The Instigator
Jawad_aslam
Pro (for)
The Contender
snoodle1
Con (against)

Jerusalem should become an independant city state

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
Jawad_aslam has forfeited round #4.
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: 1/31/2018 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 weeks ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 623 times Debate No: 107362
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

Jawad_aslam

Pro

The motion basically means that the plot of land of Jerusalem becomes a city which has its own laws and does not run by other countries laws. As most of us here are familiar that the current president of USA, Mr. Donald trump, is proposing a new policy and if accepted makes jerusalum the capital of isreal, and then it will act as a fuel in the isreal-palestine conflict. The oppsotion party will make an argument regarding the fact that why we shouldn't support the motion but you should consider that not supporting it is not morally right. I would like to remind you that Jerusalem holds gret significane to the three religions of the world. Both isreal and palistine are fighting for Jerusalem to be their capital and many people have died. SO IS IT MORALLY RIGHT THAT PEOPLE DIE???
I would like to bring it to your good knowlege that on 29th november 1947, the jewish leaders accepted the partion plan which was proposed by the United nations as resolution 181-(ll). The resolution recommended the creation of independant arab and jewish states and a special regime for the city of jerusalum. Even though jews accepted the resolution, the arab league and arab higher committee in palestine rejected it, opposing any creation of independant city state of jerusalum. The next year after the resolutiob was rejected, war started and it was known as the war of 1948. HISTORY HAS SHOWN US WHAT HAPPENED WHEN WE DENIED TBAT JERUSALUM SHOULD BECOME AN INDEPENDANT CITY STATE, IT LEAD TO WAR OF 1948. ONLY BY SUPPORTING THE MOTION, THERE WILL BE PEACE BETWEEN ISREAL AND PALISTINE. If we don't support the motion, war is the only solution. Both isreal and palistine are fighting for jerusalum and only by supporting the motion it will be more likely that the plot of land of Jerusalem will become an independant city state which will promote peace
snoodle1

Con

While your solution sounds viable in theory, it is just impractical. First of all, it wouldn't change the fact that Jerusalem is split in two. Who would lead this new nation? If a Jew was elected, the Palestinians living there would be angry. If a Palestinian was elected, the Jews would be angry. The split in the city is so major that making the city independent wouldn't solve much.

Not to mention the fact that Israel is already at a disadvantage n the Middle East (Source: https://i2.wp.com... https://i1.wp.com...) Taking away Jerusalem would only make the weak nation even weaker and increase the chance of another invasion.

You've also forgotten that city states just aren't viable long term. Studies have shown that after 200 years, city states tend to suffer economic stagnation due to the development of oligarchies (Source: https://press.princeton.edu... https://ideas.repec.org... ) This is of course ignoring the fact that ethnic conflict tends to have an impact on the economy, a very negative impact. There's a reason why places like Somalia and South Sudan aren't economic superpowers.

This also wouldn't change the fact that both sides still claim the entire land, and releasing Jerusalem wouldn't really solve the entire problem. If anything it would only hurt negotiations because there'd ow be a THIRD sovereign nation in the area.

And finally, the Jews were there first.

I'd go on, but I want to give you a chance to have a say.
Debate Round No. 1
Jawad_aslam

Pro

My firend, i think that you did not read the whole resolution that i mentioned earlier as resolution 181-(11). That resolution states that if at that time the arab higher committee in palestine and the arab league have accepted it, jerusalum would have become and independant city state.
Now you mention who is going to control that city state, that let me tell you that in that resolution it is written that UN - united nations - would supervise or monitior the actions within the land of jerusalum so neither palistines or jews will have control over it and if they choose to violate this, then they would be violating an international law, and ofcourse that can only happen when both sides agree that jerusalum becomes an idependant city state.
And now you will mention that the city would run dry if this happens, but infact you are wrong, the city will run by the money of the tourists because Jerusalem hold great significance to three religions of the world. Money would also come from people buying food, taxes, etc... so this money would be more than enough to sustain the city and make it an attraction
snoodle1

Con

So the "city-state" would be less of an independent nation and more of a UN buffer zone. Interesting...

There is, to my knowledge, no other example of an inhabited area being controlled by the UN exists. All other UN administrated territory is restricted to everyone except UN peacekeeping forces. The area between the North and South of both Korea and Cyprus is like this, and with Antarctica the people there just follow the law of their home country. How would laws be decided? If the UN makes all the decisions, how do you think the inhabitants would feel about the decisions regarding what laws they have to follow being decided by people they don't elect in an office far away from them? And if the inhabitants of Jerusalem are allowed to vote, then the prior issue hasn't been solved. If a pro-Jew law gets passed, the Palestinians will be angry and vice-versa. By the way, I'm talking about the citizens and not the countries when I say Jews and Palestinians.

You also addressed my argument about the economy of the city state. You say that tourism will keep it afloat, but I beg to differ. Studies have shown that tourism is not a surefire way to build an economy, with countries that focus on tourism ending up with various different results from their economy shrinking, their economy growing and their economy staying the same. (Source: https://www.sciencedirect.com... ) So it isn't a certainty that tourism could keep the economy afloat. Also, you mention taxes. Who would the taxes go to? The UN? If they go to the UN, how do you think the citizens will feel about their money going to an organization that is meant to look after the entire world? How could hey be sure that their money would be focused on them and not on a peacekeeping effort elsewhere. If there's a local government, then it will face the problem of a Jew being elected and the Palestinian residents of the city being angry, or a Palestinian being elected and the Jewish residents of the city being unhappy.

Not to mention that this wouldn't really make either side happy. Rather than reaching a compromise in which each side gets some of what they want like the 2 state solution proposes, you're just giving neither side what they want. Surely a compromise of some sort would be better?

Also, here are some arguments you didn't address:

#1: It would make Israel more vulnerable. Iran still plans to wipe Israel of the map. Before you say the UN would stop it, Iran is friends with Russia and China, 2 fifths of the UN council. They'd VETO any action against Iran and the others wouldn't put up a fight out of fear of starting WW3.

#2: Both sides still claim the entire land. A UN buffer zone hasn't stopped conflict in Korea and it won't stop conflict here. Both Israel and Palestine still want control of the entire land, and they'll fight to get it.

#3: The Jews were there first. Jerusalem is the heart of Biblical Israel and should belong to the Jews. The Palestinians have no historical claim to that city. The Palestinian government is a literal terrorist group so to suggest that Israel should abandon Jerusalem because of them is ridiculous. Jerusalem is only important because of Judaism. The reason the other two religions find it important is because it was first important to Judaism. Jerusalem is mentioned hundreds of times in the Jewish texts. Jerusalem is in the Israeli national anthem. The recapturing of Jerusalem by Israel in 1967 is the culmination of Jewish history. Washington DC was put on a swamp just to keep it out of any state, Jerusalem is where it is because of the Bible. To suggest that Jerusalem should belong to anyone except the Israelis is an idea I don't understand.
Debate Round No. 2
Jawad_aslam

Pro

here are my answers to your questions:
#1. You are saying that without Jerusalem you are vulnerable when no! because you have modern day superpower with you so - unites states of america ( UNITES STATES VETO WHENEVER YOU ARE QUESTIONED IN THE UN PROVE IN #5) - YOU CANNOT SAY THAT YOU ARE VULNERABLE. IN ADDITION YOU ARE KNOW TO POSSES NUCLEAR ARSENAL.

# 2. As long as Iran is concerned, and as I mentioned earlier you are known to posses nuclear arsenal as that itself will let the Iranians think twice before attacking, and if you want a prove look at Pakistan, if Pakistan did not have a nuclear arsenal Indians would plan an attack and that is the reason why to this day we have Indian troops firing at the borders of the Pakistanis. And if you still think that Iran is a threat than In a very general sense, it's no secret or cutting-edge analysis that Israel's military is the best-equipped and best-trained region,"http://www.aljazeera.com...

#3. WELL YOU MENTIONED BOTH SIDES STILL CLAIM THE ENTIRE LAND, well i only agree on this statement since Palestine reject the resolution, and Jewish leaders accepted it ( partion plan ) Jerusalem belong to Palestine.

#4. JEWS WERE FIRST. well you say that you have prove of monuments carved in Hebrew and it dates back to the period of Egyptians. OK but you also have to take into account that the language Hebrew also flourished among the the Egyptians, so there is another option, maybe the Egyptians carved and unless it specifically says that it was carved by Jews, there is no proof. SO PLEASE STOP MAKING PROOF WHEN SOMETHING DOES NOT SPECIALLY SAY IT BECAUSE NOT ONLY JEWS SPOKE HEBREW BUT ALSO EGYPTIANS.

#5 PALESTINIAN GOVERNMENT ARE TERRORISTS AND JERUSALEM IS ONLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE OF JUDASIUM. By the end of 1949, according to Israeli historian Ilan Pappe, Israel had destroyed more than 400 Palestinian villages, massacred thousands of civilians and forcibly displaced almost a million Palestinians, who ended up in refugee camps in neighboring Arab countries. In other words, with the Jewish people having just endured the horrors of the Holocaust, the Zionists were now carrying out, according to Pappe, the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people.This process of ethnic cleansing allowed Israel to expand and encompass 77 percent of Palestinian territory, all but East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza. Over the next three years, 700,000 Jews immigrated to Israel, mostly from Europe. This Jewish colonization of Palestine represented a continuation of European colonialism as the wielding of power over the Palestinian people shifted from the British government to European Jews in the form of the new Israeli state.
Following the 1967 war with several Arab states (Syria, Jordan and Egypt), Israel militarily occupied the remaining 23 percent of Palestine (East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza). The UN Security Council responded by passing Resolution 242 demanding the "Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict." The United States has since used its veto power in the Security Council on 41 occasions to ensure that the numerous UN resolutions condemning Israel"s illegal occupation have never been enforced.
https://www.counterpunch.org...

6# JERUSALEM IS MENTIONED HUNDREDS OF TIMES IN THE JEWISH TEXTS - well that does mean that Jerusalem is yours because in is just mentioned numerous times. IT IS LIKE SAYING THAT IF ( PLEASE DON'T MIND IT AS AN OFFENSE ) THAT NEW YORK IN MENTIONED HUNDREDS OF TIMES IN OUR TEXT SO WE HAVE THE CLAIM OVER IT. Your are acting like a kid when you do that. LISTEN, IF SOMETHING IS MENTIONED THAT MEANS YOU HAD IT BUT NOW SOMEONE ELSE HAS THE RIGHT OVER IT

7# THANK YOU FOR REMIND ME OF WW3 BECAUSE AS I MENTIONED EARLIER IN #5. THAT YOU ARE STARTING WW3 BECAUSE YOU ARE FIGHTING SO PLEASE STOP IT!!! AND THAT IS WHY WE NEED TO MAKE JERUSALEM AND INDEPENDENT CITY STATE

HERE ARE MY QUESTIONS:
yes or no.
1.DO you agree that you have killed innocent Palestines
2. you have launched illegal strikes against palistines
3. you have agreed to the partion plan and now you are going against your own decisions that you made 1947
4. there are currently 14.2 million Jews in the world and there are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world so saying that Jerusalem
is important because of Judaism is wrong
snoodle1

Con

Let me first get something straight: I do not live in Israel. I am not a Jew. I don't even have any particularly close friends who are Jewish. I'm just getting that out of the way first since I get the feeling from your response that you think I am Israeli Jew. I am not.

#1: You say that losing Jerusalem would not make Israel more vulnerable since it still has American backing and nuclear weapons. First of all, even with US help it would still be harder to defend since it has less land. Not to mention that the taking of Jerusalem was one of the hardest parts of the of Israeli war of independence since it's surrounded by angry Arab villages, so having Jerusalem at the start would give Israel a decent advantage. Also, the US-backing thing could end soon. The new generations are quite anti-Israel (Source: https://cdn.static-economist.com... ) so when the older people de and the young people are in charge the future US government might stop backing Israel, and what then? Besides, you also complain about imperialism in your answer in point #5. Surely an anti-imperialist such as yourself would support encouraging Middle-Eastern nations to rely less on the US? About the nukes, since the nation most hostile to Israel (Iran) is backed by Russia, a nation with the world's biggest nuclear arsenal, it would be unwise of Israelis to start deploying nukes due to MAD.

#2: Again, Iran is backed by Russia, making Israel's nuclear arsenal basically a non-element due to MAD.You also mention Israel's military is the best equipped in the region. I accept this, however it's military is still smaller than Iran's meaning the Iranian's could overpower it through force alone. Not to mention Iran is also backed by both Russia and China who could both send weapons and Israel's equipment doesn't mean much.

#3: So you concede this point? Good to know.

#4: I can't really argue with this. However, this is only an alternate possibility. Either way the Jews were still there before the Palestinians, the Christians and the Muslims. There is actually no proof of a Palestinian people up until the last century or so. Also, Jordan is 70% Palestinian. They already have a homeland.

#5: In Israel, the law is colorblind. Israeli Arabs and Israeli Jews have the same rights. They share schools, hospitals and public transports. There is no segregation. Arabs can be part of the Israeli judiciary, parliament and military. You can't say the same about any other Middle Eastern country, just look at Egypt with its Copts and Iraq with its Christians. Right now, how many Jews live in Palestine? 0. How many Arabs live in Israel? Over a million. Which state do you think has a bigger ethnic cleansing problem? East Jerusalem is currently very dangerous and if a Jew goes through it they need to be guarded from attacks, when an Arab goes into West Jerusalem there's no problem. Surveys have shown that 78% of Palestinians have positive or mixed feelings about Osama bin Laden, 89% support anti-Israeli terrorism and 89% support Sharia Law. Israel isn't perfect but no country is, and from what I've seen Palestine has done much more bad things. You forgot to mention that prior to 1967 there were still many Palestinian terror attacks,and that the occupation of those areas you mentioned where in response to an act of aggression by the Arabs and they withdrew afterwards.

#6: I didn't say that Israel owned Jerusalem because it was mentioned in the Bible, I said Israel owned it because Jerusalem is as key to Judaism as Mecca is to Islam and the Vatican City is to Catholicism. Both of those sites are under control of people from that respective religion, as they should be! Tell me, is New York central to the American's religion? No? then the comparison is non-existent. By the way don't worry about offending me, I don't get offended.

#7: Releasing Jerusalem won't stop the fighting, since both sides still claim the entire area so the fighting won't stop.

In response to your question:

1. Israel may have done some bad things in that conflict I admit, but so did the Arabs and even beforehand there were still Palestinian terror attacks, and since then the terrorism has continued. The only thing stopping Israel's major cities and airports being destroyed by the Palestinian missiles is Israel's Iron Dome Defense System and the civilian settlements in the West Bank. The IDF does more to safeguard civilian safety than the military of any other nation ever to exist. Israel is a decent, Western, democratic nation. Israel is as peaceful as Belgium, every war it's ever partaken in was in response to an act of Arab aggression. Judaism presents it's believers with a great moral code that makes it's devout followers want only the best for others. It's army is mostly made of civilians itself! During the 2014 Gaza War,millions of leaflets were dropped, texts were sent, radio messages broadcasted and tens of thousands and phone calls made just so Palestinian civilians knew which areas where to be bombed so they could escape in time. Name one other time in history an army has phoned its enemy to tell them where the bombs would be dropped. In order to prevent civilian casualties, many IDF missions were dropped leading to much higher risk for the Israelis. But since every war is confusing, chaotic and full of mistakes of course some civilians ended up dying. But unless you count mistakes as war crimes, none of them were war crimes. Compare that to Hamas which has war crimes as government policy by hiding weapons in hospitals and schools and placing rocket launchers near civilian housing and forcing civilians to stay in areas about to be attacked and forcing civilians to report all Palestinian deaths as civilian casualties, even if they were actually fighters and even if no-one actually died! Pallywood is the term for the staged accidents Hamas created in order to make Israel look evil.

2. Kind of covered that in 1..

3. Israel did, but the Arabs didn't and since the Arabs aren't holding up their end of the deal Israel is under no obligation to uphold theirs.

4. How many Jews there are in the world has nothing to do with their claim to Jerusalem. Christians outnumber Muslims, does this mean that Mecca is a Christian site? Jews were there before Christians and Muslims, Christians and Muslims only care about Jerusalem because the Jews were there first. Jerusalem is the heart of Judaism in the same way Mecca is the heart of Islam and the Vatican is the heart of Catholicism.

Now, I have some questions for you:

1. Do you agree that tourism is an unreliable way to sustain an economy?
2. Do you accept that having the UN control Jerusalem would be a nightmare?
3. Do you accept that the Arabs have been the aggressors in every single Arab-Israeli conflict?
4. Do you accept that Israel is a much more liberal, democratic nation than any of its enemies?
5. Do you accept that Russia and China would side with Iran in the event of a war between Iran and Israel?
6. Do you accept that Israel's army is mostly made up of civilians?

I look forward to seeing your answers!
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Nd2400 2 weeks ago
Nd2400
"We know that end-time Bible prophecy concerning the Third Temple is soon to be fulfilled because Israel was prophetically reborn as a nation in 1948 (Isaiah 66:8), and most of these Temple preparations only started in the last 30 years".

"Both Daniel and Yeshua (Jesus) tell us that the Anti-Messiah will defile the Third Temple before the return of the true Messiah."

So you really think building the Embassy in Jerusalem will create peace, you are in fact wrong.... It won't create peace...
This debate has 0 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.