Israel is on the short end of the stick

1. The claims dont need to be refuted when those making them are in no position to make such claims. However, I did make refutations. I showed that Gaza is not a poverty-stricken hellhole and that Israel IS fair to the Arabs. Again, restrictions are put in place due to Arab violence. When the violence is reduced or Israel goes out on a limb to make a peace gesture, restrictions are eased. [1] The helicopter video doesnt show Israeli oppression. It was taken during Cast Lead and shows Hamas fighters in civilian clothes. This is why it seems like hundreds of civilians were killed. I HAVE refuted claims about the Gaza blockade. I actually did address at least one UN resolution: 194. Most of the rest lose any validity because they are so biased thanks to the voting bloc I described above. None of them are legally binding anyway and are suggestions to promote peace. The Geneva convention actually supports Israel: Art. 28. The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations. That means human shields can be bombed. In actuality, Israel aborted hundreds of missions in Gaza due to human shield use (they wanted to keep casualties low, knowing what happens). [2] 2. Not really. I have demonstrated how the situation isnt really that bad to start with. Further, Israel provides medical aid to Arabs despite accusations to the contrary. Israel has clearly made the lives of Arabs better and most Arabs wish their leaders would shut up and make peace. [3] If not for the Arab boycott, collectively Israel and the Arab countries would have $12 trillion more in GDP since 1991. [4] 1. Israel doesnt discriminate against everyone. Israel has provided freedom and equality for Jews, Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bahai, and many others. It isnt perfect, but for a country surrounded by those wishing to annihilate it, it does the best it can. I have no idea where my opponent gets these outrageous claims from. If one soldier decides to be an idiot, that doesnt mean Israel is discriminatory. Nor does it affect any utilitarian basis. On balance, Israel provides a net good for the Arabs and would be able to provide more if not for Arab violence. No, death tolls isnt systemic discrimination. It shows that Israel works to protect its civilians, while the Arabs will throw civilians out as human shields. The other side likes to distort reality with incriminating camera angles and convenient statistics, such as "the final third of. .. ". My opponents source 1 alleges ethnic cleansing of Jerusalem. This can be easily proven wrong by the great increase in Arab population since that source. [5] If Israel is ethnic cleansing, they are doing a bad job at it. Further, the source alleges Judaization of Jerusalem. How can Israel Judaize what is already Jewish? Jerusalem never was important to Arabs and Muslims until it was controlled by Christians are Jews. [6] Then it suddenly became the centre of Islam. Further, Jerusalem has had a Jewish plurality since 1840 and a majority since the 1890s. [5] There are catch 22s for Arabs involved in Jerusalem, but those are due to the unresolved conflict and not institutional discrimination. Again, my opponent cites the Goldstone Report. Ive already provided sources that show how it is poorly researched and incorrect in many places. It contains very selective investigation designed to condemn Israel, not investigate what went on. Goldstone ignored Israeli evidence and testimony provided by British Col. Richard Kemp, among others. [7] Some events certainly will be true, and Israel has begun (unlike Hamas) to prosecute soldiers that committed crimes. But that doesnt change the vast problems with the report. Nor does it demonstrate Israel has committed war crimes. And again with these alleged white flags which never have any proof. The Arabs can easily claim they are waving a white flag and never need to prove it. And why exactly is a crowd out in Gaza during a war anyway? I have provided sources to refute claims of Goldstone, including the official Israeli response. I simply cannot respond to the entire report due to space. That would be a debate itself. I also showed one example of Goldstone lying or failing to investigate: that of weapons stored in mosques. 2. If the UN is truly for human rights, why is it viciously attacking a country that has done little an completely ignoring countries that have committed grievous human rights violations? This is not red herrings, it demonstrates that the UN has no credibility. 3a. Israel has to place restrictions due to the threats and acts of war posed by Hamas. A country is allowed to blockade an area that is engaging in war against them. Israel imports such weapons to have the best forces to fight the multiple threats against it. Just because Israel is only fighting Hamas now, doesnt mean Syria and Iran are no longer threats. Many high techs are also useful against Hamas. Hamas would be allowed to import whatever it wanted if it releases Gilad Shalit, stops shooting rockets, and recognizes Israel. b. The death toll is "against" because the Arabs make no effort to protect their civilians and even work to INCREASE civilian deaths through the use of human shields. And as I said, we now know that Hamas lost 600-700 fighters, which confirms the Israeli claim that 709 were killed and only 295 civilians were wounded. I am glad my opponent took the time to draw circles on my source. I do not deny that al Quds is there, but the 2 times are neither part of the article nor refer to the city. It refers to the Islamic Jihads al Quds brigades. The source clearly states that it is documenting Gaza. I also provided a more recent Danish source that recounts a Gazan woman crying poverty in front of a display of fresh tomatoes. Recently, an Egyptian journalist has blamed Hamas and Gazas rich, not Israel for any problems there. [8] The video evidence always supported Israel, and many Israel critics have said they have to support Israel on the incident. [9] The Marmara crew said the IHH was planning an attack. On another boat, Edward Peck said the commandos "behaved reasonably well". [10] Others on the ships cant agree on what happened. Israel got that right when it became a sovereign nation in 1948. And more of these stories about villages "razed to the ground". Never with any proof and how do they even know this happened if they were "expelled"? Also, it is war. Villages get destroyed. Jewish villages in Hebron and eastern Jerusalem were destroyed. Sykes-Picot was overridden by the mandates. Also, UK and France relinquished their claims. Why are Jewish towns illegal? Because Arabs dont like icky Jews? Who is ethnic cleansing now? Israel didnt kick out any Arabs. This has been admitted by survivors of Deir Yassin and others (see video) . http://www.youtube.com... Jews were not sent to Israel by Europe. There is nothing ever issued that said that. Jews moved there over their own will and if anything were restricted from moving by the British. The Geneva conventions do not forbid Jews from moving to live in any area. And there were no agreements to halt settlements until 2009, which expired. My opponent now fabricates a quote of mine. "Yes they do" refers to self-determination, not expulsions. And then my opponent supports Israel. Arabs instigated the violence; Israel defended its livelihood. --- To conclude, Israel is compatible with utilitarianism. Israel provides a net good to Arabs and could provide more if not for the conflict and Arab violence. 1 . http://is.gd... 2 . http://is.gd... . http://is.gd... 3 . http://is.gd... . http://is.gd... 4 . http://is.gd... 5 . http://is.gd... 6 . http://is.gd... 7 . http://is.gd... 8 . http://is.gd... 9 . http://is.gd... . http://is.gd... . http://is.gd... 10 . http://is.gd...