The Instigator
Hanspete
Pro (for)
Winning
11 Points
The Contender
HadiHemmat
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Is Israel justified in it's attack against Hamas?

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 2 votes the winner is...
Hanspete
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/17/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 930 times Debate No: 59113
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (9)
Votes (2)

 

Hanspete

Pro

I argue that Israel is well justified in attacking Hamas as it has attacked Israel endlessly for almost 10 years.

1st round:Position
2nd round: Arguments
3rd round: Rebuttle
4th round: Closing arguments

Please no vulgarity or personal attacks, I don't expect sources so we can debate opinions not facts, facts we'll debate in another debate. Good Luck!
HadiHemmat

Con

Okay I see your point, but take into account how it all started in the first place. A few years ago I had this idea that if the Jews were to have year long negotiations with the Palestinians like responsible human beings and came to a fair agreement about the distribution of land, they may be justified to respond to acts of violence. But as i remember it, Israel invaded the land, claiming that it was theirs in the first place. I believe the Jews that were doing well in Germany fled and wanted to take control of somewhere else. Because from what I understand, the Jews were doing quite well in Germany and that's why Hitler hated them so much because the Germans themselves suffered from poverty. I cant say that I have been following the complete history between Israel and Palestine, but it has never been fair for the citizens of Palestine to suffer because the Jews think that the entire country belongs to them. In my opinion it is quite barbaric for today's standards, there should be national talks that take place throughout many years of negotiations. Like for example, Iran's nuclear program, it has been years of negotiations and humane actions being taken to make sure everything is in order. I think Israel always takes it way too far, when Palestinians are seeing their fellow innocent civilians being murdered, I think they have the right to show that they can provide themselves with some defense, even though the comparison of terrorizing is far from how Israel has treated the civilians of Palestine, which in my opinion is inhumane and barbaric to today's standards
Debate Round No. 1
Hanspete

Pro

Alright your history is correct, mostly. Palestinians have suffered of their own accord attacking Israel and then running away squealing to the U.N. For peace talks. Quick comment on Iran, it's a disaster. And in terms of the people of Palestine they are way better off now than they were. I want to ask as question, why are civilian casualties so high? I will give you my answer, but I want to know why you think so. They are high because of three reasons, one Hamas is lunching rockets at Palestinians and blaming Israel, two they are using Palestinians as human shields, and three they are throwing people at the rockets, I am not making that up. Israel's treatment of the Palestinian people is far from barbaric and inhumane, the Israelits gave the Palestinians the entire West Bank to live in and that really has quelled problems between the two group, too an extent of course. Many of the minorities suffer at the hands of their own religious leaders and local leaders, they are gar united unalienable right by the Israeli constitution so long as they follow the law. So let me ask you is that inhumane or barbaric?
HadiHemmat

Con

I agree that Palestine should have worked with other countries in the U.N. to prove that they are being terrorized and forced to give their land away instead of just getting angry about it and trying to retaliate by whatever they've tried doing from the beginning that obviously hasn't worked. The way the world see's it, its a battle between the two and both are responsible for being too violent, I wont say that either has been more violent than the other because I don't know all the facts. This is not how things should be working these days, killing people is just wrong and both have done their fair share of killing, whether it was innocent civilians or the actual criminals. Also Israel should have worked with the U.N. too, they were wrong for taking matters into their own hands and using military force to take what they claim is theirs, this is the kind of crap people did in medieval times, it is different today and things like this should never have gone this far. But I have to say I cant agree with any of your three reasons because it sounds completely biased, Israel is launching attacks, and so is Palestine...there is no conspiracy to blame anyone and using people as human shields is just an excuse because how can that even be possible unless its close combat? I mean it just sounds like your using the term figuratively which you could relate to that in any case similar to this anywhere in the world. Although I have heard on media sources about those claims but it just doesn't sound right to me. As far as Israel treatment of Palestinians, all I gotta say is they could have done better, at least before this all started back up, and even then it was just let them live with whatever they got. Inhumane? yes I believe so because a caring human being would help others to live a comfortable life, not just throw them out to the West Bank like garbage, leaving them with limited resources and treating them like prisoners and remove them from their own society because they simply think of them as garbage. Israelis have everything America has to offer, but the Gaza Strip had only resources to JUST be able to survive, basic resources, nothing advance, no military, no trade system, nothing. Everyone in the world contributes to other nations for economic growth, the people of Palestine had all that taken away from them. So again yes, it is barbaric and inhumane for today's standards.
Debate Round No. 2
Hanspete

Pro

In terms of the Gaza Strip, The Palestinians asked just for that so what's there is what they got. The U.N. did not believe (back in 1946) that Palestinians were being terrorized, they still don't or they would've forced Israel to back off, or disarm them. The reason Israel is launching attacks is because Hamas is attacking them. Tell me, if someone is attacking you (Hamas) are you going to sit around and not defend yourself (Israel)? To say Hamas did not say people need to run at the missiles (I.e. Human Shields) is ludicrous, I saw the tweet myself. If it doesn't sound right does it resonate with you logically that a lesser power would do everything possible to maximize casualties to make it look poorly on the greater power, triggering international pressure for the greater power to let up it's attack? Tell me if this doesn't resonate logically and why or if it does and why.
HadiHemmat

Con

Okay well i was not aware of what the U.N. thought back then. But I am trying to not bring up the fact that it is possible that the UN is being pressured because of financial, political, and regional interests of certain countries because it is based on just a possible conspiracy and may not be the truth. But I guess this debate isn't about the whole idea of Israel invading Palestine, and i see your going back to the point where does Israel have the right to defend itself, or in my opinion retaliate against Palestine? And i still say no because again, it just shouldn't be an acceptable way of dealing with things these days, weapons of mass destruction being used constantly is like complete insanity, from both sides. Hypothetically lets say Hamas or the Palestinians never tried to defend themselves and were just slaughtered for control of their land, maybe then it would be possible for other countries to immediately step in and defend Palestine and like you say disarm Israel. Even now if they would cease fire, Israel would then truly be committing a war crime. Oh and this goes with what you say about them trying to maximize casualties by stepping in front of the missiles, but that's not how you do it, they have a wrong idea but it might actually work if Israel wont stop and actually try to figure something out peacefully. I read a counter cease fire plan by the people of Gaza Strip like 2 days ago in response to Israel's cease fire plan, but it does not seem like anyone is going for any peaceful agreement anytime soon. The plan basically states that they want more freedom which I believe is reasonable, if they are willing to cease fire, and since Israel has plenty resources, they should respond in a peaceful manner, Israel just wants to completely obliterate them from the land.
Debate Round No. 3
Hanspete

Pro

Israel is not using WMD's clarify that point please. Why doesn't Israel have the right to defend itself?

Just so you know Israel did attempt at peace talks: http://rt.com...

Since the rest of your article focuses on Palestine and not Hamas that's all I have to say, I rest my case.
HadiHemmat

Con

oh man i see what's going on here, you have politics too far up your butt you don't even care about anything else. You are materialistic so your opinion is based on man made crap that will eventually cloud your mind so terribly that I promise you, you will end up in hell. Humanity is being disintegrated, and you are lost and too far gone. I am sorry for you and I hope you find your way as to what is truly important. As a closing argument I'll just say that you can't just be closed minded and the "justification" shouldn't be based on just one thing as you put it. Open your mind fool your brain is a brick.
Debate Round No. 4
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Spedman 2 years ago
Spedman
First of all the guy says that Israel bombed Hamas because of the killing of the teenage Israelis WHICH IS COMPLETELY FALSE!!!!!!!!! This guy fails to address the fact that Hamas launched the first rockets which was unprovoked. He also fails to address that twice Israel has participated in cease-fire agreements in the past two weeks and Hamas broke BOTH of the agreements. This man also refuses to acknowledge that Hamas is considered a terrorist organization by Egypt, the United Kingdom, the United States, the European Union, Canada, and Japan. He blatantly ignores that Hamas is using human shields to protect their missiles who are indeed their own citizens. Israel has made several attempts to warn citizens to evacuate their homes which were mostly ignored. The man in the video is clearly Anti-Israeli and makes no attempt hold Hamas responsible for any of the crimes they have committed.
Posted by POPOO5560 2 years ago
POPOO5560
https://www.youtube.com...

The Gaza Bombardment - What You're Not Being Told !
Posted by HadiHemmat 2 years ago
HadiHemmat
yup we're back to that main point in the debate I just wanted it to be clear because most people i argue with on facebook have completely clouded and biased opinions that sound like they copied off the mainstream media lol
Posted by Spedman 2 years ago
Spedman
You are correct my friend, but Hamas is a completely different issue than Palestine. Hamas is considered a terrorist organization by the U.S, Israel, Egypt, and Canada. Egypt tried to get them to cease-fire but it only resulted in Hamas breaking it and continuing to attack Israel.
What is Israel suppose to do about an enemy who blatantly breaks cease-fire agreements. We are not talking about past events we are talking about something happening now which is resulting in deaths due to Hamas' complete disregard for human life, Israeli and Palestinian. The only on Israel has is to invade Gaza and hopefully get it in Hamas' head that if you keep attacking Israel there will be consequences.
Posted by HadiHemmat 2 years ago
HadiHemmat
Okay I see your point, but take into account how it all started in the first place. A few years ago I had this idea that if the Jews were to have year long negotiations with the Palestinians like responsible human beings and came to a fair agreement about the distribution of land, they may be justified to respond to acts of violence. But as i remember it, Israel invaded the land, claiming that it was theirs in the first place. I believe the Jews that were doing well in Germany fled and wanted to take control of somewhere else. Because from what I understand, the Jews were doing quite well in Germany and that's why Hitler hated them so much because the Germans themselves suffered from poverty. I cant say that I have been following the complete history between Israel and Palestine, but it has never been fair for the citizens of Palestine to suffer because the Jews think that the entire country belongs to them. In my opinion it is quite barbaric for today's standards, there should be national talks that take place throughout many years of negotiations. Like for example, Iran's nuclear program, it has been years of negotiations and humane actions being taken to make sure everything is in order. I think Israel always takes it way too far, when Palestinians are seeing their fellow innocent civilians being murdered, I think they have the right to show that they can provide themselves with some defense, even though the comparison of terrorizing is far from how Israel has treated which in my opinion in inhumane and barbaric to today's standards
Posted by ChosenWolff 2 years ago
ChosenWolff
Jf the resolution was "Is Israel justified in its missile attacks against the Administrative government in Palestine" then I would accept.
Posted by ChosenWolff 2 years ago
ChosenWolff
Remove the apostrophe in "its'
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
I'll be intrigued to track this, as I'm in agreement with you.
Posted by Spedman 2 years ago
Spedman
Completely agree with you my friend since Hamas did indeed attack Israel first which makes them the aggressor. They brought it on themselves I say, and everyone knows you don't mess with Israel. Just ask the Egyptians they more than anyone.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Conservative101 2 years ago
Conservative101
HanspeteHadiHemmatTied
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's arguments, while shorter, were also better and easier to follow. Con's personal attack on pro at the end makes Pro the person with the better conduct (especially since this was in the rules of the debate).
Vote Placed by Romanii 2 years ago
Romanii
HanspeteHadiHemmatTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro showed that Israel's attacks on Hamas were mainly out of self-defense; meanwhile, Con mostly misunderstood Pro's arguments, defending Palestine rather than Hamas, so Arguments to Pro. Con's entire last round was an abhorrent mess of personal attacks, so Conduct to Pro as well. Con's complete lack of of capitalization lost him S&G points as well.