"Holocaust" ought not be used to refer to the mass murder by the Nazi's

In an attempt to sound smart and put together my opponent has strung together a rambling argument that does not make much sense. 1. The roots of a word don't matter much when it's being used in contemporary language. In multiple historical accounts of how The Holocaust got it's name, it is derived from the term "holocaust" which was used since the 18th century to describe a death of a large group of people. It was used by many people including Winston Churchill who in 1933 used the word holocaust to describe American deaths in World War I [1]. So here we have a contemporary word describing the death of a large group of people, used by non Jews to describe the death of gentiles. I don't see where the debate is. 2. If you want to argue the merits of Zionists using the holocaust to create a Jewish state in the Middle East, that is a completely different argument. Just because Jews have attached special meaning to the word holocaust and used it for political gain doesn't mean that the initial naming of the genocide was wrong or that it is still wrong today. Stay focused on the resolution. The word holocaust was not "misapplied" as you put it. Misused at a later date? Perhaps but that is a different debate.3. The word holocaust, in all of its meanings, ancient and contemporary fit the events of the holocaust. There is no good reason to disqualify the title because you are incensed about the state of Israel. 4. I don't have to make any arguments, technically, Pro has the Burden of Proof and I must just prevent them from fulfilling it. 5. How can you claim a word is "widespread" and "misused"? If a word has become widespread and taken on a new, contemporary use, stemming back from the 18th century, 200 years before WWII, who are you to claim it is misused? That may be your opinion but has no basis in debatable fact. The thing about language is that words take on new meanings, language evolves, and the way it does that is through widespread acceptance of the word by the people speaking. Therefore, the appeal to wide acceptance works when discussing when words became popular and entered the vernacular. This case the modern English word holocaust appeared in the 13th century and became popular for describing deaths of large groups of people in the 18th century and was thus applied in the 20th century.Take this argument...I. The word holocaust means the death of a large group of people, dating back from 13th century English, finding widespread use in the 18th century. II. The Nazis caused the death of a large group(s) of people.III. The Nazis caused a holocaust. It's simple. The definition fits. The word has roots and uses stemming all across history, across cultural and political borders in multiple different languages. The meaning is clear: the death of a large group of people. It only becomes more appropriate when we examine how the bodies were disposed.The word is not misused. It might have been a crutch for the Jews to create a state in the Middle East but that is a completely different debate. - PRO has made no legitimate arguments except to show that he is anti-Israel. - The word holocaust has multiple varied uses, all of which can be applied to the actions of the Nazis. - Multiple groups and millions of non Jews died in the event known as the holocaust and are not discredited or forgotten. Pro has not fulfilled the burden of proof.