You conveniently omit the fact that the Hebrews got their title for the land by conquering someone else who was then its owner. The Romans just were the next link in the chain of ownership. You got it by conquest; you lost it the same way. Why is the title of one conqueror any more valid than that of any other conqueror?
Army: Blast in Korean DMZ wounds two South Korean soldiers (Reuters)
from the article: Police probing rightist MK over fake West Bank outpost deal