i can confuse the most people with my argument

First of all, let me apologize for the foreitfeture of the previous two rounds. Unfortunately something very pressing arose and demanded my attention over the last week or so.In response to your arguments. I can't imagine that any of the descendants of those killed in the holocaust felt that monetary reparations are adequate compensation for the loss of their families and the gross cultural humiliation they suffered. Would you? Also, it is entirely possible that a Jewish state would of arisen eventually, and even though Israel came about following the war, I'm sure that it was still not much consolation for those who were driven to animal insanity in a concentration camp, forced to watch the torture, rape and mass murder of their friends and family. Particularly the European Jews who had lived their entire lives in Europe only to be handed a small isolated spit of sand in the Middle East surrounded by people who by and large despise them. Yeah...that was probably a totally fair recompense in the minds of most Jews. Your statement of:"The Jewish nation of Israel would not exist if the holocaust had not taken place."is entirely your opinion and thus completely ineffective in countering my stance of--The Holocaust was overall a negative event for the people who were victims of it. How could anybody say that it wouldn't of existed at some point even had the tragedy of the Holocaust not spurned its creation.Also, I'd point out that there were hundreds of thousands of non-Jewish victims of the holocaust who still don't have a sovereign state (the Romani, the homosexuals :), and I'm sure that they would all agree that Jewish compensation doesn't do diddly-squat for them.And seriously, the DMT bit? As someone who has recreationally tried DMT, I can guaruntee you (as could any reliable source of info on psychedelics) that it would absolutely in no way mitigate the horror as you were trooped en masse naked in to a gas chamber to slowly asphyxiate, or as a German boot heel was stomping your skull to mush in the pavement. If anything it would augment the shock and horror in such a situation to an unimaginably terrifying degree.In conclusion: I respect your self-esteem and the monumental challenge you've undertaken to try and confuse my argument. However, No.1) you have not confused me, although I can't speak for others. No.2) your argument did not effectively or even adequately counter my argument that the holocaust was overall a negative event for the people who were its victims. Undoubtedly there were some corollary positive outcomes, but those in no way balance the immense scale of atrocities perpetrated unto the victims of the Holocaust, much less sway anybody to thinking that the Holocaust was a positive thing for it's victims. Really I don't think anybody could counter my position unless they themselves were a Nazi or some kind of anti-semetic troll. Honestly, I just needed to get three debates under my belt so I can start voting. I would suggest a little more humility in any future challenges you make. Or at the very least offer your own argument. You realize that the argument I did choose was not even remotely the most difficult to counter. I might have said, "Human beings need to eat or they'll die." although that would not have been very sporting of me. I'm happy to go again at any point in a real debate if ever you wish. Thanks and good luck.