State Sanctioned Assassinations - the answer to world terrorism! :rolleyes:
Printable View
State Sanctioned Assassinations - the answer to world terrorism! :rolleyes:
That is pretty amazing.
I don't know enough about this conflict or the Hamas party but this assassination it strikes me as non-productive (to say the least).
Agreed, but I'm all for it regardless.Quote:
Originally posted by KQ
That is pretty amazing.
I don't know enough about this conflict or the Hamas party but this assassination it strikes me as non-productive (to say the least).
I guess what I'm wondering is -- how is it that state sponsored assassinations aren't considered acts of terrorism?
Well, "technically," since he wasn't the acknowledged leader of a country, it's not considered an assassination and thus doesn't run counter to the Geneva Conventions. Murder, pure and simple, yes. However, the Israelis did have a warrant out for his capture - dead or alive. He should have either turned himself in (HAH!) or fled their sphere of influence. This, BTW, is why they have NOT killed Arafat.
Same rules apply to Osama, BTW. We can, and could have, taken him out without breaking any international treaties/laws, since he's a wanted criminal and not a "leader" in the technical sense.
Personally I think the Israeli policy of hunting down and killing these Palestinian Leaders is counterproductive to any peace process, but then again Ariel Sharon was NEVER interested in a peaceful resolution of the conflict. To be fair, probably most of the PLO leadership isn't either, 'cause then they'd be out of a job. Same thing goes for the IRA, ETA, and most other so called "Resistance Fighters." Take their war away and they become irrelevant and powerless - not something for them to look forward to.
I'm so sick of Israel bringing the rest of the world down with their distorted colonialism and perverse policies, they got themselves into this mess, they need to get themselves out. Bring our boys home from Iraq, find Osama, and then let's start over. No more aiding, supporting, and siding with Israel, we're neutral, like Switzerland, only we tread lightly and carry a very big stick.
For every " terrorist leader " killed 10 more are there to fill his place. Personally I have little sympathy left for Israel. if your policy is violence expect it to be returned upon you. The only thing that concerns me is Bush is leading us down the same path.
Mideast Reacts Strongly to Assassination
Thousands Protest Yassin Assassination
March 22, 2004
Times Headlines
By Megan K. Stack, Times Staff Writer
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — Rowdy street demonstrations erupted throughout the Middle East today as the assassination of Hamas' aging founder angered Muslims and raised fears that the intifada's violence could spread beyond Israeli borders.
Calls for revenge sounded from the university campuses of the Persian Gulf to the dusty streets of the Levant after Israeli pilots shot dead Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, a sort of spiritual grandfather and resistance symbol throughout the Arab world.
For the first time in memory, Hamas threatened to retaliate against targets outside Israeli borders, deepening fears that Arab-Israeli bloodshed could spread into other countries.
Anti-Israel protests broke out in Jordan, Lebanon, Yemen, Egypt, Sudan and Iraq. Students at Cairo's universities spilled into the streets crying, "When Sharon crosses the line, we must kill him and his soldiers."
Meanwhile, Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak gave a rare public show of emotion. The killing was "regrettable and cowardly," Mubarak told reporters. Asked about peace talks, which Egypt has been trying to kick start for more than a year, he scoffed: "What peace process?"
In the Muslim world, Yassin was seen not as a fearsome terrorist, but as a proud Muslim fighter degraded by age and suffering, a wheelchair-bound old man whose physical frailty symbolized the struggles of the Palestinians.
Many Arabs said they were revolted at the idea of Israeli pilots flying U.S. aircraft over a mosque and shooting the old man with a missile.
"This is an insult to everybody all over the Islamic world. Everybody has to take a stand now," said Abdul Latif Arabiyat, a member of Jordan's Islamic Action Front and a former parliament speaker. "Nobody can say, 'I'm civilized but I'll be silent.' After this crime the word peace has lost its meaning."
Arab satellite channels covered the story live from sunrise to sunset, and the audience was mesmerized.
In the first stirrings of diplomatic trouble, Mubarak canceled a controversial trip to the Jewish state by members of his government, who were to celebrate the anniversary of Egypt's chilly peace with Israel.
"(Demonstrators) are calling to cut all ties to Israel, and they're even calling for revenge," said Egyptian analyst Dia Rashwan. "This will put the Egyptian government under more pressure, and we don't know how much pressure the government can support. It's very dangerous now, not only in Egypt but all over the region."
Special correspondent Fayed abu Shammalah and Times Staff Writer Alissa J. Rubin contributed to this story. Rubin reported from Baghdad.
When Palestinians blow up Israelis school buses, that's understandable anger. When America defends itself, that's indefensible. When dissent is crushed with secret police and torture chambers, that's not worthy of comment. When some people point out that traitorous behavior is unadmirable, that's the recapitulation of Nazi Germany.
This guy that they "assassinated" was the founder of Hamas. One of the most ridiculously violent terrorist groups in the world. these people are our enemies, plain and simple. your moral equivalency is shameful.
If the U.S. killed Osama bin Ladan, would it be terrorism?Quote:
Originally posted by 13
I guess what I'm wondering is -- how is it that state sponsored assassinations aren't considered acts of terrorism?
That's what people say about the U.S. and al Qaeda. Both positions are ignorant.Quote:
Originally posted by danimal's dead
I'm so sick of Israel bringing the rest of the world down with their distorted colonialism and perverse policies, they got themselves into this mess, they need to get themselves out.
Israel's policy is not violence, but it is easy to argue that the Palestinian position is violence (indiscriminate terrorist violence against civilians, no less).Quote:
Originally posted by board
Personally I have little sympathy left for Israel. if your policy is violence expect it to be returned upon you.
Israel needs to defend itself, and we may not like how it does so, but killing known terrorists responsible for multiple mass-murders is every state's right.
The Palestinians can control these terrorists if they want to, but they don't. That leaves the ball in Israel's court.
If bieng a leader of a country is what qualifies a victim as bieng assasinated, then what happend to Dr. Martin Luther King, or Malcom X? Niether of them were the president, but everyone considers them to have been assasinated. So what is the actual definition of assasination?Quote:
Originally posted by Tippster
Well, "technically," since he wasn't the acknowledged leader of a country, it's not considered an assassination and thus doesn't run counter to the Geneva Conventions. Murder, pure and simple, yes.
Quote:
Originally posted by Dexter Rutecki
Israel's policy is not violence, but it is easy to argue that the Palestinian position is violence (indiscriminate terrorist violence against civilians, no less).
Israel needs to defend itself, and we may not like how it does so, but killing known terrorists responsible for multiple mass-murders is every state's right.
The Palestinians can control these terrorists if they want to, but they don't. That leaves the ball in Israel's court.
Agreed.
" Israel's policy is not violence " you don't consider missile attacks violence ?
" but it is easy to argue that the Palestinian position is violence (indiscriminate terrorist violence against civilians, no less). " Ok if civilian causalities are the measuring stick for what is or what is not violence then Israel is beyond guilty. I have NO need what so ever to qualify that statement ! ! ok ok if you need to grab any Time magazine from the last 20 years if you insist on seeing pictures of dead Palestinian boys and girls.
" Israel needs to defend itself, and we may not like how it does so, but killing known terrorists responsible for multiple mass-murders is every state's right. " given this logic Hamas has EVERY right to " assassinate " Ariel Sharon as he was a mass murderer of civilians during his time spent in the Army and now as Prime Minister. Need proof go do a search on his military record, it's on par with Slobodan Milosevic ! A particularly poignant example of this is the 1982 Sabra and Shatila refugee camp massacres.
" The Palestinians can control these terrorists if they want to, but they don't. That leaves the ball in Israel's court. " well speaking of controlling your own destiny Israel could also very well leave ALL the occupied territories, remove ALL the settlements and recognize Palestine, but they choose not to. They have chosen to repress and violently subdue an ENTIRE people who were a sovereign nation some 60 years ago. So like I said originally IF YOUR POLICY IS VIOLENCE EXPECT IT TO BE RETURNED UPON YOU.
" ..... " = Dex.
The probelm with Isreal is Isreal. Dropping the Jewish state into the middle of the Arab world was simply stupid. Forget about history and heritage, the plan was flawed form the start and there is no solution other than to simply flatten the entire place. Demolish the relics of ancient and outdated rel;igions and there would be nothing to fight over...end of story. Religion is the culprit here. Why do we pretend otherwise? Blind faith and organized religion have been the cause of more violence than anything in human history. It's fodder for the feeble, let it go.
Like I said: "Technically," meaning as far as international law is concerned, neither one was assassinated. Of course the dictionary entry states:Quote:
Originally posted by PaSucks
If bieng a leader of a country is what qualifies a victim as bieng assasinated, then what happend to Dr. Martin Luther King, or Malcom X? Niether of them were the president, but everyone considers them to have been assasinated. So what is the actual definition of assasination?
1 : to injure or destroy unexpectedly and treacherously
2 : to murder by sudden or secret attack usually for impersonal reasons
So that would certainly make the assertion that these two men were "assassinated" grammatically and literally correct. The difference is, admittedly, somewhat "nuanced"
I agree that the Palestinian people have gotten the shaft, Board, but they deal with the problem irrationally. Haven't they ever heard of Dr. Martin Luther King? They choose violence over diplomacy (remind you of anyone in the White House?). They lose the respect of the world community, breed endless generations of "martyrs", and perpetuate endless counterattacks. It's like gang warfare. Maybe they should use some of their time and resources to teach their kids something valuable.
Another funny thing to ponder - Most of the Arab world sypathize with the Palestinians, yet you never see them (Saudi, Syria, etc.) offer them any land or resources.
israels stated policy might be non violence, a chicken in every pot, 2 cars in every garage..but the actions are what matters, not a bunch of bs put out for public consumption. isreals leaders have plenty of practice lieing, starting with their lie that bombing and killing the palestinians that lives there at the end of ww2 was justified because that area " was the jewish homeland" what a crock of crap israels words are compared to their military/police actionsQuote:
Originally posted by Dexter Rutecki
Israel's policy is not violence, but it is easy to argue that the Palestinian position is violence (indiscriminate terrorist violence against civilians, no less).
Israel needs to defend itself, and we may not like how it does so, but killing known terrorists responsible for multiple mass-murders is every state's right.
The Palestinians can control these terrorists if they want to, but they don't. That leaves the ball in Israel's court.
How would we feel if some outside powers arbitrarily decided to give Georgia back to the Cherokees? It WAS theirs historically, after all... Why was it OK to force the South African government to abandon "Apartheid," yet the same policy is perfectly reasonable in Israel?
When you have no means of resisting "fairly," how can you not expect these "terrorist" actions? How else would YOU fight the oppressor?
This was a can of worms opened by the UN in its infancy. We seem to know better, now that it's too late. Unfortunately for both sides, there's no way to turn back the clock.
Quote:
Originally posted by board
" Israel's policy is not violence " you don't consider missile attacks violence ?
" but it is easy to argue that the Palestinian position is violence (indiscriminate terrorist violence against civilians, no less). " Ok if civilian causalities are the measuring stick for what is or what is not violence then Israel is beyond guilty. I have NO need what so ever to qualify that statement ! ! ok ok if you need to grab any Time magazine from the last 20 years if you insist on seeing pictures of dead Palestinian boys and girls.
" Israel needs to defend itself, and we may not like how it does so, but killing known terrorists responsible for multiple mass-murders is every state's right. " given this logic Hamas has EVERY right to " assassinate " Ariel Sharon as he was a mass murderer of civilians during his time spent in the Army and now as Prime Minister. Need proof go do a search on his military record, it's on par with Slobodan Milosevic ! A particularly poignant example of this is the 1982 Sabra and Shatila refugee camp massacres.
" The Palestinians can control these terrorists if they want to, but they don't. That leaves the ball in Israel's court. " well speaking of controlling your own destiny Israel could also very well leave ALL the occupied territories, remove ALL the settlements and recognize Palestine, but they choose not to. They have chosen to repress and violently subdue an ENTIRE people who were a sovereign nation some 60 years ago. So like I said originally IF YOUR POLICY IS VIOLENCE EXPECT IT TO BE RETURNED UPON YOU.
" ..... " = Dex.
Wow, what is Sharon's handicap if he's on par with Milosevic??? Milosevic cleansed tens of thousands of Muslims over a period of time. Is William Calley on par with Milosevic because he lead a group of US soldiers to kill 100 villagers at My Lai?
Israel isn't strapping bombs to knowing and unknowing women and children to perpetuate a culture of violence. the fact that you actually defend this is reprehensible.
Truth, I do believe there's some well...truth to your assertions:D .
I don't totally agree with the creation of Israel in the mid 20th century. However, good luck taking it from them. Three times the arabs have tried and three times they've gotten their collective ass handed to them. At this time. Vi Victis(sic), to the winner go the spoils.
More food for thought: (from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary)
Semite:
1 a : a member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs b : a descendant of these peoples...
Anti-Semitism:
: hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group
What happened to the Akkadians, Phoenicians, and ARABS?
They offer money, weapons, and training covertly. Anyone recall, a few years ago, when an Israeli patrol boat intercepted a small ship attempting to smuggle wepons and explosives into Palestine?Quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Gaper
Another funny thing to ponder - Most of the Arab world sypathize with the Palestinians, yet you never see them (Saudi, Syria, etc.) offer them any land or resources.
good point mr. g. what's done is done, BUT israel needs to admit the truth about the past and start to treat palestinians as equal citizens, meaning compensation for land takeaways and land to live on now, not the shitty camps that israel forces them into...., plo needs to stop killings and admit that they lost the violent fights, and that jews deserve to live.. what a pipe dream eh?? what the usa needs to do is GET THE FUCK OUT AND STOP GIVING MONEY TO 2 SETS OF VIOLENT CRIMINALS.... to bad the dems and the repubs are such assholes about this issueQuote:
Originally posted by mr_gyptian
Truth, I do believe there's some well...truth to your assertions:D .
I don't totally agree with the creation of Israel in the mid 20th century. However, good luck taking it from them. Three times the arabs have tried and three times they've gotten their collective ass handed to them. At this time. Vi Victis(sic), to the winner go the spoils.
Israel has never, and I doubt it ever will, launch attacks meant to kill civilians. When Israel attacks terrorists, it takes measures to minimize civilian casualties. This is why, in fact, it failed to kill this Yassin guy several months ago--they were unwilling to use a bomb large enough to level his building, instead concentrating just on the area in which they believed him to be (unfortunately, he escaped with minor injuries).Quote:
Originally posted by board
" Israel's policy is not violence " you don't consider missile attacks violence ?
" but it is easy to argue that the Palestinian position is violence (indiscriminate terrorist violence against civilians, no less). " Ok if civilian causalities are the measuring stick for what is or what is not violence then Israel is beyond guilty. I have NO need what so ever to qualify that statement ! !
Quote:
ok ok if you need to grab any Time magazine from the last 20 years if you insist on seeing pictures of dead Palestinian boys and girls.
Many of whom died in the process of attacking Israel. The pictures you've seen, while sad, do nothing to prove anything at all.
Ever seen pictures of any of the thousands of Israeli children killed and maimed by Palestinians? I know, it's never really a source of world outrage (unlike when Israel kills a Palestinian terrorist), but I imagine you still know about these attacks.
Quote:
" Israel needs to defend itself, and we may not like how it does so, but killing known terrorists responsible for multiple mass-murders is every state's right. " given this logic Hamas has EVERY right to " assassinate " Ariel Sharon as he was a mass murderer of civilians during his time spent in the Army and now as Prime Minister. Need proof go do a search on his military record, it's on par with Slobodan Milosevic ! A particularly poignant example of this is the 1982 Sabra and Shatila refugee camp massacres.
Those massacres were carried out by Lebanese militia, not Sharon, nor Israeli forces. Sharon was tried by Israeli courts for his complicity in this, and found to bear indirect responsibility, but to claim he was behind the massacres is a gross distortion.
To claim a Milosevic parallel simply shows the true anti-Israeli nature of your argument, and makes me question your agenda and where you get your information from.
Quote:
" The Palestinians can control these terrorists if they want to, but they don't. That leaves the ball in Israel's court. " well speaking of controlling your own destiny Israel could also very well leave ALL the occupied territories, remove ALL the settlements and recognize Palestine, but they choose not to. They have chosen to repress and violently subdue an ENTIRE people who were a sovereign nation some 60 years ago.
OK, now you've gone off the cliff. Palestine was never a sovereign nation--they went from British control, to Egyptain and Jordanian, to the stateless entity that they now are. The Palestinians rejected the original UN plan for their statehood, and have rejected all offers since then. Israel could leave the territories, as you say, but if you believe this would have any impact on terrorism then you just don't know your history. Palestinian terror against Israel predates any occupation of the West Bank or Gaza. Hamas and Al-Aqsa, both under the protection of the PA, both state their intention to destroy Israel and drive all the Jews into the ocean (or some other death).
Also, Israel has announced that it is unilaterally leaving Gaza. The Palestinian response? Suicide bombings.
Great theory. So the Palestinians use a policy of violence--should they expect it to be returned to them? (It never has been returned, because Israel has only targeted those responsible, not responded in kind by indiscriminately killing Palestinians.)Quote:
So like I said originally IF YOUR POLICY IS VIOLENCE EXPECT IT TO BE RETURNED UPON YOU.
" ..... " = Dex.
ok I have a solution seeing that so many people feel that " legitimate" governments with conventional military forces are justified in defending themselves but poor people without these resources are just blood thirsty terrorists, why don't we simply divert the BILLIONS we give Israel annually to the Palestinians ? That why they can arm themselves to the teeth with American tanks, planes, helicopters just like Israel. This would give them the conventional army we all seem to need them to have and they could then fight it out with Israel on equal terms ! PROBLEM SOLVED ! no more terrorism just good ol' fashioned warfare we can all relate to ! YEE HAW ! ! ! !
even though it has been repeated ad nauseum. Or Saddam's 25k "reward" to homicide bomber families?
To say that the Arab world sympathizes with the Palestinians is hilarious. They treat Palestinians like absolute shit. We treated indians on reservations better than the Arabs treat palestinians.
Quote:
Originally posted by Tippster
How would we feel if some outside powers arbitrarily decided to give Georgia back to the Cherokees? It WAS theirs historically, after all... Why was it OK to force the South African government to abandon "Apartheid," yet the same policy is perfectly reasonable in Israel?
There is no apartheid in Israel. Israeli Arabs have all the rights of other Israelis (there may be discrimination, unfortunately, but there's also discrimination against different types of Jews). The only difference is Arab Israelis do not have mandatory army service (some do serve, though).
Quote:
When you have no means of resisting "fairly," how can you not expect these "terrorist" actions? How else would YOU fight the oppressor?
If Israel decided that it had no way to counter terrorism 'fairly', would it then be OK for Israel to simply level Gaza and the West Bank? By your logic, it is. But I know you're actually arguing for a double standard.
It's a can of worms opened by Arab refusals to recognize Israel and accept a two-state solution. The only plans the Palestinians have claimed to be open to have been those that could never work.Quote:
This was a can of worms opened by the UN in its infancy. We seem to know better, now that it's too late. Unfortunately for both sides, there's no way to turn back the clock.
This would be a wonderful idea. How about the same for the million+ Jews expelled from Arab countries?Quote:
Originally posted by up an down
good point mr. g. what's done is done, BUT israel needs to admit the truth about the past and start to treat palestinians as equal citizens, meaning compensation for land takeaways and land to live on now,
While we're at it, how come no one ever expresses concern for the Palestinians (and other Arabs) who live under Arab oppression? Why are there no protests against Jordanian slaughter of thousands of Palestinians, or Syrian secret police actions against Palestinians?
Those questions are mostly rhetorical, as there is a long history of anti-Zionism (which, as Martin Luther King noted, is usually just anti-Semitism dressed up) around the world used to attack Israel.
why does a crime committed against palestinians by arabs, jordanians, or syria absolve crimes against palestinians committed by israel? once again israel (and they could do it if they wanted to) needs to fess up to what they are to blame for, plo needs to fess up to what they are to blame for, if they ever want to end the pattern they are in. and as i said USA NEEDS TO STOP GIVING MONEY TO 2 SETS OF CRIMINALSQuote:
Originally posted by Dexter Rutecki
This would be a wonderful idea. How about the same for the million+ Jews expelled from Arab countries?
While we're at it, how come no one ever expresses concern for the Palestinians (and other Arabs) who live under Arab oppression? Why are there no protests against Jordanian slaughter of thousands of Palestinians, or Syrian secret police actions against Palestinians?
Those questions are mostly rhetorical, as there is a long history of anti-Zionism (which, as Martin Luther King noted, is usually just anti-Semitism dressed up) around the world used to attack Israel.
The Palestinians chose terrorism instead of other options open to them. You are very uninformed if you don't know that they've had multiple opportunities to have their own country. It's well worth noting that during the time they were 'occupied' by Egypt and Jordan they never had an offer of statehood--it's only with Israel that such offers have been made, even when their stated goal was the destruction of Israel.Quote:
Originally posted by board
ok I have a solution seeing that so many people feel that " legitimate" governments with conventional military forces are justified in defending themselves but poor people without these resources are just blood thirsty terrorists,
How about a Palestine in Jordan and the West Bank? Jordan should be considered Palestinian land, since much of it is populated by Palestinians--but since it's Arabs in control of Jordan, and not Jews, no one will ever make issue of this (particularly not in Jordan, since when the Palestinians did agitate for this King Hussein had them slaughtered in the streets).
The reasons they are called bloodthirsy terrorists is because that is what they have demonstrated themselves to be, hundreds of times over. I would never call all Palestinians terrorists, or supporters of terrorism, but the unfortunately most of them are.
The most recent plan endorsed by the PA is virtually identical to the plan for statehood offered by Israel under the Barak administration (98% of West Bank, all of Gaza). Why did the Palestinians refuse that plan, like they did all earlier ones? Because they knew that at that time Israel would grant it, and unfortunately peace does not serve their interests.
It's sad, but that's how it is.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. The only solution to this conflict is to ship all the Jews out of the Middle East and put them somewhere else. THERE IS NO OTHER SOLUTION.
I never said it did, but I would like to know why intentional killings of civilian Palestinians by Arab countries are tolerated, while Israel's targeting of terrorists elicits condemnation.Quote:
Originally posted by up an down
why does a crime committed against palestinians by arabs, jordanians, or syria absolve crimes against palestinians committed by israel? once again israel (and they could do it if they wanted to) needs to fess up to what they are to blame for, plo needs to fess up to what they are to blame for, if they ever want to end the pattern they are in. and as i said USA NEEDS TO STOP GIVING MONEY TO 2 SETS OF CRIMINALS
To equate the Israeli government with the Palestinian terrorists is to miss the point and make your argument empty. Israel is a democracy that tries to avoid unnecessary civilian casualties, the PA is an autocracy that shelters and supports terror groups that do the opposite.
Glass, man, sheet of glass.Quote:
Originally posted by Blurred Elevens
THERE IS NO OTHER SOLUTION.
OK, Gaper, you quoting Blurred got me to finally click on a post of his and read it.
His new name should be Adolph 'Final Solution' Airdog. No wonder he looks stiff in the air--all that goose-stepping.
Quote:
Originally posted by Dexter Rutecki
OK, Gaper, you quoting Blurred got me to finally click on a post of his and read it.
His new name should be Adolph 'Final Solution' Airdog. No wonder he looks stiff in the air--all that goose-stepping.
Whatever Dex...speaking as a Jew I have to concur with Blurred. Oh, by the way, that Hitler bit was cute.
Wow. That's ludicrous.
Why is the solution not to move all the Palestinians? How about getting rid of all the Tibetans? Hutus? American Indians? Mormons? Kosovars?
Jeezus, some seriously demented thoughts here.
It's really just common sense Dex. Locating a Jewish state in the middle of Arab world is never going to work. Bulldoze all the holy sites and vacate the premises. Let the fucking arab mongrels fight over the scraps and be done with it. Now, if the land had oil I'd say we should take it for ourselves, which is what we should have done with Iraq. No, really, I'm serious.Quote:
Originally posted by Dexter Rutecki
Wow. That's ludicrous.
Why is the solution not to move all the Palestinians? How about getting rid of all the Tibetans? Hutus? American Indians? Mormons? Kosovars?
Jeezus, some seriously demented thoughts here.
WOW ! that is truly fucked up ! ! !Quote:
Originally posted by truth
. Let the fucking arab mongrels
btw Jews have a very legitimate right to live in the middle east ! I just don't agree with Israel's treatment of the Palestinians.
I guess Israel could've gone in the middle of Europe--yeah, that would've worked. Europeans have a long history of treating Jews well.
There were all sorts of wacky plans for putting a Jewish state in Africa, North America, other places, but historically and based on where people lived (by WWII Palestine was full of Jews) there was really only one sensible (and obviously imperfect) choice. I don't think Israel or the World should give in to Arab intransigence. And I doubt there's anywhere in the world that a Jewish state would not have come under some form of attack and hypocritical condemnation.
Unfortunately, the only oil-producing area ever occupied by Israel (Sinai) was given up in exchange for peace. I have to admit that I do share some of your ideas about oil, but I try not to openly admit to that...