I’m not completely following the discussion any more (to be honest, the acrimony bothers me, especially since I probably contributed), but I want to point out what I seecasxan inconsistency in Just Emes’ post.
JE quotes Hapardes as saying (implying, to be fair) that the majority held that it would be “possible to agree, according to the laws of the Torah, to the establishment of a Jewish State in a portion of the Eretz Yisael”, “if it were established as a religious state” (my juxtaposition of quotes).
However, JE’s conclusion is a huge stretch: “there were many gedolim who held it would be ok according to the torah–but we should try to make it frum-“.
Established as frum is completely different than established as not frum with the frum on the sidelines trying to make it frum.