Conquered by who? The Israelites? The British? The Turks? The Arabs? The Persians? The Assyrians? The Babylonians? The Israelites?

My understanding was that, at the end of the various wars in which non-Israeli territory was annexed by counteroffensive against the aggressing sovereignties (Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, with USSR-backing), Israel made every effort to allow "refugees" to repatriate OUT of the occupied areas and back behind the new boundary of their home sovereign. This proposal was flatly rejected by pretty much all the aggressing nations, and those living in the occupied areas were encouraged to stay as "refugees" instead of relocating into Syria, Lebanon, Sinai, etc. I believe the concern was that, allowing those Lebanese, Syrian, Egyptian, Jordanian, people to relocate behind the new boundary would be an admission of defeat and a de facto acceptance of the new boundary won by the Israelis in counteroffensive.

In effect, all of Israel's neighbors attacked her (repeatedly) and have repeatedly been soundly beaten back, but have refused to acknowledge defeat by allowing citizens from the areas annexed by Israel to repatriate. This seems to be the seed of the current "Palestinian crisis." I may be wrong but that was my understanding of the general silhouette of the history? Am I wrong here?

Since the surrounding "Arab" sovereigns are the ones who initially declared war, and they are also the ones who basically refused to allow their people back into their territories from the occupied areas, do they not bear some responsibility for "punishing" the "Palestinians?"