UN Resolution 1674 should be invoked to stop the genocide in Gaza
Debate Rounds (3)
Well, not according to the Israelis it would seem.
As Jewish Israeli families celebrate Hanukkah by feasting, exchanging gifts and generally making merry, their neighbours in Gaza, already desperately short of the basic necessities of life, are being bombarded by Israeli Air Force jets and, with no way of defending themselves, are being murdered in their hundreds every day.
So while Jewish children in Israel are joyfully opening their presents, Arab children, a few miles to the south in Gaza, lie dead and wounded in the rubble of their homes.
Is the life of a Jewish child really worth more than that of an Arab child? Is that what it says in the Torah? Well, yes, actually, at least according to Rabbi Pinchas Frankel:
"Hashem had declared in Devarim 25:17-19 'eternal war' against Amalek (Arabs), and commanded the Jewish People, once they achieved stability in the Land of Israel, the Promised Land, to erase the name of Amalek"
And Rabbi Eliezer Melamed writes:
"'Do not allow them to reside in your land' (Exodus 23:33). The Rambam (Hilkhot Avoda Zara 10:6) explains that when we have the power it is forbidden to allow any non-Jew to reside in our land…The Torah also exhorts: 'do not give them any consideration' (Deuteronomy 7:2), and the sages interpret this to mean that it is forbidden to provide non-Jews with any sort of foothold upon the soil of the land of Israel (Avodah Zara 20a) (and) it is forbidden to give any portion whatsoever to Arabs."
Many Jews support the Israeli government's murder of innocent men, women and children because they are taught that Arabs are gentiles (non-Jews) living in the land that they believe was bequeathed to them, the "chosen people", by their god.
The UN defines genocide thus:
"Any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
( a ) Killing members of the group;
( b ) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
( c ) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
( d ) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
( e ) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."
Also, it was agreed in the United Nations World Summit 2005 that:
"The international community, through the United Nations…has the responsibility to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means, in accordance with Chapter VI and VIII of the Charter, to help protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. In this context, we are prepared to take collective action, in a timely and decisive manner, through the Security Council, in accordance with the UN Charter, including Chapter VII, on a case by case basis and in cooperation with relevant regional organizations as appropriate, should peaceful means be inadequate and national authorities manifestly failing to protect their populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity."
Additionally, the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1674 (2006) reaffirms "the provisions of paragraphs 138 and 139 of the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document regarding the responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity;"
Jewish religious beliefs cannot justify an act of genocide against "gentiles" any more than Islamic Jihad can justify an act of terrorism against "infidels". Therefore, the international community, under the auspices of the UN, should intervene immediately to stop the violence. Furthermore, the perpetrators of this genocide, the Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert and the Israeli Defence Minister, Ehud Barak, should be brought to justice under international law.
The points you made:
1. "their neighbours in Gaza, already desperately short of the basic necessities of life, are being bombarded by Israeli Air Force jets and, with no way of defending themselves, are being murdered in their hundreds every day."
This statement is full of exaggeration and based on little fact whatsoever. My opponent is under the impression that the Palestinians in Gaza are short on the basci necessities of life because of the Israelis. In fact, Israel has allowed aid into Gaza.
The next infallacy my opponent makes is that they are being murdered in the hundreds every day. He needs to clarify between Hamas combatants or civilians, because there is a difference. Israel and Hamas are fighting a war, so enemy combatants killed should not and are not used as warrant of genocide. Over the past three days, 51 civilians have been killed. Is that bad? Of course it is. Is that hundreds by the day? Not even close.
2. Rabbi Pinchas Frankel and Rabbi Eliezer Melamed
Are Rabbi Pinchas Frankel and Eliezer Melamed the opinion of every Jewish follower? No. So they have no warrant to the "evils" of the Jewish faith. But I will further clarify what the Rabbi's said.
My opponent quotes a passage that details a historic event of God telling Shaul (Saul) to kill the Arabic tribes that hunted them down previously. First of all, it is a past event, not a proverb to all Jews to kill all Arabs. Secondly, it was to show the Jews that they will always be hated and not to hold back on survival. You may disagree with this, but again, it is not the opinion of every Jew.
"it is forbidden to allow any non-Jew to reside in our land (with the exception of a "Ger Toshav" - a resident alien who has accepted some of the laws of Judaism)." (same source) "so long as he does not worship idols and upholds the seven Noahide laws, he is not prohibited from living in Israel...good and amiable Muslims are permitted to live in Israel, because Islam does not embrace idolatry. Arabs, though, who are hostile towards us clearly do not upkeep the seven Noahide laws, for they fail to recognize the God of Israel Who has given us the land of Israel. In addition, such Arabs support terrorists, thereby violating the Noahide prohibition against murder," This is a pretty logical tenant in my opinion. Everyone is welcome as long as they don't pose a threat to Israel's security. That is not genocide.
3. The UN definition of genocide.
"Any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group"
The recent war with Hamas is not genocide because it does not focus on killing any national, ethical, racial or religious group. It is a war focused on removing Hamas from power.
war - " a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states"
So if I prove the Israeli-Hamas war is in fact a war, I prove that it is not genocide, and that the UN should not step in.
4. Israel and Hamas are in a war; Israel is not commiting genocide
The war is not genocide because Palestenians are not being targeted intentionally
"avoid as much as possible hitting civilians while the people of Hamas and other terrorists deliberately hide and operate within the civilian population"
"Israel's defense minister said his military is fighting a "war to the bitter end" against Hamas but is not fighting the residents of Gaza."
"Israel began Saturday's assault by targeting Hamas security installation...On Sunday planes struck dozens of smuggling tunnels under the Gaza-Egypt border, cutting off a key lifeline that had supplied Hamas with weapons and Gaza with commercial goods. "
These three quotes and the definition of war outline why this is a war, not genocide. In conclusion, my opponent uses fallacies to make the war have the appearance of genocide and quotes from two men to define the religion as evil. I have pointed out the fallacies and explained what the Rabbis said and why they do not matter. I ended with a definition of war, and quotes to why it is a war and not an act of genocide.
Thank you, and good luck
So, let's examine each point in turn.
1 – In relation to humanitarian aid my opponent quoted the Jerusalem Post and the Huffington Post. These newspapers are based in Israel (the main protagonist) and America (their most loyal ally). In response I could quote the Palestine News Agency http://english.wafa.ps... and the Islamic Republic News Agency http://www2.irna.ir... but I realise that they may be equally biased. That is why I prefer to quote neutral news agencies such as the BBC and Reuters.
The above report shows that Israeli forces have murdered 386 Palestinians, not 51 as my opponent's pro-Israeli sources claim.
2 – My opponent claims the Rabbis I referred to were not representative, but did not back up his assertion with any source. With this being the case, here is the result of a recent survey of Israeli public opinion, conducted by an Israeli organisation, which shows that the majority of Israelis want to kick all Arabs out of Israel..
3 – The source my opponent quotes to support that Israel's attack on the defenceless people of Gaza is an act of war, rather than genocide reads:
"War – a state of usually open and declared hostile conflict between states or nations"
It is not a war, because Gaza is not a state or nation – it is illegally occupied territory, has no functioning government, no army, no navy, no air force; it doesn't control its borders, its ports or its airspace. The people of Gaza are totally reliant on Israel for their welfare and Israel is bombing them. This is not war; it's genocide.
4 – My opponent quoted the Israeli government spokesman who claimed they were not targeting civilians. What would you expect him to say? It's political propaganda, even Hitler didn't boast about massacring Jews, gypsies, disabled people and political dissidents.
The bottom line is that Israel wants the whole of Palestine to be a totally Jewish state. They know that the internationally-brokered peace process will not achieve this goal for them, which is why they have disengaged from it. Instead they have decided to drive the Palestinians out of their homes and off their farms and murder those who dare to remain. This is an act of genocide and the international community has a moral and legal duty to put an end to it by whatever means necessary.
cto09 forfeited this round.
Are they going to sit on their hands, as they did when the situations in Bosnia and Rwanda deteriorated into orgies of unchecked ethnic cleansing?
Extremists purporting to represent Hamas have been rightly condemned for provoking Israel by firing rockets over the border and thus giving them the excuse they were waiting for to attack. However, no amount of military intervention, short of annihilating the entire population, will ever stop terrorists when they hide amongst civilians – and Israel knows that.
No doubt, if the UN allows Israel to commit these heinous crimes against humanity with impunity, similar attacks against Palestinians in the West Bank will follow soon.
For this reason, I affirm that the UN should invoke Resolution 1674 in an effort to end the violence in Gaza.
cto09 forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by JBlake 7 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||0|
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.