Strength Evaluation
Which of the following two arguments is stronger?

Please compare the strength of the two arguments below, ignoring all others.

Note. The platform identifies the top arguments for each viewpoint independently of others. This implies that the competition occurs among arguments supporting the same viewpoint.

Argument A

October 7 would have never happened if it weren't for the deeply oppressive policies undertaken by the Israeli government over the past decades. This includes the complete blockade of Gaza, the expansion of unlawful settlements in the West Bank despite U.S. objections, and regular provocations at Masjid Al-Aqsa—a site sacred to Muslims. These places are part of Palestine, and Gazans consider them their homeland, as reflected in the name of the operation, “Al-Aqsa Storm.” Therefore, one cannot claim that such violations are unrelated to the events of October 7 committed by Gazans.

Israelis often cite security concerns to justify their actions. However, seizing other people's land is blatantly illegal (also see this) and is not self-defense. It will make bad precedent if countries start to occupy other countries and start making settlements there in the name of self-defense.

Argument B

There is ample evidence that Hamas has made attempts at peaceful coexistence with Israel in the past, but Israel rejected these efforts due to its overarching goal of preventing the establishment of a Palestinian state.

When Hamas came to power in 2006 after a fair election, as confirmed by the UN and US, they repeatedly sent peace feelers to the Israeli government. However, the Israeli government dismissed all these efforts. Although a ceasefire was later reached, it was soon broken unilaterally by Israel. While it's true that Hamas at the time of sending peace feelers asked for the right of return for all refugees expelled from their homes in 1948—a demand not favored by Israel—one should note that, first, international law does recognize the right of return for expelled people, and second, Hamas presented it as a topic of negotiation, which Israel refused to engage in.

Additionally, in an effort to heal divisions within the Palestinian movement, Hamas issued a new charter in 2017 that endorsed the idea of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders—a significant shift from its previous stance.

Israel dismissed all these efforts to prevent the creation of an independent Palestinian state.

Overview