Haredi opposition to Zionism

What is the three weeks?

See Ketubot Kiya. An oath that they will not go up the wall and will not rebel against the nations. Haredim see this as a source that prohibits establishing a state, certainly by force of arms. These are the ones who

In my understanding, such reliance on legend is extremely weak. Perhaps they have a more convincing source?

What does this discussion have to do with the sources? It doesn't start with them and isn't related to them.

Indeed. By the same token, anyone who does not live in the land practices idolatry (see page one above). Which is truly outrageous. Personally, I would rather go through the no of breaking the oath than practice idolatry. But as the rabbi said, “what's the point of this discussion and the sources? It doesn't start with them and isn't related to them.”

If there is a clear and tangible danger in the land of Narli that it is permissible to leave the land
For example, in a project that brings destruction and lays the foundation for annihilation
There is no commandment to be destroyed

It is not appropriate for Rabbi Mikhi to fall into such a generalization. The reliance on the oaths is unique to Satmar, while the rest of the Haredim oppose Zionism because of its essentially secular nature – the idea of turning Judaism from a religion into a nation.

Personally, the attempt by the secular State of Israel to represent Judaism in the eyes of the world seems to me to be a fraud, like the Reforms. Just as the rabbinate represents a false representation of religion, so does the State of Israel represent a false representation of Judaism.