On the Settlement Enterprise

Hello Rabbi Michael,
Do you think there is moral justification for going and establishing a settlement in a place surrounded by hostile Palestinian villages and then working with the sectoral parties (religious Zionism, which is only a small percentage of Israeli society) so that the state will officially recognize this settlement and be obligated to provide it with security and infrastructure?
I'm not talking about all the communities in Judea and Samaria, the vast majority of which have a national justification that they prevent a Palestinian terrorist organization like the one that exists in Gaza.
I'm talking about those who establish (usually on their own initiative) a settlement on some hill with the goal of settling the land or some vision of Israel's redemption, and at the same time drag the state and the army into providing them with security, etc.
After all, it is very possible that there is a majority of the people, even a fairly large consensus, who do not agree with this approach, and yet that majority later goes and enlists in the army (not all of them for combat, but let's put that aside). And if they were asked, they would not be willing to embark on this adventure and even think it is a really bad idea, let alone pay for it, and even more so would they not be willing to risk themselves or their own children for what they see as the madness of individuals.
So I'll repeat my question: Isn't there a kind of moral injustice in establishing a settlement in the middle of a hostile place and dragging in state and military infrastructure to support it, even though there is probably broad agreement against the idea and that same majority will also have to pay an economic price (and sometimes a bloody price) for this settlement? And does it matter if those individuals believe (against the majority) that there is actually a security justification for establishing that settlement and not just a religious value?
I hope I phrased the question well, I would appreciate your feedback.