I continue to find this very interesting, but there are two things that make it hard. THe first is that I think you read miliotary campaigns of the day too much through a modern lens. Assuming the House of David is historical, its armies would have been tribal levies and mercenary retainers. There would not have been generals or the communication system to coordinate separate campaigns through the royal centre. Even reading the Biblical accounts (which were written much later), the theme is named individuals fighting out individual battles against specific targets. It may simply be a matter of phrasing, but I just cannot see Solomon's generals communicating with him over whether to remove troops from one front to the other, or evacuating civilians from surrendering cities to fortify them against counterattack. That's modern war.
The other is purely semantic, and I will echo previous posters: There are neither Israelis nor Palestinians in the first millennium BCE. There are Israelites, Canaanites, Philistines, Edomites and various others. Palestinians and Israelis have been in existence since around 1900, using the words earlier is anachronistic.