Total Posts:118|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Israel

OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 5:40:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
What are you thoughts on it?

Why do you believe this?

Do you support it?

Why/why not?
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 5:44:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I support Israel. In 7th grade once we debated over its existence and my side won. To resolve the Middle-East inferno over Israel's existence, why doesn't Israel just let the people they kicked out come back in, and pay the Arabs some repayments for several years?
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 6:56:48 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 5:44:55 PM, Contra wrote:
I support Israel. In 7th grade once we debated over its existence and my side won. To resolve the Middle-East inferno over Israel's existence, why doesn't Israel just let the people they kicked out come back in, and pay the Arabs some repayments for several years?

The Arabs won't be satisfied with that.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 7:05:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 6:56:48 PM, DanT wrote:
At 4/23/2012 5:44:55 PM, Contra wrote:
I support Israel. In 7th grade once we debated over its existence and my side won. To resolve the Middle-East inferno over Israel's existence, why doesn't Israel just let the people they kicked out come back in, and pay the Arabs some repayments for several years?

The Arabs won't be satisfied with that.

Look at what they already gave them.

Also, I'm not a big fan of supporting the people supporting suicide bombers, and terrorists targeting innocents.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 7:24:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 7:05:06 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 4/23/2012 6:56:48 PM, DanT wrote:
At 4/23/2012 5:44:55 PM, Contra wrote:
I support Israel. In 7th grade once we debated over its existence and my side won. To resolve the Middle-East inferno over Israel's existence, why doesn't Israel just let the people they kicked out come back in, and pay the Arabs some repayments for several years?

The Arabs won't be satisfied with that.

Look at what they already gave them.

Also, I'm not a big fan of supporting the people supporting suicide bombers, and terrorists targeting innocents.

So you're not a fan of people who supported the Taliban and Al-Qaeda?
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 7:43:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 7:05:06 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 4/23/2012 6:56:48 PM, DanT wrote:
At 4/23/2012 5:44:55 PM, Contra wrote:
I support Israel. In 7th grade once we debated over its existence and my side won. To resolve the Middle-East inferno over Israel's existence, why doesn't Israel just let the people they kicked out come back in, and pay the Arabs some repayments for several years?

The Arabs won't be satisfied with that.

Look at what they already gave them.

Also, I'm not a big fan of supporting the people supporting suicide bombers, and terrorists targeting innocents.

Also what they already gave them? Who are you referring to?
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 7:44:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 7:24:44 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 4/23/2012 7:05:06 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 4/23/2012 6:56:48 PM, DanT wrote:
At 4/23/2012 5:44:55 PM, Contra wrote:
I support Israel. In 7th grade once we debated over its existence and my side won. To resolve the Middle-East inferno over Israel's existence, why doesn't Israel just let the people they kicked out come back in, and pay the Arabs some repayments for several years?

The Arabs won't be satisfied with that.

Look at what they already gave them.

Also, I'm not a big fan of supporting the people supporting suicide bombers, and terrorists targeting innocents.

So you're not a fan of people who supported the Taliban and Al-Qaeda?

Are you?
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 7:47:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 7:44:07 PM, DanT wrote:
At 4/23/2012 7:24:44 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 4/23/2012 7:05:06 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 4/23/2012 6:56:48 PM, DanT wrote:
At 4/23/2012 5:44:55 PM, Contra wrote:
I support Israel. In 7th grade once we debated over its existence and my side won. To resolve the Middle-East inferno over Israel's existence, why doesn't Israel just let the people they kicked out come back in, and pay the Arabs some repayments for several years?

The Arabs won't be satisfied with that.

Look at what they already gave them.

Also, I'm not a big fan of supporting the people supporting suicide bombers, and terrorists targeting innocents.

So you're not a fan of people who supported the Taliban and Al-Qaeda?

Are you?

That's a tough question, am I a fan of America? I guess not in so far as our foreign policy is concerned.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 10:40:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 7:05:06 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 4/23/2012 6:56:48 PM, DanT wrote:
At 4/23/2012 5:44:55 PM, Contra wrote:
I support Israel. In 7th grade once we debated over its existence and my side won. To resolve the Middle-East inferno over Israel's existence, why doesn't Israel just let the people they kicked out come back in, and pay the Arabs some repayments for several years?

The Arabs won't be satisfied with that.

Look at what they already gave them.

"Gave them"? If I remember, the Palestinians were living there when David Ben Gurion conspired with Britain to strip them of their lands.
Also, I'm not a big fan of supporting the people supporting suicide bombers, and terrorists targeting innocents.
Look up the Stern Gang and the bombing of the King David Hotel. You would be surprised at some of the acts of terrorism the other side has committed.
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 10:48:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 10:40:33 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 4/23/2012 7:05:06 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 4/23/2012 6:56:48 PM, DanT wrote:
At 4/23/2012 5:44:55 PM, Contra wrote:
I support Israel. In 7th grade once we debated over its existence and my side won. To resolve the Middle-East inferno over Israel's existence, why doesn't Israel just let the people they kicked out come back in, and pay the Arabs some repayments for several years?

The Arabs won't be satisfied with that.

Look at what they already gave them.

"Gave them"? If I remember, the Palestinians were living there when David Ben Gurion conspired with Britain to strip them of their lands.

How would you remember? I didn't think you were alive then. Also if you said "Palestinians" at the time, you were referring to Jews living in Palestine. The terminology of referring to Palestinians with regards to the refugees, didn't occur as a common thing until the 60's. Furthermore it was legally British land for whatever that matter, and a large amount of the land was legally purchased from absentee land owners.

"Stripping people of their land", is an intentionally false narrative.

Also, I'm not a big fan of supporting the people supporting suicide bombers, and terrorists targeting innocents.

Look up the Stern Gang and the bombing of the King David Hotel. You would be surprised at some of the acts of terrorism the other side has committed.

This is certainly a good point, and I wont deny the point generally. However the stern gang came into fruition as a way to protect Jews from acts of violence that came regularly against them. Also the King David Hotel was a military target. You do understand the difference in reference to terrorism right?
Debate.org Moderator
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 10:52:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 10:41:06 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
My point is that neither side is guiltless and we shouldn't pretend that any particular side is blameless.

I don't think any reasonable person is saying anyone is guiltless, both sides are clearly to blame, and I agree with your notion in general.. but we certainly don't need to push false information or narratives to make that point...

Ultimately I think we agree, there is no reason to point to the wrong on one side, as a way to justify the other.
Debate.org Moderator
Buddamoose
Posts: 19,448
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:00:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 10:52:11 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 4/23/2012 10:41:06 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
My point is that neither side is guiltless and we shouldn't pretend that any particular side is blameless.

I don't think any reasonable person is saying anyone is guiltless, both sides are clearly to blame, and I agree with your notion in general.. but we certainly don't need to push false information or narratives to make that point...

Ultimately I think we agree, there is no reason to point to the wrong on one side, as a way to justify the other.

The formatiom of Israel of a nation wasnt exactly unprecedented. Keeping in mind "Palestine, wasnt a nation, at the time, it was British territory, so they could do what they wanted with it.

Also keeping in mind those that were living there before and had to be relocated were given compensation for having to do so.

Now I will also say I wholly disagree with the debacle that "Palestine" has turned into with the human rights violations occuring with the Gaza Strip for example. Both sides arent exactly acting fairly or justly, and both have legitimate grievances. Something that works in Israels favor is that they are willing to co-exist, yet the middle east generally views Israel as something that should be wiped out and "pushed into the sea." I.E. they arent willing to co-exist.

Not sure if what I said is a 100% accurate portrayal, but I think its close enough.
"Reality is an illusion created due to a lack of alcohol"
-Airmax1227

"You were the moon all this time, and he was always there to make you shine."

"Was he the sun?"

"No honey, he was the darkness"

-Kazekirion
Buddamoose
Posts: 19,448
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:03:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Overall as Airmax said, both sides have their legitimate grievances. But personally I support the "existence" of Israel as a nation, just think theres a better way to go about it than is currently being done.
"Reality is an illusion created due to a lack of alcohol"
-Airmax1227

"You were the moon all this time, and he was always there to make you shine."

"Was he the sun?"

"No honey, he was the darkness"

-Kazekirion
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:08:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 10:48:26 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 4/23/2012 10:40:33 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 4/23/2012 7:05:06 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 4/23/2012 6:56:48 PM, DanT wrote:
At 4/23/2012 5:44:55 PM, Contra wrote:
I support Israel. In 7th grade once we debated over its existence and my side won. To resolve the Middle-East inferno over Israel's existence, why doesn't Israel just let the people they kicked out come back in, and pay the Arabs some repayments for several years?

The Arabs won't be satisfied with that.

Look at what they already gave them.

"Gave them"? If I remember, the Palestinians were living there when David Ben Gurion conspired with Britain to strip them of their lands.

How would you remember? I didn't think you were alive then.
History textbooks, lol.
Also if you said "Palestinians" at the time, you were referring to Jews living in Palestine. The terminology of referring to Palestinians with regards to the refugees, didn't occur as a common thing until the 60's. Furthermore it was legally British land for whatever that matter, and a large amount of the land was legally purchased from absentee land owners.

It was "legally" British land because they colonized it. That's like me breaking into your house, using violence to seize control of it, and then giving it to my best friend and I get bored with it.
"Stripping people of their land", is an intentionally false narrative.

That is SO not false. Do you know how many have been displaced and are currently being displaced? That's intentionally stripping people of their lands.
Also, I'm not a big fan of supporting the people supporting suicide bombers, and terrorists targeting innocents.

Look up the Stern Gang and the bombing of the King David Hotel. You would be surprised at some of the acts of terrorism the other side has committed.

This is certainly a good point, and I wont deny the point generally. However the stern gang came into fruition as a way to protect Jews from acts of violence that came regularly against them.
Al Qaeda came into being to protect Arabs from repressive regimes. That doesn't justify acts of terrorism on their part.
Also the King David Hotel was a military target. You do understand the difference in reference to terrorism right?

The King David Hotel housed colonial officials AND civilians.
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:09:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The formatiom of Israel of a nation wasnt exactly unprecedented. Keeping in mind "Palestine, wasnt a nation, at the time, it was British territory, so they could do what they wanted with it.

Also keeping in mind those that were living there before and had to be relocated were given compensation for having to do so.

Now I will also say I wholly disagree with the debacle that "Palestine" has turned into with the human rights violations occuring with the Gaza Strip for example. Both sides arent exactly acting fairly or justly, and both have legitimate grievances. Something that works in Israels favor is that they are willing to co-exist, yet the middle east generally views Israel as something that should be wiped out and "pushed into the sea." I.E. they arent willing to co-exist.

Not sure if what I said is a 100% accurate portrayal, but I think its close enough.

Here is a thread called Israels vs Americas right to exist

http://www.debate.org...

Here is a block of text I wrote in that thread that got no response, that points out my general agreement with your post...

"There is nothing particularly unique about the creation of Israel. Lands have been reapportioned, conquered, claimed, reclaimed, divided, traded, and lost throughout the entire history of the world. Every other time, the displaced have absorbed into that society or elsewhere, and will eventually continue meaningful and productive lives.

What seems to be particularly unique about this case though is the willingness of a culture to subjugate an entire group of people into permanent refugee status (The Palestinians are first hereditary refugees in history) forcing them into second class status in places like Lebanon and Jordan, leaving the Palestinians little choice but to aim forward towards their perceived enemy Israel with there own supposed brethren behind them, weapons pointed at their back, in a metaphorical tunnel in which they have no other options.

I don't think many people predicted before Israeli independence that this would be the manifestation of the Arab/Muslim world to use the Palestinians in perpetuity in effort to delegitimize Israel's existence forever.

Israel has a 'right' to exist because it is able to defend itself. Questions pertaining to land sovereignty invariably come down to most recent military victory in all cases. Nothing else has any influence or bearing over a nations legitimacy or its 'right to exist'."

--I think there may be flaws with what I said above, as I've generalized an entire culture, but I believe its also generally the truth...

I am Pro-Israel and Pro-Palestinian.. But while the existence of Israel itself is seen as the genesis of Palestinian suffering, there will be no way to politically reconcile those two ideals.
Debate.org Moderator
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:10:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
"The King David Hotel bombing was an attack carried out by the militant right-wing Zionist underground organization Irgun on the King David Hotel in Jerusalem on 22 July 1946.[1][2] 91 people of various nationalities were killed and 46 were injured.[3]"
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:13:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I don't see how the fact that nations have been appropriated in the past justifies it happening in this case. In fact, I would argue that no nation has a right to exist. The ability to defend itself doesn't grant it any moral legitimacy. If I break into your house and defend myself from a SWAT team, I don't have any moral right to control your property. Possession and ownership are not equivalent.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:16:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
To be frank, I am fed up with the people responsible for the violence on both sides. Millions of innocents on both sides are being destroyed because of the idiotic actions of the prejudiced few. Just kill everyone responsible for the conflict and let the innocents live (just kidding, of course, but this should demonstrate how frustrated I am with this).
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:16:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 11:08:22 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 4/23/2012 10:48:26 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 4/23/2012 10:40:33 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 4/23/2012 7:05:06 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 4/23/2012 6:56:48 PM, DanT wrote:
At 4/23/2012 5:44:55 PM, Contra wrote:
I support Israel. In 7th grade once we debated over its existence and my side won. To resolve the Middle-East inferno over Israel's existence, why doesn't Israel just let the people they kicked out come back in, and pay the Arabs some repayments for several years?

The Arabs won't be satisfied with that.

Look at what they already gave them.

"Gave them"? If I remember, the Palestinians were living there when David Ben Gurion conspired with Britain to strip them of their lands.

How would you remember? I didn't think you were alive then.
History textbooks, lol.
Also if you said "Palestinians" at the time, you were referring to Jews living in Palestine. The terminology of referring to Palestinians with regards to the refugees, didn't occur as a common thing until the 60's. Furthermore it was legally British land for whatever that matter, and a large amount of the land was legally purchased from absentee land owners.

It was "legally" British land because they colonized it. That's like me breaking into your house, using violence to seize control of it, and then giving it to my best friend and I get bored with it.

It was legally British land because the Ottoman Empire lost a war. Should the land be returned to the Ottoman Empire?

"Stripping people of their land", is an intentionally false narrative.

That is SO not false. Do you know how many have been displaced and are currently being displaced? That's intentionally stripping people of their lands.

No one needed to be displaced. The reaction to the creation of Israel was the goal of the destruction of it. People could have stayed right where they were. They were unfortunately told Israel would be destroyed and that they would return the next day and the state of current events is the unfortunate result of that.

I can't defend the current state of the 'settler program', however it is also an asymmetrical warfare tool, in an asymmetrical war.

Also, I'm not a big fan of supporting the people supporting suicide bombers, and terrorists targeting innocents.

Look up the Stern Gang and the bombing of the King David Hotel. You would be surprised at some of the acts of terrorism the other side has committed.

This is certainly a good point, and I wont deny the point generally. However the stern gang came into fruition as a way to protect Jews from acts of violence that came regularly against them.
Al Qaeda came into being to protect Arabs from repressive regimes. That doesn't justify acts of terrorism on their part.

I didn't justify anything the Stern Gang did, but their goals were not the indiscriminate killing of innocent people.

Also the King David Hotel was a military target. You do understand the difference in reference to terrorism right?

The King David Hotel housed colonial officials AND civilians.
Debate.org Moderator
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:17:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 11:13:42 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
I don't see how the fact that nations have been appropriated in the past justifies it happening in this case. In fact, I would argue that no nation has a right to exist. The ability to defend itself doesn't grant it any moral legitimacy. If I break into your house and defend myself from a SWAT team, I don't have any moral right to control your property. Possession and ownership are not equivalent.

If you can defend yourself from a SWAT team, and anybody else that tries to stop you, then you are the rightful owner. Property is just force. The rightful owner is the person who has the means to defend their property, either through a defense contractor, state or themselves acting on their behalf.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:19:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 11:16:06 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 4/23/2012 11:08:22 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 4/23/2012 10:48:26 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 4/23/2012 10:40:33 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 4/23/2012 7:05:06 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 4/23/2012 6:56:48 PM, DanT wrote:
At 4/23/2012 5:44:55 PM, Contra wrote:
I support Israel. In 7th grade once we debated over its existence and my side won. To resolve the Middle-East inferno over Israel's existence, why doesn't Israel just let the people they kicked out come back in, and pay the Arabs some repayments for several years?

The Arabs won't be satisfied with that.

Look at what they already gave them.

"Gave them"? If I remember, the Palestinians were living there when David Ben Gurion conspired with Britain to strip them of their lands.

How would you remember? I didn't think you were alive then.
History textbooks, lol.
Also if you said "Palestinians" at the time, you were referring to Jews living in Palestine. The terminology of referring to Palestinians with regards to the refugees, didn't occur as a common thing until the 60's. Furthermore it was legally British land for whatever that matter, and a large amount of the land was legally purchased from absentee land owners.

It was "legally" British land because they colonized it. That's like me breaking into your house, using violence to seize control of it, and then giving it to my best friend and I get bored with it.

It was legally British land because the Ottoman Empire lost a war. Should the land be returned to the Ottoman Empire?

The Ottoman Empire did not own the land. They conquered the people living in the land, so it should be returned to those people. You are really just dodging the point. Nobody has moral legitimacy to seize control of another person's property. It doesn't matter how many hands it gets passed through, it still belongs to the original owners.

"Stripping people of their land", is an intentionally false narrative.

That is SO not false. Do you know how many have been displaced and are currently being displaced? That's intentionally stripping people of their lands.

No one needed to be displaced. The reaction to the creation of Israel was the goal of the destruction of it. People could have stayed right where they were. They were unfortunately told Israel would be destroyed and that they would return the next day and the state of current events is the unfortunate result of that.

So, you are telling me that the innocent people who were displaced all were actively threatening Israel? Give me a break, airmax. I know you don't think that's true. A bunch of idiotic leaders initiated the violence. The displaced innocents WERE NOT RESPONSIBLE even if they happened to belong to the same race as the others.

Plus, the displacement just created more enemies for Israel. It wasn't an intelligent move from that standpoint either.
I can't defend the current state of the 'settler program', however it is also an asymmetrical warfare tool, in an asymmetrical war.

Also, I'm not a big fan of supporting the people supporting suicide bombers, and terrorists targeting innocents.

Look up the Stern Gang and the bombing of the King David Hotel. You would be surprised at some of the acts of terrorism the other side has committed.

This is certainly a good point, and I wont deny the point generally. However the stern gang came into fruition as a way to protect Jews from acts of violence that came regularly against them.
Al Qaeda came into being to protect Arabs from repressive regimes. That doesn't justify acts of terrorism on their part.

I didn't justify anything the Stern Gang did, but their goals were not the indiscriminate killing of innocent people.

That wasn't Al Qaeda's original goal either.
Also the King David Hotel was a military target. You do understand the difference in reference to terrorism right?

The King David Hotel housed colonial officials AND civilians.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:20:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 11:17:15 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 4/23/2012 11:13:42 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
I don't see how the fact that nations have been appropriated in the past justifies it happening in this case. In fact, I would argue that no nation has a right to exist. The ability to defend itself doesn't grant it any moral legitimacy. If I break into your house and defend myself from a SWAT team, I don't have any moral right to control your property. Possession and ownership are not equivalent.

If you can defend yourself from a SWAT team, and anybody else that tries to stop you, then you are the rightful owner. Property is just force. The rightful owner is the person who has the means to defend their property, either through a defense contractor, state or themselves acting on their behalf.

LOL, seriously? Property rights theory definitely does not justify this. If this is the case, literally everything you own belongs to the state because it can strip you of your property at any time and nobody can do anything about it.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:22:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 11:20:55 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 4/23/2012 11:17:15 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 4/23/2012 11:13:42 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
I don't see how the fact that nations have been appropriated in the past justifies it happening in this case. In fact, I would argue that no nation has a right to exist. The ability to defend itself doesn't grant it any moral legitimacy. If I break into your house and defend myself from a SWAT team, I don't have any moral right to control your property. Possession and ownership are not equivalent.

If you can defend yourself from a SWAT team, and anybody else that tries to stop you, then you are the rightful owner. Property is just force. The rightful owner is the person who has the means to defend their property, either through a defense contractor, state or themselves acting on their behalf.

LOL, seriously? Property rights theory definitely does not justify this. If this is the case, literally everything you own belongs to the state because it can strip you of your property at any time and nobody can do anything about it.

This is slightly off topic- I have absolutely no opinion on the israel/palestine relationship.

But I want to pose this- both you, him, and his property exist in a place with laws and rights. They exist by either the grace of mightier countries or benefit from might makes right, it would seem. The nations/nationstates exist largely in anarchy, no?
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:23:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 11:16:04 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
To be frank, I am fed up with the people responsible for the violence on both sides. Millions of innocents on both sides are being destroyed because of the idiotic actions of the prejudiced few. Just kill everyone responsible for the conflict and let the innocents live (just kidding, of course, but this should demonstrate how frustrated I am with this).

I actually agree with this point to some extent, and I'd imagine I'm more fed up with it than you are because I lived it, and have friends and family still living it, on both sides.

If there were an easy solution to it, I'd advocate to just do that thing. If there was few people whose lives could be taken that could ensure peace I would advocate that as well. But there isn't, and there aren't.

Its more complex than 'bad people are doing bad things', and when people realize that I think we might be one step closer. But I doubt that will happen in our life time.
Debate.org Moderator
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:24:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 11:22:18 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 4/23/2012 11:20:55 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 4/23/2012 11:17:15 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 4/23/2012 11:13:42 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
I don't see how the fact that nations have been appropriated in the past justifies it happening in this case. In fact, I would argue that no nation has a right to exist. The ability to defend itself doesn't grant it any moral legitimacy. If I break into your house and defend myself from a SWAT team, I don't have any moral right to control your property. Possession and ownership are not equivalent.

If you can defend yourself from a SWAT team, and anybody else that tries to stop you, then you are the rightful owner. Property is just force. The rightful owner is the person who has the means to defend their property, either through a defense contractor, state or themselves acting on their behalf.

LOL, seriously? Property rights theory definitely does not justify this. If this is the case, literally everything you own belongs to the state because it can strip you of your property at any time and nobody can do anything about it.

This is slightly off topic- I have absolutely no opinion on the israel/palestine relationship.

But I want to pose this- both you, him, and his property exist in a place with laws and rights. They exist by either the grace of mightier countries or benefit from might makes right, it would seem. The nations/nationstates exist largely in anarchy, no?

I don't see how anarchy justifies atrocities . . .the idea behind human rights is to curb atrocities even in places that are anarchical and/or have laws that dehumanize people. That's why we condemn Iran, China, and the United States, or example.
Buddamoose
Posts: 19,448
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:25:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 11:22:18 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 4/23/2012 11:20:55 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 4/23/2012 11:17:15 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 4/23/2012 11:13:42 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
I don't see how the fact that nations have been appropriated in the past justifies it happening in this case. In fact, I would argue that no nation has a right to exist. The ability to defend itself doesn't grant it any moral legitimacy. If I break into your house and defend myself from a SWAT team, I don't have any moral right to control your property. Possession and ownership are not equivalent.

If you can defend yourself from a SWAT team, and anybody else that tries to stop you, then you are the rightful owner. Property is just force. The rightful owner is the person who has the means to defend their property, either through a defense contractor, state or themselves acting on their behalf.

LOL, seriously? Property rights theory definitely does not justify this. If this is the case, literally everything you own belongs to the state because it can strip you of your property at any time and nobody can do anything about it.

This is slightly off topic- I have absolutely no opinion on the israel/palestine relationship.

But I want to pose this- both you, him, and his property exist in a place with laws and rights. They exist by either the grace of mightier countries or benefit from might makes right, it would seem. The nations/nationstates exist largely in anarchy, no?

Precisely, to try and justify the existence of property or nations morally is a fool's task. It cant be done because at some point you'll reach the conclusion that it is immoral.

So we justify it through laws, which again, is highly immoral, but still a legitimate claim nonetheless.
"Reality is an illusion created due to a lack of alcohol"
-Airmax1227

"You were the moon all this time, and he was always there to make you shine."

"Was he the sun?"

"No honey, he was the darkness"

-Kazekirion
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:26:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 11:20:55 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 4/23/2012 11:17:15 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 4/23/2012 11:13:42 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
I don't see how the fact that nations have been appropriated in the past justifies it happening in this case. In fact, I would argue that no nation has a right to exist. The ability to defend itself doesn't grant it any moral legitimacy. If I break into your house and defend myself from a SWAT team, I don't have any moral right to control your property. Possession and ownership are not equivalent.

If you can defend yourself from a SWAT team, and anybody else that tries to stop you, then you are the rightful owner. Property is just force. The rightful owner is the person who has the means to defend their property, either through a defense contractor, state or themselves acting on their behalf.

LOL, seriously? Property rights theory definitely does not justify this. If this is the case, literally everything you own belongs to the state because it can strip you of your property at any time and nobody can do anything about it.

Yes, that is correct, so long as the people do not defend it. That is simply how it is. So long as someone can stop other person, through force or persuasion, from utilization something, that is property. I own a labtop, because nobody is willing to take it via force. If someone were willing to take it via force, I will use the state as an agent to use force against them.

What do you define as property rights theory?
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2012 11:27:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/23/2012 10:40:33 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 4/23/2012 7:05:06 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 4/23/2012 6:56:48 PM, DanT wrote:
At 4/23/2012 5:44:55 PM, Contra wrote:
I support Israel. In 7th grade once we debated over its existence and my side won. To resolve the Middle-East inferno over Israel's existence, why doesn't Israel just let the people they kicked out come back in, and pay the Arabs some repayments for several years?

The Arabs won't be satisfied with that.

Look at what they already gave them.

"Gave them"? If I remember, the Palestinians were living there when David Ben Gurion conspired with Britain to strip them of their lands.
It wasn't their land, it was great Britian's territory, and before that it was a territory of the Ottoman empire. Arab Palestinians havented owned that land for centuries, it has belonged to foreigners for hundreds of years.
Also, I'm not a big fan of supporting the people supporting suicide bombers, and terrorists targeting innocents.
Look up the Stern Gang and the bombing of the King David Hotel. You would be surprised at some of the acts of terrorism the other side has committed.

That was a fringe paramilitary group, under the British mandate. You can't logically connect that to Isreal.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle