Instigator / Pro
1
1500
rating
1
debates
100.0%
won
Topic
#5129

Israel - Palestine

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Winner
1
0

After 1 vote and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...

SamPike
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
One day
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Winner selection
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
0
1315
rating
296
debates
40.37%
won
Description

I believe Israel is justified in their response to October 7th and anything less than wiping out hamas's military capabilities and some
UN/moderate Arab Nation presence in the Gaza strip will cause the continuation of the conflict.

The best option for the Palestinians at this time is a de-nazificatin of the Gaza strip to usher in a government that believes in economic prosperity first. Once that happens Israel will have a government they can make concessions with.

Round 1
Pro
#1
The sad truth is that every war consists of the death of civilians. If we had social media in 1940, we would have left the Nazis as a sovereign nation occupying most of Europe.
The fact of the matter is that not every was is two sided.
Nazis are bad.
Isis is bad.
Hamas is bad.
The conflation between real life grievances and bad people and ideas needs to end. The same way you cannot reason with the Nazis who believe they are the superior race, Israel cannot reason with a party that won't settle for anything less than the murder of all Jews.
Con
#2
Well, my argument will consist of 4 arguments.

1. Jews stole the land

2. Jews abused Palestinians

3. Jews are overusing their power right now

When we look at these 4 points, we see that even if 3 is somehow false, 1 and 2 and 4 is historically confirmed. But 3 is true because we can all see that Israel killed more civilians in 2 weeks than Russia did in 1 year. So yes, if you can pretend to care for Ukraine, you can pretend to care for Palestine too.

So unless my opponent refutes all 4 arguments that I presented, which he cant of course because these are facts and facts are not lie facts are true, I am afraid that it stands as fact that Jew is the bad guy and/or nazi.
Round 2
Pro
#3
My opponent list three arguments, but calls them four. I will address each one accordingly though:
1. Israel stole the land:
Crash course on basic history. The Ottoman empire fell after world war I to the British. The area was then under British mandate with a state to be promised to both the Jewish and Muslim populations living there at the time. Israel accepted the proposed state after WW11 declaring their independence which prompted the surrounding Arab Nations to attack. If you are a sovereign nation that gets attacked, and gains land as a result, you gain land as a result.

2: Israel abused Palestinians 
3. Israel continues to abuse Palestinians now.
I'd like to address this agreement my first clarifying, who are the Palestinians?
The 2 million Muslims living in israel fighting alongside them in gaza? The ones that sit on the supreme court? How about the members of the parliament?
I'm so I'll assume you're referring to the ones living in Gaza.
Hamas, who has a 75% approval rating has in their charter from 1988 "There is no solution for the Palestinian problem except by Jihad"  and they have shown the world that they mean it.

Even if you're referring to the West bank, the PLO has a fund with a pay out to the families of those who commit suicide bombings and the like.

Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005 for peace.
It returned to the entire Sinai desert for peace.

Israel has proven they are willing to make concessions to be left alone. Pointing to the sufferings of those that live under genocidal governments that care more for their territorial gains then killing Jews is a false flag. 
The sufferings of those living under the jurisdiction of Hamas and the PLO aren't Israel's responsibility.



Con
#4
Since my opponent didnt explain what makes sovereign nations, I am afraid we will just have to reject his argument.

The history lesson which he gave us was basically: "Britain stole the land and gave it to Jews".

I dont see how does that make it not theft, but I am pretty sure my opponent will explain it to us in the next round.

The Jews, who are minority in Palestine, now rule it? I guess my opponent believes in something opposite of democracy and property rights.

Also, there are plenty of cases of Jews kicking palestinians from their homes.

So yeah, extend.
Round 3
Pro
#5
1: Being that my opponent rejects my argument on the basis of not explaining what a "Sovereign Nation" is, I can assume they accept the premise that conquests or land gains of a sovereign Nation are not theft.

Therefore, the answer is simple. The definition of a sovereign Nation is a state whose government has authority over its nation and territory.

Israel, after declaring independence, and fighting off the Arab nations in the immediate aftermath has proven it has both of these qualifications.

Boiling down my argument to Britain stole the land and gave it to the Jews is a straw man.

Britain, fought and won the Ottoman empire in world war I, and gained their territory. Even my opponent will agree that that is justified conquest of a sovereign Nation.

2: In terms of my opponent's second point of Jews being a minority in Palestine, I respectfully we'll have to question my opponent's knowledge on the subject.

As I mentioned earlier in my last argument, who are the Palestinians?

The West Bank and Gaza are not part of Israel. The Jews are the majority in Israel currently as there are 2 million Israeli Arabs and almost 7 million Jews.

3: To my opponent's last point of there being plenty of instances of jews kicking Muslims out of their houses:

This is not an argument. There are also plenty of instances of Jews kicking Jews out of their houses for example when they vacated Gaza. There are so many instances of actual terror attacks, suicide bombings, not to mention the indiscriminate rape and murder that took place on October 7th.

Let's have an actual argument based off facts and solutions instead of falling on platitudes.

Con
#6
I will skip this round.
Round 4
Pro
#7
I'm not sure how this debate forum works, but I assume my opponent means that they concede the points I have made.

Therefore, I will reiterate my initial argument. The best option for the Palestinians is to have the complete destruction of Hamas and for israel, or other countries to take hold of the education and leadership to eventually install a government that cares for economic prosperity. Gaza is just as large as Singapore, and could have been a Singapore of the Middle East if it wasn't run by a terror group.

Once that happens, Israel will have a functional government they can make land concessions with.

Right now, Hamas doesn't want a two-state solution. It wants the complete destruction of Israel.

Offering a two-state solution now, is like giving an iPhone to a toddler.
Con
#8
I extend my arguments.
Round 5
Pro
#9
I've already refuted your arguments. 

Will you address anything I said?
Con
#10
My opponent didnt refute the following arguments:

"2. Jews abused Palestinians

3. Jews are overusing their power right now

When we look at these 4 points, we see that even if 3 is somehow false, 1 and 2 and 4 is historically confirmed. But 3 is true because we can all see that Israel killed more civilians in 2 weeks than Russia did in 1 year. So yes, if you can pretend to care for Ukraine, you can pretend to care for Palestine too."

"The history lesson which he gave us was basically: "Britain stole the land and gave it to Jews".

I dont see how does that make it not theft, but I am pretty sure my opponent will explain it to us in the next round.

The Jews, who are minority in Palestine, now rule it? I guess my opponent believes in something opposite of democracy and property rights.

Also, there are plenty of cases of Jews kicking palestinians from their homes."

Bye now.