frame
Howdy Debater!
Sign In Register


          
+ NEW DEBATE

Best Recent Content

  • What went Bang!

    @Erfisflat Gravity doesn't exist? Then I'll just jump out my window and fly! Here we go!
    m_abusteitErfisflat
  • Should Land belong to Palestine or Israel?

    @Erfisflat  Fascinating article actually.  Thanks for that.  I'll have to do some more research with that.  
    Erfisflat
  • If I support Trump, am I a closet Racist?

    @Vaulk I agree - I don't like Trump's ban, but it wasn't on a race or a religion, it was on countries, so that doesn't make the action racist. And if someone supports it, it doesn't make them racist.

    Ultimately, no one is racist unless they truly believe a group to be inferior. That has nothing to do with their political affiliation, or whether you support or at against certain political actions.
    VaulkSuperSith89
  • If I support Trump, am I a closet Racist?

    All of you Trump supporters who say that You are not racists: lets be honest, it is clearly targeting muslims. Maybe it makes you feel better about yourselves that you are not racists, but if you turn off the lights and no one is watching, you can admit it to yourself. I believe bulk of Trump supporters are in fact racists whether they admit it or not publically to themselves. Just being honest...
    Reven851SuperSith89
  • Cannabis

    Legalizing it will resolve a lot of society cost and unnecessary criminal activity.  
    Erfisflat
  • Cannabis

    "A new Quinnipiac poll released Thursday found 71 percent of Americans would oppose a federal crackdown on legal marijuana, and 93 percent are in favor of medical marijuana, according to the survey of 1,323 voters nationwide."

    http://www.thecannabist.co/2017/02/23/quinnipiac-poll-2017-marijuana-legalization-federal-crackdown/74227/

    Why is the government so opposed to the majority? Aren't we a Government of the people, by the people, for the people? 

    Can someone give me a good reason that i can't pick up a pack of cannabis cigs at the gas station around the corner? Why shouldn't cannabis be legalized for everyone?
    melef
  • Communism vs Capitalism [I already know the answer trust me]

    Capitalism is the highest form of economic freedom there is, provided the government does not stray too close to corporatism, which I am afraid we are currently doing. However, this is not the fault of capitalism, it is the fault of the government. The economic system itself is not perfect but it is better than communism, under which many opportunities have to be consequently shut down as a result of communism's function. This means that if combined with a corrupt government, it will be even worse
    agsrErfisflat
  • Should Land belong to Palestine or Israel?

    @melanielust ;

    Quite a lot of issues to pick here I'm afraid. My general advice to readers is to be wary of someone who is completely uncritical of either side in the debate. Here I'll mostly be picking holes in Melanielist's endorsement of Israel, but that's only because there is little to respond to in regards to bringing down Palestinian ideologues a peg or two.

    That land has been Israeli for thousands of years. It has always been the Jewish homeland

    The state of Israel formed only 70 years ago and before then the land was owned by a series of Arab nations for millennia. There was a biblical kingdom thousands of years before, but that isn't a recognised basis for taking a country.

    and was formally recognized as such by the US and UN in the 1940s-50s thanks to President Truman.

    The UN did try to establish a Jewish homeland in the 40s but this was only going to be on a portion of the Palestinian Mandate with the other half forming a Palestinian state. It is also quite contentious as it seems to go against the right to self determination and a bit of a last dying gasp over the old Colonial mindset.

    The territory that Israel now tries to claim includes land that not only goes beyond the borders raised in the partition plan of the 40's, but includes land the UN has specifically said does not belong to Israel and that Israel but withdraw from. The UN did not recognise that the land that constitutes Israel has always been the Jewish homeland and the plan was never implemented.

    But the land they gained was never respected by any of the surrounding countries, including Palestine.
    The Palestinian Authority has made offers which would recognise Israel and its borders in peace negotiations, as Israel has made offers to Palestine too. There is even the outstanding Arab Peace Initiative which Israel has not accepted, but which has been endorsed by the Arab league and states the "Arab states will do the following: (a) Consider the Arab–Israeli conflict over, sign a peace agreement with Israel, and achieve peace for all states in the region; (b) Establish normal relations with Israel within the framework of this comprehensive peace". Unfortunately so far the various sides have still not reconciled the difference in their positions.

    Palestine will stop at nothing to completely get rid of a Jewish state, no matter how legal it is
    This is a very dangerous and obviously incorrect statement. There is no single "Palestine". There are the Palestinian people, the Occupied Palestinian Territories as a geographic location and various bodies which in different ways claim to represent aspects of the Palestinian people (Such as the Palestinian Authority, Fatah and Hamas). There is however no singular ruling government in the same way you would have in a nation-state. Part of this whole struggle is Palestinian wanting to be able to do that.

    The Palestinian people represent a wide variety of people with a wide variety of views. Only a tiny minority engage in violence, there are many that are supportive of the peace process and other that engage in wholly non-violent protest. To speak of Palestine as a whole as being murderous is to paint an entire race as inherently murderous one dimensional caricatures.

    Also the Israeli occupation is widely accepted as illegal and guilty of war crimes under international law by the UN, the International court of Justice and a host of humanitarian organisations ranging from Amnesty International to Israeli based organisations like B'Tselem. These same organisations will point out when Palestinian militant groups like Hamas and PIJ commit war crimes, so they are unbiased. It's isn't a case of any one 'side' being the white-hatted good guys.

    Israel has been constantly battered by Egypt and other middle eastern nations,

    As for being constantly battered by Middle Eastern nations like Egypt, that's a bizarre claim. Egypt and Israel have been on friendly terms for years. They signed a peace deal decades ago and especially in the last few years they have worked together to stymie Hamas.

    In terms of battering each other, that's well in the past but even then it was moreso Israel attacking Egypt than vice-versa.

    Putting aside tit-for-tat border skirmishes and focusing only on wars:

    - In '48 there's enough blame for everyone as Egypt attacked Israel but only after Israel started ethnically cleansing the Palestinian which itself happened after decades of mutual fighting and suspicion between Jews and Muslims in the Mandate.

    - Suez War was Israel attacking Egypt to try and take their land.

    - Six Day War was Israel attacking Egypt and others neighbours to try and take their land and actually succeeding this time.

    - The Yom Kippor actually was Egypt attacking Israel, but only to reclaim it's own land that Israel was occupying since the 6 Day War. Even then they didn't actually defeat Israel because for decades Israel has been the regional superpower, but they put on a good enough show that Israel agreed to peace on the same terms that Egypt had been offering before the war started.

    the way they have defended themselves successfully every time shows their resilience and why they deserve that land.

    Lastly being powerful enough to take and hold land is not a good reason for having land. That would legitimise the actions of the worst dictators in the world and the entire reason following WW2 that we instituted international laws to stop such actions is because we realised how horrifying the results could be. We've specifically instituted international laws, military and otherwise, that define the nature of how nations and organisations must conduct themselves specifically because we know the idea of the strong ruling over the weak and what results from that is abominable to our basic conceptions of morality.
    melanielustErfisflat
  • Should Land belong to Palestine or Israel?

    @melanielust ;

    Quite a lot of issues to pick here I'm afraid. My general advice to readers is to be wary of someone who is completely uncritical of either side in the debate. Here I'll mostly be picking holes in Melanielist's endorsement of Israel, but that's only because there is little to respond to in regards to bringing down Palestinian ideologues a peg or two.

    That land has been Israeli for thousands of years. It has always been the Jewish homeland

    The state of Israel formed only 70 years ago and before then the land was owned by a series of Arab nations for millennia. There was a biblical kingdom thousands of years before, but that isn't a recognised basis for taking a country.

    and was formally recognized as such by the US and UN in the 1940s-50s thanks to President Truman.

    The UN did try to establish a Jewish homeland in the 40s but this was only going to be on a portion of the Palestinian Mandate with the other half forming a Palestinian state. It is also quite contentious as it seems to go against the right to self determination and a bit of a last dying gasp over the old Colonial mindset.

    The territory that Israel now tries to claim includes land that not only goes beyond the borders raised in the partition plan of the 40's, but includes land the UN has specifically said does not belong to Israel and that Israel but withdraw from. The UN did not recognise that the land that constitutes Israel has always been the Jewish homeland and the plan was never implemented.

    But the land they gained was never respected by any of the surrounding countries, including Palestine.
    The Palestinian Authority has made offers which would recognise Israel and its borders in peace negotiations, as Israel has made offers to Palestine too. There is even the outstanding Arab Peace Initiative which Israel has not accepted, but which has been endorsed by the Arab league and states the "Arab states will do the following: (a) Consider the Arab–Israeli conflict over, sign a peace agreement with Israel, and achieve peace for all states in the region; (b) Establish normal relations with Israel within the framework of this comprehensive peace". Unfortunately so far the various sides have still not reconciled the difference in their positions.

    Palestine will stop at nothing to completely get rid of a Jewish state, no matter how legal it is
    This is a very dangerous and obviously incorrect statement. There is no single "Palestine". There are the Palestinian people, the Occupied Palestinian Territories as a geographic location and various bodies which in different ways claim to represent aspects of the Palestinian people (Such as the Palestinian Authority, Fatah and Hamas). There is however no singular ruling government in the same way you would have in a nation-state. Part of this whole struggle is Palestinian wanting to be able to do that.

    The Palestinian people represent a wide variety of people with a wide variety of views. Only a tiny minority engage in violence, there are many that are supportive of the peace process and other that engage in wholly non-violent protest. To speak of Palestine as a whole as being murderous is to paint an entire race as inherently murderous one dimensional caricatures.

    Also the Israeli occupation is widely accepted as illegal and guilty of war crimes under international law by the UN, the International court of Justice and a host of humanitarian organisations ranging from Amnesty International to Israeli based organisations like B'Tselem. These same organisations will point out when Palestinian militant groups like Hamas and PIJ commit war crimes, so they are unbiased. It's isn't a case of any one 'side' being the white-hatted good guys.

    Israel has been constantly battered by Egypt and other middle eastern nations,

    As for being constantly battered by Middle Eastern nations like Egypt, that's a bizarre claim. Egypt and Israel have been on friendly terms for years. They signed a peace deal decades ago and especially in the last few years they have worked together to stymie Hamas.

    In terms of battering each other, that's well in the past but even then it was moreso Israel attacking Egypt than vice-versa.

    Putting aside tit-for-tat border skirmishes and focusing only on wars:

    - In '48 there's enough blame for everyone as Egypt attacked Israel but only after Israel started ethnically cleansing the Palestinian which itself happened after decades of mutual fighting and suspicion between Jews and Muslims in the Mandate.

    - Suez War was Israel attacking Egypt to try and take their land.

    - Six Day War was Israel attacking Egypt and others neighbours to try and take their land and actually succeeding this time.

    - The Yom Kippor actually was Egypt attacking Israel, but only to reclaim it's own land that Israel was occupying since the 6 Day War. Even then they didn't actually defeat Israel because for decades Israel has been the regional superpower, but they put on a good enough show that Israel agreed to peace on the same terms that Egypt had been offering before the war started.

    the way they have defended themselves successfully every time shows their resilience and why they deserve that land.

    Lastly being powerful enough to take and hold land is not a good reason for having land. That would legitimise the actions of the worst dictators in the world and the entire reason following WW2 that we instituted international laws to stop such actions is because we realised how horrifying the results could be. We've specifically instituted international laws, military and otherwise, that define the nature of how nations and organisations must conduct themselves specifically because we know the idea of the strong ruling over the weak and what results from that is abominable to our basic conceptions of morality.
    melanielustErfisflat
  • Will Theresa May step aside?

    I don't believe so.

    She now plays a huge role in he British government even bargaining to create a new government for the U.K. I don't believe that she will step aside mainly due to this and the latest elections.
    The latest elections are viewed as a failure on May's part. She was already PM and didn't need to call them; elections in the UK are every 5 years but can be called early. In this case one wasn't needed until 2020, but she called one anyway because the polls at the time indicated she would come away with an increased majority.

    The tables turned during the campaign and she ended up weakening herself and her party on a failed gamble.

    That she is negotiating to put together a majority is not a sign of strength, she had a majority a month ago and the norm is for the PM to be able to form a government without need for a coalition. She is having to bargain to hold onto power. I mean if you think despite this she will hold onto power then that's one thing, but I can't see any argument for presenting this as a positive for May.
    randal

Debate Anything on DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2017 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
Terms of Service

Get In Touch