The Instigator
Rsammut
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Emilrose
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points

Is the conflict in Palestine a genocide?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+5
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...
Emilrose
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/21/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 697 times Debate No: 65593
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (9)
Votes (2)

 

Rsammut

Pro

For the death toll for both countries, there is considerably more Palestinian deaths suggesting an uneven battle- genocide? The Palestinians being condensed to gaza and the west bank (a concentration) and then civilians being targeted- genocide?
Emilrose

Con

Accepted. First off I will provide a brief definition of the term: "genocide".

noun

The deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.

(1.) http://dictionary.reference.com...

Examples of "genocide" is something I will expound upon in round two. Overall. the term "genocide" is defined by deliberate intention to not only serioisly harm but in the vast majority of cases actually destroy a certain people. Historical cases suggest that it is generally ethnically motivated, or in some cases; political. With every case that is considered genocide--high numbers and statistics (in many cases, in the millions) have also prevailed. Otherwise, every conflict, whether defensive or not, would be categorised as a genocide.
Debate Round No. 1
Rsammut

Pro

Rsammut forfeited this round.
Emilrose

Con


Opening Argument

As outlined in round one, I will now include historical examples of "genocide".

Statistically speaking, the worst genocide in modern history was actually perpetrated by Chinese leader Mao Ze-Dong. These mass killings took place within 1958-61 and 1966-69 (China) and 1948-50 (Tibet). The number of those killed is 9-78,000,000.

Second only to this example is the Holocaust (1939 to 1945)--which is well-known as being one of the most brutal genocides. Over 12,000,000, namely Jews, Roma gypsies, ethnic Polish, were killed.

Thirdly, there is the case of Congo (1886 to 1908), 8,000,000 people were killed at the command of King Leopold II of Belgium.

Another example is the imposed famine of Ukraine and soviet labour camps (1932-39, by Josef Stalin.

The killing of 5,000,000 civilians under Hideki Tojo, Japan (1941-44) is also considered a genocide.

There is also the genocide conducted by the Ottoman Empire, in which 1,200,00 Armenians, 350,000 Greek Pontians and 480,000 Anatollians and 500,000 Assyrians were killed. (1915-20).

These are all cases that constitute as "genocides", primarily due high statistics and the intent in which is behind them. I'll highlight again that ethnic cleansing a large factor in many genocides. Unlike the conflict between Israel and Gaza, that took place between July/August, genocides are generally prolonged affairs.

Naturally a number of other genocides that are worthy of mention have also been committed, but due to character limit I will now begin with the case of Israel and Gaza:

Prior to the Israel Defence Forces entering Gaza in July of this year, Hamas--the official government of Gaza--which is also a categorized terrorist group, had made three armed attempts at underground tunnel infiltration into Israeli towns. During this period rockets/missiles were also being aimed at civilian targets in Israel; by the complete ceasefire in August over 4500 had been sent over.

Evidence of Hamas exploiting its civilian population has also surfaced. For example, during the conflict Hamas used the al-Shifa hospital as its main headquarters. Three UN schools were found with rockets, and journalists reported on Hamas storing and firing weaponry from civilian buildings. Photographic evidence of Hamas using civilian infrastructure has also been published.


Statistics that have come out of Gaza are heavily disputed, with many suggesting that the (young) men are noticeably overrepresented and a large portion of those killed were actually militants. Cases of entire families being stated as killed, and then being discovered as alive, also occurred.

(1.) http://www.scaruffi.com...

(2.) http://www.timesofisrael.com...

(3.) http://www.france24.com...

(4.) http://www.reuters.com...
Debate Round No. 2
Rsammut

Pro

Ayelet Shaked 'Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there." She is clearly calling and saying that Israel needs to kill the palestinians!

http://www.amnesty.org... I think this is all the evidence I need against your 'fugures' of the death toll. Try looking at an unbiased website next time instead of listening to Israeli propaganda.

*correction Hamas and Fatah. Hamas was democratically voted into defend Palestine. The UN has confirmed that they are NOT using civilians as a shield.

I would use unbiased websites to back up your point because the Times Of Israel is obviously bias.
Emilrose

Con

Within the quote that Pro has used Shaked has not explicitly stated that "Israel needs to kill Palestinians", rather this is an interpretation applied by Pro. To clarify: Shaked is an Israeli politician and member of far-right party "Jewish Home".

"I think this is all the evidence I need against your 'fugures' of the death toll. Try looking at an unbiased website next time instead of listening to Israeli propaganda."

Here Pro has not only one source--in which I could find others that would contradict and offer difference evidences, Pro has also stated that I do not look at "unbiased websites" and that I exclusively listen to "Israeli propaganda"; which I would like to highlight is an accusation assumed by Pro and something that is not proved. As can seen in round one, I posted a video that was from Indian news outlet NDTV, in the video they clearly show Hamas setting up a rocket-firing base directly outside a hotel.

Another source I included was from news outlet France 24, again, a non-Israeli source. The article shows another video in which Hamas can be seen launching rockets from, I quote directly: "heavily populated areas with civilians". The article also comments: "Children can be seen playing on and near the rocket launchers.", thus substantiating my point. Alluding to again to objective use of source, Reuters (a well-known media outlet) is also non-Israeli.

Pro exclaims that: "I this this all the evidence you need against your "fugures" (correction: "figures") of the death toll". One source and one figure is not enough to confirm whether a statistic is actually definitive or not. Pro suggests that this source by amnesty is complete fact which is not how evidence is actually examined. More importantly, the source used by Pro dates back to March 2008, which was six years ago. Therefore it bares absolutely no relevance to this debate and the most recent conflict that has taken place between Israel and Hamas.

Moreover, it states: "230 Palestinians", which as I will again reiterate to Pro, does still not classify as an actual genocide. If it is, then the 174,000 estimated civilians killed in Iraq as a result of U.S military action is clearly also a "genocide", in fact--much more so.

As for my own assertions on Gaza statistics, major news outlets including the BBC, NY Times, and even al-Jazeera have admitted that figures published may not be entirely accurate. In fact, head BBC's head of statistics explicitly called for caution with figures, claiming that there are "serious" problems with the widely used numbers. Here is his exact statement:

If the Israeli attacks have been 'indiscriminate,' as the UN Human Rights Council says, it's hard to work out why they have killed so many more civilian men than women.”.

Men have in fact been overrepresented and the figures are open to inquiry.

(1.) http://www.ibtimes.co.uk...
Debate Round No. 3
Rsammut

Pro

Rsammut forfeited this round.
Emilrose

Con

As Pro has once again forfeited--I have no other additional arguments to rebut; however, I will use the remaining characters to expand on my own.

Why Israel Has Not Committed Genocide

I'll briefly highlight again that any action that has took place between Israel and Hamas within Gaza is is not a genocide, For the following reasons that I outlined in round one: a "genocide" is the systematic and purposeful killing of a large number of people. All historical cases that are considered genocides exceed the number of "100,000", a statistic that is far off those from Gaza. Generally, cases of genocides happen over a prolonged and sustained period of time--in many circumstances, years. The purpose of the "genocide" is not just target a select numbers, but to actually kill en mass and more or less eliminate the whole group. Another fact is that all conflicts that have occurred--have been militarily initiated by Hamas. In most cases by indiscriminate firing of rockets, but also in the case of this summer: the building of terror tunnels and attempted attacks on Israel through them.

Israel, has not committed or even attempted a "genocide" of the Palestinian people. If this was the case, the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) would not go to the lengths of distributing leaflets across Gaza or making phone calls and sending text messages to residents in dangerous areas, which is both costly and time consuming; and is also something that no other army in the world has exercised. In addition, if genocide was the goal the IDF would also not build their own field hospital specifically to treat Gaza citizens in, nor would Israel allow Palestinian patients to cross the border and get treated in Israeli hospitals. Other examples are Israel delivering aid into Gaza, and IDF soldiers providing food to Gaza children that was originally packaged for them.

Above top page is a a recorded example of an IDF soldiers giving food to a young Palestinian child. In all cases of genocide, it's very unlikely that the perpetrators would have ever done this.

https://www.youtube.com...

You can also view recorded evidence of the IDF setting up its own field hospital for those in Gaza.

https://www.youtube.com...


Other examples of Gaza aid
, immediately after the summer conflict Israel began sending building supplies into the Gaza strip for its rehabilitation. In fact, during the conflict: over 4.58 million liters of diesel for the power station in Gaza Strip, 1.73 million liters for UNRWA. Along with:
9.8 million liters of fuel; 4.26 million liters of gasoline for transportation; 4,843 tons of gas for domestic needs.

Israel also carried out 6 infrastructural repairs; 55 electrical repairs; 18 water supply repairs; 6 sewage repairs; 7 communication repairs.

Also during Operation Protective Edge, over 4,243 Palestinians came through the Erez crossing.

*Continuation of evidences in round 5*

(1.) http://www.cija.ca...
Debate Round No. 4
Rsammut

Pro

Rsammut forfeited this round.
Emilrose

Con


Again Pro has forfeited and offered no rebuttals, so I'll now outline a summarization of my argument.

(1.) Statistics As highlighted in both round one and two, a "genocide" largely constitutes the mass killing--or attempted mass destruction--of an entire people. The example of Israel and Gaza is very different; mainly due to the fact that the fatality numbers do not correspond with historically upheld genocide statistics, and also because Gaza is governed by Hamas; which is an extension of the Muslim Brotherhood and a categorized terrorist group. The vast majority of genocide cases happen unprovoked and without initial attack by the "victims" of the genocide. Including examples such as the Holocaust, people forced into concentration camps were without any valid means of protection or ability to maintain their human rights. Hamas initiates conflict with Israel by firing rockets at civilian targets and attempting attack through underground tunnels, they are therefore to be held accountable for provoking response.


(2.) Israeli Aid

Also provided were examples of Israeli aid towards Gaza, again something that it would not occur under terms of genocide. As well as IDF solders assisting Gaza civilians by contributing food and building a field hospital with the specific purpose of treating civilian injury within Gaza. Moreover, you have the high number of Gaza civilians that came from the Erez border to receive treatment in directly in Israel; again something that would never happen if Israel was committing their genocide. During the summer Israel continued to supply electricity to Gaza despite the fact that Hamas was firing numerous rockets (in total, over 4500) into Israeli neighbourhoods and towns and was refusing to accept or maintain ceasefire agreements.

(3.) Civilian Exploitation

As indicated previously, as the official governance of Gaza Hamas also bares the responsibility of preventing any fatalities and protecting civilians. Instead--they use civilian infrastructure (as displayed) and purposely place civilian population in danger. This is the most fundamental factor in why fatalities take place and why civilians are left exposed. Hamas has been filmed firing rockets from schools, hospitals, mosques, and neighbourhoods. Other examples such as storing the rockets and weaponry in these places and placing booby traps in civilian property is also evidenced.

Sources:

(1.) https://www.youtube.com...

(2.) https://www.youtube.com...


(3.) http://www.smh.com.au...

(4.)
http://www.worldtribune.com...


Debate Round No. 5
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Emilrose 2 years ago
Emilrose
I know! It's kinda silly to put five rounds if you're just going to forfeit.
Posted by yoshidino 2 years ago
yoshidino
Why do they forfeit!? Even if you don't have a good answer, you can still give a bad answer... I see people do it all the time! lol!
Posted by Emilrose 2 years ago
Emilrose
*do* look--typo error.
Posted by Emilrose 2 years ago
Emilrose
I used one source that is Israeli--as you can see the video and other sources are all impartial.
Posted by Emilrose 2 years ago
Emilrose
@Oliark, I agree completely. This could have the potential for a good debate and it's a topic I'm very interested in.

Likewise--it is correct about those statistics. Militants and men of a certain age are largely over-represented.

@Rsammut, hope you post an argument at some point! Even if it's short and mostly your opinion; it'd be a shame to waste the debate.
Posted by Oliark 2 years ago
Oliark
This could have been an interesting debate... however Pro was already behind before this even started because of his flawed analysis of the death toll.
He claims that Israel is targeting civilians while numbers explicitly show the opposite.
Posted by TheBrandMan 2 years ago
TheBrandMan
The Middle east has waged war against Israel since the day it was created, and they want to kill the Jews just because they are intolerant and violent. Israel has tried time and time again to make peace with its surrounding enemies but their enemies are thirsty for blood. In 2005, Israel finally left Gaza and of course, not surprisingly, Gaza elected HAMAS (a terrorist organization) to lead their land and started launching rockets into Israel. What would you do in a situation like this?
Posted by Emilrose 2 years ago
Emilrose
As you've not outlined any rules: presumably the first round is for acceptance?
Posted by FantumHeist 2 years ago
FantumHeist
What?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by yoshidino 2 years ago
yoshidino
RsammutEmilroseTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit!
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
RsammutEmilroseTied
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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture