The Instigator
OsamaTheCityzen
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points
The Contender
Emilrose
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Building Israeli Settlements on Recognized Palestinian Territory

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
OsamaTheCityzen
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/10/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 549 times Debate No: 88049
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (11)
Votes (2)

 

OsamaTheCityzen

Con

I believe that building settlements on Palestinian Territory (i.e: the West Bank and Gaza) is illegal and should be strictly punished. Leaders are speaking against it but nobody is stepping up to punish them for it. It is a form of oppression, and it's only harming the Israeli government and people, because it is causing Palestinians to act violently against these settlements. I think that all settlements should be removed from Palestinian territory.
Emilrose

Pro

==Accepted==

Thanks to Con for initiating this debate--I look forward to reading his/her arguments.

My basic case: As Pro, I will be arguing *against* the statement--which is that 'building settlements on Palestinian territory (I.E the West Bank and Gaza) is illegal and should be strictly punished.'

Con will have to prove that:

-this is *definitely* Palestinian territory, according to both national and international law.

-that settlements are presently being constructed in Gaza (as they state.)

-that in the case of building settlements, it is something that constitutes 'a form of oppression.'

-that (in the case) of building settlements, it justifies violent behaviour from Palestinian people and is the root cause of the ongoing conflict.

-that, assuming there's settlements within Palestinian territory (again, Pro has to show this), they should be removed.

Con will also have to explain precisely what kind of punishment they think is appropriate and/or necessary against Israel.
Debate Round No. 1
OsamaTheCityzen

Con

Thank you for accepting the debate, but when I said that settlements are being constructed, I meant only the West Bank. Gaza is still, however, Palestinian territory (and I was referring to it being a territory by the i.e, not having settlements). It is still illegal to build settlements there, but as of 2005, these settlements were pulled (1).

A brief history, to demonstrate where Palestinian territory lies: Pre-1948, there were very few Jewish settlements in the land that was known as "Palestine". The Palestinian population (the Christians and Arabs) was 87.84% of the population in that region in 1922, but started decreasing after Jewish immigration, to 69.29% in 1942 (2). After the state of Israel declared independence in 1948, and several wars later (fast forward to 1967), the United Nations passed Resolution 242 that necessitates (i)Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict; and (ii)Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force. They included a map, defining the territories exactly, which include the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, and the Golan Heights in Syria. The first part of this resolution calls on Israel to withdraw from those territories, and the second part calls for the recognition of all the states in the area, referring to Israel recognizing Palestine and Palestine recognizing Israel (3).

Building settlements constitutes a form of oppression because it is an occupation of another country's land, and this occupation takes resources from the Palestinians without proper compensation, often demolishing their homes in the process (4). When people's houses are destroyed, their land taken, their resources stolen, they resort to violence. It is not the point of the debate to argue whether it is justified or not, but many Palestinians, namely Hamas, definitely think that it is justified because they are fighting an oppressive occupation. If the Palestinians stopped resisting, there will be no more violence from their side, and Israeli violence in response will cease. It is then, I argue, the root of the ongoing conflict.

There is no doubt that settlements do exist in the West Bank territory, which according to UN resolution 242 that I have mentioned above, are illegal. In the West Bank, "Around 300,000 Israelis live in settlements..., scattered in pockets amidst 5 million unwelcoming Palestinians." (5).

Lastly, I do not have to explain precisely what kind of punishment I think is necessary against Israel. That is up to bodies like the United Nations and others to decide. It is not the topic of our debate. We are debating whether they are illegal and should stop or not, and if found illegal, then they should logically be punished like any other illegal behavior. We are not deciding the punishment here. I implore you to stick to the debate topic.

1. http://www.washingtonpost.com...
2. http://www.cjpmo.org...
3. https://unispal.un.org...
4. https://news.vice.com...
5. http://content.time.com...
6. http://www.latimes.com...
Emilrose

Pro

Emilrose forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
OsamaTheCityzen

Con

Forfeiture does not demonstrate good conduct. I look forward to your arguments, if any, in this round.
Emilrose

Pro

Emilrose forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Emilrose

Pro

Emilrose forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
OsamaTheCityzen

Con

In conclusion, Pro started out the debate in a seemingly enthusiastic way but forfeited every single round after I gave my argument. Pro also failed to give an argument themselves or use any resources. I look forward to the voting process.
Emilrose

Pro

Emilrose forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Adam2isback 7 months ago
Adam2isback
Good job. Emilrose's argument doesn't make sense. Nonsensial arguments as usual.
Posted by whiteflame 11 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Everything// Mod action: NOT Removed<

6 points to Con (Conduct, Arguments, Sources). Reasons for voting decision: .

[*Reason for non-removal*] Full forfeit debates are not moderated unless the voter votes for the forfeiting side.
************************************************************************
Posted by Rami 11 months ago
Rami
If rockets stopped coming over our heads and terror tunnels below our feet, then they would have legitimate claim. Perhaps, they would use the aid to build bridges instead of bombs. Countries are realizing what is happening to the aid they send, and they are slow to fully send out what they promised. Just so you know, I'm not blaming the Palestinians. I'm blaming their terrorist government.
Posted by OsamaTheCityzen 11 months ago
OsamaTheCityzen
The first round is for acceptance and listing of a basic argument for your cause.
Posted by Emilrose 11 months ago
Emilrose
As you haven't outlined the debate structure--is the first round for acceptance?
Posted by OsamaTheCityzen 11 months ago
OsamaTheCityzen
They pulled out of Gaza but stayed in the West Bank, which is much bigger. Also, they continue bombing Gaza and preventing aid from reaching there, banning the ambulances from driving because they're "too wide", 90-95% of the water reaching Gaza is undrinkable AND they get 4 times less water as Israeli settlers but pay 5 times as much, so tell me again how it's fair. I recommend you read Jimmy Carter's book, "Palestine: Peace not Apartheid". It will really inform you, and all the facts that I gave were from that book.
Posted by imnotacop 11 months ago
imnotacop
I would.
Posted by Rami 11 months ago
Rami
They pulled out of Gaza. Do you want me elaborate?
Posted by OsamaTheCityzen 11 months ago
OsamaTheCityzen
How id building settlements going to stop terrorism? If anything it'll anger them more and they'll be more hostile. Also, it's against international law, and it's inhumane and causes the death of MUCH MORE Palestinians then Israelis. Debate me if you're so sure Rami.
Posted by imnotacop 11 months ago
imnotacop
Why don't you accept the debate if you're so sure of yourself?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Overhead 10 months ago
Overhead
OsamaTheCityzenEmilroseTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: PRO FFing almost every round, never getting round to offering their argument and not using any sources means they lose out in the relevant categories to an opponent who did not FF, offered an argument and used sources.
Vote Placed by Everything 11 months ago
Everything
OsamaTheCityzenEmilroseTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: .