority German population, I think people would start talking.
If Germany treated non-Germans the way Israel treated the Palestinians and arab-Israelis, I think people would have a problem with that.
Considering how many people in Germany have lived there for two and three generations without being able to receive citizenship and facing various amounts of discrimination due to this, that’s a rather odd statement.
Perhaps you can link us to a few threads on the Dope condemning Germany for this.
Apparently not.
As I said, this isn’t a conflict about money. The demands are at least in part intended to be impossible to comply with - that’s the point: to ensure that the Palestinian refugees cannot be satisfied, so that they may permanently be in a state of angry deprivation - ripe to be recruited as footsoldiers.
Ethno-nationalism, not ethnocentrism. If you don’t know what ethno-nationalism is, much of the history of the 20th century will be a mystery to you.
Briefly put, ethno-nationalism is the notion that nations ought to be organized around ethnic communities: that a “nation” is a creation, as it were, of a “people’s” desire for self-determination. The notion that “the Palestinians” ought to have a country of their own, rather than be satisfied to be citizens of Jordan, is an example of “ethno-nationalism” - as of course is Zionism.
The notion was extremely influential in the 19th-20th centuries.
Note that much of what is complained about vs. Israel is, in fact, common to many (mostly European) states who are organized along ethno-nationalist lines - often reflected in the very names of the countries themselves: “Germany” is the homeland of the “Germans”, “Greece” is the homeland of the “Greeks”, “Italy” is the homeland of the “Italians”, etc.
You may well ask - as you have done - ‘if this is the case, why does everyone complain about Israel’s policies, and not about those of Germany, Greece, or Turkey?’
It’s a good question.
I’m not sure who are you talking about, can you be more specific?
I know that you don’t get German citizenship merely by being born in Germany and that can lead to illegal aliens having children that are illegal aliens at birth. I don’t see how that is remotely comparable to what is going on in Israel.
Are you talking about people who were chased off their land and then denied the ability to return or naturalize to Germany?
Are you saying that people that legally reside in or enter Germany have something on their driver’s license identifying them as not being a real “German”
Are you saying that what Germany is doing is just as bad as what Israel is doing?
My understanding was that the largest objection to the Palestinian right of return was the demographic challenge it presented.
Having grown up and lived in America, the notion of ethnic nationalism seems pretty primitive but based on your link to the wiki page, I don’t see how this really applies to Israel? I mean how much does the Ethiopian Jew have with the Russian Jew? Other than a shared religion and the commonalities that spring from that?
I think Jews have carved out a homeland and have defended it against hostile neighbors and at this point the only thing worse than a million Palestinian refugees would be a million Palestinian refugees AND a million Jewish refugees. But we still ought to do something about a Palestinian population that is kept in a “state of angry deprivation - ripe to be recruited as footsoldiers”
Does the Gaza Strip (Palestine) get a share of the enormous “Leviathan” offshore gas field?
If the Leviathan field is as big as claimed, I can see a new conflict brewing over that.
Oh heaven help us if there is actually oil there and not just gas. So far its not an earth shattering amount of gas and frankly gas is not nearly as transportable as oil so its harder to sell, it will just make energy prices in the immediate area a bit cheaper (like the middle east needs cheaper gas). If there is oil then “there will be blood”
That isn’t the case. Palestinians generally have no real interest in becomming Israeli citizens, and some in fact have been offered citizenship and rejected it - the Palestinians of Jerusalem - which isn’t compatible with fear of demographic threat (there are exceptions, like gay Palestinians). What they want, is their lands back - which pretty well of necessity means removing the current set of inhabitants. The fact that this is a pipe dream is neither here nor there.
The notion of demographic threat is highly overblown. As demostrated upthread.
Ethnic identity is very malliable and clearly doesn’t have to be based on some sort of pseudo-genetic basis, any more than any other sort of national identity. An Etheopian Jew is as much a Jew as a Polish Jew. It makes just as much “sense” (or as little) to have “Jews” form a nation, as to have “Turks” or “Greeks” - if you examine “Greek” or “Turkish” nationality, you will no doubt find it is genetically pretty mixed, too.
As it turns out, all you need is a shared sense of being a “nation”.
Certainly. Some have offered solutions - for example, at one point Canada offered to take them in, allegedly, which would certainly be better than living pretty well anywhere in the ME - only to have them angrily rejected as incompatible with the “right of return”.
The big conflict there is between Israel and Cyprus on the one hand and the Turks on the other.
The problem is this: Greek Cypriots wish to develop the gas in their territory; the Turks do not like this, as the territory is disputed, and they insist on having their share (or all). Cypus has a deal with its only local ally, Israel. This made the Turks get militant.
There is some speculation that the recent downturn in Turkish-Israeli relations is basically fueled (to make a pun) by this conflict - that the sudden interest of the Turks in Gaza, and the flotila run-in which really put the kibosh on Turkish-Israeli relations, was sanctioned by the desire on the part of the Turks to get more beligerent so as to assert their rights to a big slice of this possible pie - the Turks made noises about moving in their navy. Just so happens this is the very area of contention they wish to move their navy into.
The interests of Gazans, and the Lebanese, are going to be trodden under, as they lack the power to enforce them - same would be true of Greek Cypriots of course. The real issue is to what extent the Turks and Israelis - the actual powers in the region - are willing to sabre-rattle over this, and to what extent they can influence their (mutual) trade partners and allies.
The situation is very complex, as of course Turkey is a NATO ally and Israel is not, but has a special relationship with the US; and Turkey cannot risk too much beligerance against the Cypriots, lest that alarm the Euros. While the Euros are perfectly willing to see the Turks take a slap at the Israelis, they are not so interested in seeing them take another slap at Cyprus. The Yanks, of course, want nothing to do with Turkish-Israeli hostilities.
In short, another fine ME conundrum. 
These are also interesting:
Just in case anyone has any doubts about Jews living in that area for many thousands of years: Does Israel Have No Roots There in History? | HuffPost Religion
Wait, It almost sounds like you are saying that most of the land in Israel actually was taken from Palestinians. I was under the impression that most of the land was either wasteland or purchased. Certainly they are not demanding land that the Jews have purchased or wasteland that they turned into arable land (which would belong to the Jews even under Ottoman law). Or are you saying that the land that was taken or confiscated from the Palestinians no longer belongs to the Palestainians in the same sense that America no longer belongs to the Inidians.
So you traded Palestinians for Orthodox Jews. I suppose its an improvement but you might be better off making peace with the Palestinians in the long run and have a minority Jewish state than a majority Orthodox state.
So perhaps Palestine is a nation as well?
I had never heard that. Do you have a cite?
Who has doubted the presence of Jews in the middle east for at least 5000 years other than folks like Ahmedenijad? The point some people were making in this thread was that for there weren’t very many Jews for centuries in what would become Israel until the Aliyahs.