How do dispensationalists understand the statements that God fulfilled all his promises to Israel in Joshua 21 and 23?

One of the foundational claims of dispensational theology is that there are various land promises that God has made to the nation of Israel which He has yet to fulfill. One claim is that Israel has yet to take possession of the entirety of the land which was promised to Abraham's descendants: > The Lord makes them perfectly clear. Like any modern-day land purchase, the deed indicates the boundaries of the land given: from the Nile river (which is mainly modern Egypt and Sudan) to the Euphrates (modern-day Iraq). - from Chosen People Ministries But in Joshua 21 we see the following statement: > Thus the LORD gave to Israel **all the land that he swore to give** to their fathers. And they took possession of it, and they settled there. And the LORD gave them rest on every side just as he had sworn to their fathers. Not one of all their enemies had withstood them, for the LORD had given all their enemies into their hands. **Not one word of all the good promises that the LORD had made to the house of Israel had failed**; all came to pass. - Joshua 21:43-45 And in Joshua's self eulogy in chapter 23 he says to Israel: > And now I am about to go the way of all the earth, and you know in your hearts and souls, all of you, that **not one word has failed of all the good things that the LORD your God promised concerning you**. All have come to pass for you; not one of them has failed. - Joshua 23:14 It appears clearly stated in these two verses that **every promise** came to pass. Additionally, the context surrounding 23:14 indicates that if Israel drifts toward unfaithfulness, God will stop restraining the surrounding nations from taking the land again. Since we know that Israel did indeed drift, this seems like an adequate explanation as to why they currently do not possess all that was promised. How do dispensationalists understand these statements of fulfillment made in Joshua?