“The oaths require living in galus until Hashem chooses to end the Galus. Nowhere does anyone rule that if someone breaks this rule that they could therefore now be free of the requirement to live in galus. This, of course, would be akin to “sheLo yehei chotei niskar” from shas. And if you understood that galus was for our benefit, then you would immediately see why it’s absurd to even posit such a thing.”
The oaths are exactly one thing. Don’t make up stuff. There is no Mitzvah to knock on the doors of the nations and beg to be subjegated. The misquoted Maharal that Satmar refers to explains that the Galus is unnatural and that it requires an active Gezeira forcing it in place. The three oaths are three Gezeiros that keep the situation suspended in midair. And you just can’t go against it.
There is no Mitzvas Galus. It is a warning that you can’t outsmart Hashem. By raising the importance of these oaths and turning them into Yesodei Hadas you then can’t understand a simple logic, and equate it to fire on Shabbos.
I’m very unconvinced that any of them were violated, especially since it worked and the whole idea is that it won’t. Bnei Ephraim didn’t get out successfully; the state of Israel did get established. But regardless, having a state has nothing to do with going up en masse or breaking out if Galus on our own.
Yes, it’s obvious that the Zionist organizations would have wished for mass migration and a peaceful crusade, but it didn’t happen. It’s obvious that they caused a lot of trouble in Yiddishkeit just like any replacement ideology, which is the main reason Rabbonim had to counter these organizations.
But it happened, one way or the other. And Hashem was aware of it, I’m told. No, we didn’t outsmart His Galus plans.