Hamas is more at fault for the current suffering of Palestinians than Israel.

3R1NRC: On the Arrest of Yassim The opponent has committed the fallacy known as strawman; i.e misrepresenting my arguments. Firstly, one must observe that the opponent's contention is based upon the post-Intifida period, whilst mines are based on the pre-Intifida period. However, what one must understand was that Israel had intelligence and witnessed Sheikh Ahme Yassin's coming to power and creating the Hamas face-to-face! Perhaps the opponent might need a clearer picture of what Israel's role in the creation of Hamas was like. In 1979, America supported the Islamist Radicals who wanted to overthrow the King of Iran; they thought that by overthrowing this secular regime, the Islamist Radicals might install a pro-US government. However, precisely the opposite happened; the Reagan Administration made the same mistake in regards to Afghanistan, which spawned Al-Qaida and Taliban. Israel did the same thing; they thought Hamas would counter the secular Fatah and PLO, whilst installing a Pro-Israeli government. This was false; religious differences between the two sides cannot be compromised. [1] Let me remind all sides that Israeli officials submitted many reports on this rising Islamist threat to Israeli authorities; yet the Israeli Government ceased to arrest him, thinking of him as only a tool to be used against the secular PLO. In fact, the Israelis did not arrest him until it was clear the Hamas was going to be Anti-Israeli; this was done after the first Intifida. However, the Israelis had enough precedent to arrest him after his arms cache (for usage against the PLO) was seized. The opponent has also stated that the PLO is not secular, contrary to claims; why? Because it is becoming more violent and "extreme" Firstly, one needs to understand that secular does not mean less violent, extreme, or even moderate. Ba'athism cannot be said to be moderate, yet it is secular; same goes for fascism and communism. Secondly, the PLO is indeed becoming less violent and extreme; in fact, the PLO has recognized Israel and UN Resolutions 242, which states that Israel must be recognized as an independent state. [2] The opponent concerns himself with the election of Hamas only; we are talking about the creation of Hamas! As history is the key to the understanding of men, we have to understand the history of each faction to make a good judgement. The opponent inquires into why this argument has been employed; let us take the following analogy for example.I created the time travel machine for commercial usage; I use this time machine to earn money to fight against my rivals. However, my rivals obtain my time machine, and they use it to kill me; in terms of fault, if I had not invented the time machine, then I wouldn't have died! So is it partly my fault; yes. I invented the thing, and now the thing has turned on me!Or much like Frankenstein; the monster feels the need to avenge its creator for his creation, which has led to misfortune and destruction. If the creator hadn't created Frankenstein, then he would not have to suffer as much as he is doing when Frankenstein is around; he made the object that was going to make him suffer. Henceforth, if the opponent affirms the resolution, then he would still be forced to accept that Israel created Hamas, and henceforth Israel is slightly more responsible for the suffering of the Palestinian populace. 3R2NRC: On Weapons and AttacksFirstly, one has to understand that Israel started this "Operation Protective Edge" in order to curb the Fatah-Hamas threat, which united and formed the Palestinian Government. NOTE HERE that the first attack was done via an Israeli plane bombing the innocent civilians of Gaza, killing 7 people. Now firstly, Israel struck the first blow; it bombed Gaza. They have no defense system whatsoever; Israel acknowledges this, and takes this opportunity to launch blow after blow of attacks on Gaza, from the air, sea and land. This is proven via the fact that:1. Gaza is being deliberately destroyed by Israeli attacks; Gaza has lost 2,000 inhabitants while Israel has lost 3! Is this not a clear sign that Israel, who attacked Gaza first, was the aggressor in these situations? And is it not a clearer sign that Israel is just mad at the current placement of power, which provides Palestine more unity than ever. As Irish Parliament Member David Norris stated, "can you imagine letting your enemy choose your government for you? I certainly cannot!"2. Hamas, albeit being able to launch Qassam Rockets (and occasional long range M302 missiles), has killed only 3 Israelis in the proccess of doing so; this is because Iron Dome. Israel has deliberately attacked Gaza, knowing that they could not retaliate in any form!Now this is sad, as Israel was the aggressor; at this point, also note that Israel has attacked a UN Hospital for displaced people 7 times. [3] This has accounted for 47 deaths and 2,000 injured, whilst these areas were created by the United Nations as a temporary shelter for the displaced! Israel has violated every laws of war that was ever agreed! Accordingly to the Geneva Convention, in which Israel signed in two occasions, it states that:Upon the outbreak and during the course of hostilities, the Parties concerned may conclude agreements on mutual recognition of the zones and localities they have created. They may for this purpose implement the provisions of the Draft Agreement annexed to the present Convention, with such amendments as they may consider necessary. This right has been violated many times! The UN schools which were distinguished for displaced citizens has been followed by an attack on a disabled people's home. [3] Israel themselves are bringing bombs after bombs on Gaza, yet it is simply shrugging the enemy's rockets. Is this moral? As the aggressor, this is in no way moral.3R3NRC: On Suicide Bombing and Human Shields/HR ViolationsThe latter will be recognized first; Israel has indeed launched a ground operation in Gaza, where heavy fighting persists (albeit a ceasefire has been negotiated). If anyone is violating any human rights, it is Israel; the fact that they have disregarded the rights of the Palestinians says it all. Article 16 of the Geneva Convention states:As far as military considerations allow, each Party to the conflict shall facilitate the steps taken to search for the killed and wounded, to assist the shipwrecked and other persons exposed to grave danger, and to protect them against pillage and ill-treatment. [5]Israel has indeed violated this. Accordingly to the HR inspector:"These are just a few examples [boming hospitals] where there seems to be a strong possibility that international humanitarian law has been violated, in a manner that could amount to war crimes.” Israel is doing everything they can to make the Palestinians suffer; "we will turn Gaza into the middle ages" "we will Holocaust the Palestinians" are only some of the statements stated by the Israeli Foreign Minister in defiance to the true intention of Israel. "They suffer [Palestine] so our children could have a good summer [Israel]" was the response that the Israeli Foreign Minister threw after a beach gunboat attack that killed 3 and wounded 15. The opponent here has stopped short of justifying the violation of human rights; it would be nice for him to go on with such claims. [5][6]Henceforth, why would it not be wrong to call these attacks as martyrdom? Note that these acts are done on consent. I am not here to justify these attacks, but these attacks have been beyond the point of justifiable; they are almost neccesary. Freedom to Palestine comes at a cost; it seems that Hamas is willing to take this step to implement this. Apart from this, albeit Hamas's storing weapons in hospitals and Mosque cannot be directly interpreted as war crimes, Israel's actions can. An example of this is when a town in Southern Gaza was captured; 100+ Palestinians were taken, and used as "human shields" for the Israelis, accordingly to testimonies. Note at this point that the opponent has the BoP.THE RESOLUTION IS NEGATED.Citations:[1] http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org... [3] http://www.independent.co.uk... [4] http://www.independent.co.uk...[6] http://www.youtube.com... (Vid One)[5] http://www.youtube.com... (Vid Two)