The Instigator
Arimfexendrapuse
Pro (for)
The Contender
roborule
Con (against)

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
roborule has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/22/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 346 times Debate No: 100161
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

Arimfexendrapuse

Pro

I am heavily pro Israel, and want to be debate any issues about Israel.
roborule

Con

I will be advocating for the position that Israel should, at a minimum, at least cease its current expansion and construction of settlements.

I look forward to this debate.
Debate Round No. 1
Arimfexendrapuse

Pro

the settlements are not the obstacle to peace. numerous times, most recently in 2002, Israel has offered most of the west bank and other huge incentives, like control of Jerusalem, in summits with numerous leaders of the Arab world, for peace between the nations. and consistently were turned down. this is because, in conjunction with the Muslim religion, the Palestinians, hamas, Hezbollah and fatah all deny Israel's right to exist. most of them have no interest in peace, because they just want to see Israel destroyed. furthermore, in a situation like this, normally the requesting party (the Palestinians) would make an offer to the larger party, Israel. the reason why this has never happened is because they have no interest in peace. even when Israel withdrew from Gaza, as a way to appease the people who live there, it became a bastion of terrorism, launching rockets and making home made bombs and terror tunnels, just to kill Israelis. their actions include: stabbing, kidnapping, suicide bombing, firing rockets at civilian areas, truck bombing, shooting, and even hiding in civilian areas so that they cannot be bombed. they lost the right to the west bank when the Arab nations attacked Israel, and lost. before this discussion goes any further, please condemn hamas, the plo, Hezbollah and fatah, and the Palestinian "freedom fighters" who slaughter women and children.
roborule

Con

First off, in the evaluation of this debate I would submit, for your consideration, a utilitarianism framework. We are thus able to achieve the best outcome for the highest number of people.

The first reason for stopping future Israeli settlements is Palestinian human rights. Israel has, throughout their expansion, had a very poor record when it comes to Palestinian human rights. Israel consistently abuses, mistreats, and uses excessive force against Palestinians who have the misfortune of living on land it decides to occupy. [1]

Second is an attempt at peace. In your opening arguments you are quick to write off the continuing violence as a problem that, in conjunction with the Muslim religion (which at this point is pure speculation). Interestingly, however, you omit and misrepresent the fact that the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative was an initiative proposed by Arab countries. The current settlements are developed strategically in a manner such that it continually subdivides any land that could be remanded to the Palestinians. The fact is the reason peace hasn't occurred is because Israel is not interested. They had an opportunity in 2002 and ignored it all while continuing to build settlements. The best way to pursue peace is simply to stop building these settlements.

In response to your arguments none of them really give us a reason as to why it is Israel should continue building settlements, where as I give you at least two reasons they should not. The deal you mention wasn't proposed by the Israelis at all, it was rejected by them. I condemn all terrorism and to the extent that those organizations are terrorist in nature I would condemn them. In the interest of equality, however, I should note that it has often been thought that Jewish terrorism in the region may be something that is widely under represented. It is found that when Israel was in a situation similar to that of the Palestinians they were committing similar crimes. [2]

All that being said, even if you accept everything mentioned as true you still cannot piece together any reason for expanding settlements further. If anything the constant terror threat should encourage Israel to centralize itself more for its own protection. In the interest of all people involved in this conflict we're going to negate the fact that Israel should continue this aggressive expansion.

1. https://www.hrw.org...
2. https://cup.columbia.edu...
Debate Round No. 2
Arimfexendrapuse

Pro

Sir, with all due respect I'm not sure you know exactly what you're talking about. Israel's human rights record in the West Bank is not pristine, but appreciate record is hard to keep when you are up against an enemy as determined as the terrorists who attack Israel. Your abuse mistreatment and excessive force claims are unfounded, except for home demolition, which is a necessary evil to reduce the threat of terrorism, but more importantly, when it happens it is because the homes are built illegally. The people you are currently defending have a terrifyingly horrible record of Human Rights when they were in charge of the country where Israel now stands. Please look it up. Simply put, the Palestinians who live in the West Bank are a security threat to Israel. When they follow the law, they are considered full citizens of the state of Israel, and are subject to the same treatment of Jews and Christians when they break a serious law. And you are still forgetting that even though the West Bank is considered occupied territory, Israel was attacked by the country who had previously occupied it beforehand, and took the West Bank as a security measure. In the 2000 peace Summit it was offered up almost in its entirety for Peace by Israel, but the offer was refused by Yasser Arafat, not the Israeli state. In fact the King of Jordan and I quote said that yes there are thoughts decision was a sin to the Palestinians. The 2002 Summit you are referring to was started by the Arabs but included exorbitant demands, ones that when offered by Israel in 2000 were turned down so that Syria and Egypt could attack Israel. My statement on the Muslim religion is not speculation, it is the word of the Quran, the Muslims holy book, and I think you need to research the Muslim religion before responding. Of course Israel is interested in peace, it has offered large amounts of land for peace, successfully with Egypt and Jordan, but is constantly working towards peace progress and ceasefire. If Palestinian terrorists were to Simply stop attacking Israelis, then a peaceful resolution could be met. I do not understand how you can think that the slaughter of women and children is somehow a protest of Israel's occupation of the West Bank. You also neglect to mention that during the time where Israel had no occupation of any territories West Bank golan or otherwise, terrorism was still a daily threat, and many Israelis died due to attacks. The countries that surround Israel and the many of the Palestinians who live in it have been trying to destroy Israel from day one. Literally, day one. As soon as Israel was created, all of the surrounding Arab Nations attacked at once in an attempt to destroy the new state. You still do not address the fact that the Palestinians refused to give up anything for peace, and it is always the Israelis who must sacrifice land or lives for short-lived peace always violated by the Arabs/Palestinians. Did you know that Israel is one of the only countries in the world who has never started a war? How amazing is that. The reason why Israel should keep building settlements is because there is no reason why they shouldn't. It is their land to build settlements on, after the country who used to own it attacked them. I find that your refusal to condemn these terrorist organizations by name horrifying. Jewish terrorism in the region is so very rare and the Jewish religion calls in no way for an act of violence. The Quran on the other hand calls for the obliteration of those who refuse to accept the rule of Islam. before the state of Israel Islamic terrorism was still committed constantly, in their own countries and in Pre israel palestine. Moreover terrorism has never been undertaken by the Jewish religion in any way not even by a single sect. In your final statement you say that if anything the constant Terror threat should encourage Israel to centralize itself for protection. I think that statement should expose the hypocrisy of your argument very well. Think about it. The fact that Israel is being attacked by terrorists means that Israel should give in to the terrorist demands for its own good is what you said. That's a disgusting statement. Israel is a growing Nation who expands for its needs, not as an aggressive anti-palestinian campaign. Before posting your response please research the Islamic religion, and the book The Satanic Verses. It exposes the violence in Islam, but you really understand the issue that you are trying to grapple with, read Alan dershowitz, the Case for Israel. That book turned a radical Islamic terrorist into a pro-israel advocate. If it can't convince you nothing can.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.