The Instigator
LaL36
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Chocolateisop
Con (against)
Winning
1 Points

Hamas is more at fault for the current suffering of Palestinians than Israel.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 3 votes the winner is...
Chocolateisop
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/6/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 652 times Debate No: 60064
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

LaL36

Pro

I said Hamas in the title and that is the focus but this also includes other terrorists like them such as whoever was responsible for the murder of the three Israeli teens. By current I mean in the last few months. Just to be clear it is still permitted to bring up an occurrence before if it is relevant. Other than that I think the title says it all but I will define fault. Fault- Responsibility for a problem, mistake, bad situation etc. source: Merriam Webster dictionary.

1st round is for accepting the debate and to what I said above.
Chocolateisop

Con

I don't accept what you said but I accept this debate.
Debate Round No. 1
LaL36

Pro

Congratulations to my opponent for screwing up a debate.
Chocolateisop

Con

Thank you but I will only debate on the side I think is right.
I will post my opinion even if you are bi*ching about it.
Even if Hamas kill THREE innocent people that shouldn't make Israel kill hundreds of people.
It really makes hitler's words true:You will swear to me for Jews that I couldn't kill
Debate Round No. 2
LaL36

Pro

Wow I can't believe I am actually responding to this. If you have in issue with the debate message me.

1. It is not even confirmed that Hamas is responsible for the death of the three teens and while Israel is investigating it is not the main reason Israel is in Gaza. Since you clearly are ignorant about the current situation Israel is taking the measures that they are taking because rockets have been fired at their civilians and they discovered tunnels that lead to Israel that is suppose to be used for a massive attack on Israelis.
2. At this point I, and hopefully everyone else, cannot accept anything else you say considering you agree with reasoning of a mass murderer who murdered millions of people not just Jews.
3. You did not even accept this debate as you claim because what you are saying has nothing to do with who is more at fault.
Chocolateisop

Con

You closed messages,

I will change the system of this site if neccesary but I wont go back in my opinions.

1-Israel didn't just bomb Gaza, They bombed UN hospitals.
2-Israel have the technology to discover underground for years and they learned those tunnels now? did you actually believe this?
3-They truced 2 times and each went to trash because Israel used another bomb.
4-Israel kills Palestinians for decades and they actually have reasons for those murders NOW.
PS:I hate Palestinians because of what they did to us in WW1(I am Turkish) but YOU CAN'T KILL PEOPLE BECAUSE OF SOME TUNNELS AND INACCURATE ROCKETS.
Debate Round No. 3
LaL36

Pro

1. There were weapons there.
2. Yes this is something unexpected. Israel found them searching for the teens. If they did not there was suppose to be a massive terror attack by Hamas terrorists dressed as Jews to kill and kidnap thousands of Jews on the Jewish new year.
3. Hamas was the one that broke all the cease fires. During one they killed three soldiers.
4. Once again Israel targets Hamas and they have every reason to target them. Unlike you I do not hate Palestinians. I hate terrorists like Hamas. I actually think their just stuck in the middle of this conflict with Israel and Hamas.

PS: You have never even said the issue you had with this debate.

Please vote pro.
Chocolateisop

Con

I will just say one thing: They bombed UN hospitals for Palestinians.
Vote whoever you want.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Theunkown 3 years ago
Theunkown
LaL36ChocolateisopTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Round 1 outright confused me. If Pro wants Con to accept with what he says than why bother making this a debate rather than a forum post? Pro further goes on to accuse Con of 'screwing up the debate' despite his completely illogical debate structure of con accepting Pro's arguments. Conduct to Con When they actually got to the debating in Rounds 3 and 4. Neither side was really overly convincing, really on the fence here. So I gave a tie. But really Pro, if you expect your opponent to agree with you then this is not a debate.
Vote Placed by jackh4mm3r 3 years ago
jackh4mm3r
LaL36ChocolateisopTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Well, I guess it's a debate. However, it would be better likened to a tribe of ancient humans fighting neanderthals compared to the chess-like maneuver wars of medieval kings; both sides were sloppy, Pro did not satisfy a burden of proof, and both sides lacked use of logical argumentation (the key weapon in a debate) to follow any of their assertions, merely stating what they believed.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 3 years ago
bladerunner060
LaL36ChocolateisopTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: I'm not sure exactly what Con was going for, but he certainly did not support a negation of the resolution. Unfortunately, Pro had BoP and never really presented a case. So I'm nulling this debate for never having actually happened. As always, happy to clarify this RFD.