Instigator / Con
1
1500
rating
4
debates
62.5%
won
Topic
#5004
How should Israel respond? Have they proceeded in a way that is justified and will keep them safer?
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After 1 vote and with the same amount of points on both sides...
It's a tie!
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 500
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Pro
1
1271
rating
353
debates
39.8%
won
Description
Both sides have a history. Both sides we should feel empathy for civilians.
Round 1
According to experts, one reason for insurgency and terrorist cells becoming powerful as more people are radicalized it is due to the relative-deprivation theory. It is the idea that people become more radicalized as they see their expectations and experiences not being met and conditions do not fairly compare to someone else. These are the conditions in Gaza. As Israel has bombed the city more then an entire year of the US-Iraq and the US-Afghanistan wars. Many innocents have been killed.
Israel should just surrender.
Round 2
Israel should not just surrender, there is a responsibility to it's people to attack decisively back but they haven't been mindful that Hamas is more than just a militant group, it based in an ideology that is a mix of religous fanatics and that would be next to impossible to just completely elimated. I feat that you might be coming from an unexpected and ridiculous side that perhaps agrees with Hamas' sentiment. Israel, should it enter Gaza, will kill many and have many dead and splinter groups..
Israeli should just go back to USA, but first return 1 trillion dollars that USA gave them.
Round 3
If Israel could learn anything from the United States it could look at what happened when we went into Afghanistan and Iraq. Yes we toppled the governments in both countries but what was created was a vacuum that caused for even more radicalized groups to rise up Ala Isis. They should be more precise with their attacks and they should also be fighting the war of the minds of the Palestinian people, to truly be able to ensure this doesn't happen again. Or in ten years they will be again.
Since my opponent got help from Barney, as we can see in comment 4, it follows that my opponent was cheating and this was a 2 vs 1 debate.
Therefore, voters should just ignore everything my opponent has said so far and vote for me without considering my opponent's arguments at all. They shouldnt even bother to read the debate any further. Also, my solution is more peaceful than my opponent's solution, so I am the obvious winner.
Round 4
Forfeited
I have won.
Round 5
Forfeited
I have won.
.
BARNEY QUOTE TO GARRETTWEST38: "Your arguments should provide a counter plan for what Israel should do in response to Hamas’ aggression."
The very simple solution is what the Hebrew Torah Old Testament states for what the Hebrews are to do subsequent to being invaded by Muslims on October 7th:
"If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant; AND HATH GONE TO SERVE OTHER GODS, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, THAT SUCH ABOMINATION IS WROGHT IN ISRAEL ; Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, AND SHALL STONE THEM WITH STONES, TILL THEY DIE." (Deuteronomy 17:2-5)
Instead of stones in the 21st century to kill sweaty smelling goat herder Muslims, the Jews now have bombs and American made aircraft to carry said bombs!
.
Thank you! Not exactly an easy task because of the fact no one seems able to solve this but I have some more general concepts based on some research.
Your arguments should provide a counter plan for what Israel should do in response to Hamas’ aggression.
You should also refute your opponents idea of surrendering, as in spell out for the audience why surrendering is a bad idea.
Right now a voter is likely to be forced to choose your opponent, simply because they’re the only one suggesting any course of action.
It's now a little sided against you, but as a voter I do get what you mean. Is their plan for safety good or bad? It's obviously bad if it outright makes them less safe than doing nothing; but doing nothing might be the absolute worst option... So maybe build a counter plan in your arguments which would most likely make them more safe. A lot of plans have been tried, and nothing has worked; but it's a good starting place to build an argument.
I changed it. Haven't really had a debate yet.
With that one sided of a resolution, expect to be Kritiked.
For starters, traditional ideas of defense and their current tactics are not mutually exclusive.