So I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt, cause at least you acknowledge the genocide and you're still under the process of conversion. I'm gonna make you understand what settler colonialism is and how even the earliest thinkers of Zionism referred to the Zionist project as a colonial endeavor:
Colonialism is not simply the act of a group of people returning to their homeland, it's the act of stealing or depriving that land from the indigenous population that already exist there. The term indigenous refers to the people who were colonized, the Arabs (whether Jewish, Christian or Muslim) in this case. Even Herzl, Ha'am and Jabotinsky held that the Arabs feel at least the same instinctive jealous love of Palestine, as the old Aztecs felt for ancient Mexico, and their Sioux for their rolling Prairies, and were displaced either by land purchase and forced displacement. The relationship here between the Zionists who did Aliyah and the Arabs is that the Zionists became the exploiters, the colonizers and the occupiers, while the Arabs, who were indigenous to the land, became the deprived, the colonized, and the occupied, having lost their land.
they HAVE a homeland and almost half the world’s population of Jews lives there,
Ze'ev Jabotinsky and Herzl literally compared the colonization of Palestine to the colonization of the Americas and Rhodesia respectively, I'd suggest reading the Iron Wall, because Jabotinsky is one of the earliest pioneers of Zionism. Futhermore, do you believe that Israeli Jews then have the right to settle in Gaza and (currently) the West Bank, because the land was once part of their homeland? I'd go ahead and say, no you don't, so why does that make anything else any different?
I need you to understand that the Arabs made up the majority of the population when the UN partition took place. Naturally, the Jewish people became the majority, because 750.000 Palestinians were expelled during the Nakba. However, before the partition took place, David Ben Gurion planned ahead and took as much land as possible from the Arabs and forcefully expelled them, several massacres took place, such as in Deir Yassin, Lydda and Ramle, according to Yitzhak Rabin. Ben Gurion confined this in his diary:
The compulsory transfer of the Arabs from the valleys of the proposed Jewish state could give us something which we never had, even when we stood on our own during the days of the First and Second Temples.… We are being given an opportunity which we never dared to dream of in our wildest imaginings. This is more than a state, government and sovereignty—this is national consolidation in a free homeland.
A State at Any Cost: The Life of David Ben-Gurion (2019) Tom Segev
When the Peel commission was rejected by the Zionists, because they believed that they had an inalienable right to settle anywhere in Palestine, David Ben Gurion said:
I see in the realisation of this plan practically the decisive stage in the beginning of full redemption and the most wonderful lever for the gradual conquest of all of Palestine.
Does the establishment of a Jewish state [in only part of Palestine] advance or retard the conversion of this country into a Jewish country? My assumption (which is why I am a fervent proponent of a state, even though it is now linked to partition) is that a Jewish state on only part of the land is not the end but the beginning…. This is because this increase in possession is of consequence not only in itself, but because through it we increase our strength, and every increase in strength helps in the possession of the land as a whole.
Palestine and Israel: The Uprising and Beyond, (1990) David McDowell.
Keep in mind that ALL of this preceded the Nakba and the UN partition plan as part of Ben Gurion's Plan Dalet. It was premeditated and foundational for the Zionist project to work. The expulsion of the Arabs was a necessity and David Ben Gurion announced that to the Zionist executive in 1936:
The foundation of of our state will be based on a Jewish majority... without it, we cannot fulfill the vision of a Jewish commonwealth.
So to respond to your point, yes, the privilege and exploitation of one people over the other through forceful eviction and displacement is the core definition of settler colonialism. Blaming it primarily on the Bibi regime is misleading, because even the founder of Israel himself wanted to displace the Palestinians. Yes, those Jews who did live in the Land of Palestine are/were indigenous to Palestine, the Jews who participated in Aliyah and settled in the land at the expense of the indigenous people are settler colonizers.
I'll quote Henrich Erlich, the leader of the Jewish labour bund.
When the Zionists speak to the non-Jewish world, they are tremendous democrats and depict conditions in the Palestine of today and the future as models of freedom and progress. But if a Jewish state should arise in Palestine, its spiritual climate will be: eternal fear of the external enemy (Arabs); eternal struggle for every foot of ground and for every bit of work with the internal enemy (Arabs); and an untiring struggle for the extermination of the language and culture of the non-Hebraized Jews in Palestine. Is this a climate in which freedom, democracy, and progress can grow? Indeed, is it not the climate in which reaction and chauvinism ordinarily flourish?
Henryk Erlich and Victor Alter: Two Heroes and Martyrs for Jewish Socialism. The article originally appeared in the Yiddish newspaper Di Tsukunft in October 1938.
You can twist this to mean something differently, but history has made it abundantly clear that this is Settler colonialism and that Zionism is a genocidal ideology, it won't recover from that. If you support the UN verdict that the Settler state is committing genocide, then you have to accept the fact that Palestinians have an inalienable right to return to their former lands both within the OPT and Israel proper, a right that has been constantly denied to them by their oppressors, all for the sake of maintaining the Jewish majority.
