Left to Submit Arguments
Left to Evaluate Arguments
  • Investigating a controversial topic is governed by two deadlines: The Argument Submission Deadline and the Argument Evaluation Deadline
  • The Argument Submission Deadline is the cutoff point for users to submit their arguments. However, users can continue to evaluate existing arguments until the Argument Evaluation Deadline. The time gap between the two deadlines is key, as it allows for the assessment of all submitted arguments. (Learn more)
Is Israel's military operation in Gaza following Oct 7 justified?

Israel has launched a military operation in Gaza following the October 7 attack by Hamas. Is this operation justified?

#israel_palestine_conflict #gaza #oct_7 #palestine #israel

Previous Viewpoint
Next Viewpoint
Viewpoint 1/2

Given Hamas's statements on record, the only way the Israeli government can prevent similar attacks in the future is to fully dismantle Hamas. While Israel will try to minimize human casualties, it is utterly unreasonable to ask Israelis to coexist with Hamas.

When Hamas came to power in 2006 (following a fair election, as confirmed by the UN and US), they repeatedly sent peace feelers to the Israeli government. They were clearly looking for some sort of settlement. However, the Israeli government dismissed those peace feelers. Hamas and the Israeli government eventually entered into a ceasefire, but even that was broken by the Israeli government soon after it was initiated. If Israel agrees to a two-state solution, which they currently show no sign of doing, there is ample evidence that Hamas would also agree.

Regarding the specific video shared above from Ghazi Hamad, first, this is an unofficial message. Hamas’ updated charter, released in 2017, suggests willingness to co-exist with Israel. Second, the speaker begins by saying, “We should teach Israel a lesson.” This statement is key and frames the rest of his message. If Israel were to change course and respect Palestinian rights, there would be no reason “to teach them a lesson.”

It is irrational to ask Israelis to live alongside an organization fundamentally dedicated to destroying them. No other nation agrees to live under such conditions, and no nation is in a position to ask Israelis to do so.

In an effort to heal divisions within the Palestinian movement, Hamas issued a new charter in 2017 that accepted the idea of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders. Although the document stops short of formally recognizing Israel, it undermines the claim that Hamas is fundamentally committed to Israel's destruction.

It's also notable that after Hamas came to power in 2006, it repeatedly extended peace feelers to the Israeli government. These gestures were consistently rejected. Additionally, Netanyahu government backed Qatar’s monthly cash transfers to Gaza as part of a “divide-and-conquer” strategy aimed at undermining prospects for Palestinian statehood.

Had Israel responded constructively to these overtures, the current tragic situation would have been avoided.

Israel is the “front line” or first target for Islamist groups because of its geographic location and symbolic significance, but it is neither the ultimate nor the only objective. Confronting militant groups in Gaza is therefore not merely an Israeli security measure; it is also a preemptive effort to contain a broader threat that could eventually reach Europe or North America.

There is no evidence to suggest that Hamas or any other Muslim group intends to carry out military operations in Europe. This claim is propaganda by Israel aimed at securing military and political support from the West.

refreshLoad More
{{ (total_arguments_per_viewpoint[ "0" ] - allowed_arguments_per_viewpoint[ "0" ]).toLocaleString() }} more Argument(s) are available
close_fullscreenMinimize
Back to the first {{ initially_allowed_arguments_per_viewpoint }} Arguments
Previous Viewpoint
Next Viewpoint
Viewpoint 2/2

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.

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.

The attack was carried out by residents of Gaza, while the settlements are located in the West Bank, a different geographical area. Relating these two events is misleading.

Israeli officials publicly cut off electricity and water supplies to Gaza soon after October 7th. Additionally, according to reputable international organizations, food supplies to Gaza have been significantly reduced, with aid groups citing difficulty coordinating with the Israeli military as the primary reason (see here for more evidence). Some Israeli citizens have also attempted to block aid trucks. These limited food supplies have led to the starvation and deaths of many innocent people, particularly vulnerable children. In effect, the IDF has used starvation as a weapon of war against Gazans.

These policies clearly constitute "collective punishment", which is strictly prohibited under international law. It is important to note that the popular Israeli argument of "collateral damage" does not even apply in this case.

Israeli officials have attempted to cast doubt on claims of a food shortage in Gaza. They cite certain "studies" and "images" showing overweight individuals. It's important to note that all such studies originate from Israeli sources, not independent ones. As for the images, they should be weighed against the many more photos emerging from Gaza that show visibly malnourished individuals. Ultimately, if the Israeli government is confident there is no food shortage, one must ask: why not allow international journalists in to see for themselves?

Source: Middle East Eye/AFP/Omar al-Qattaa

A new study reveals that Israel has permitted ample food supplies to enter Gaza. However, these supplies do not reach Gazan civilians in a timely manner due to the inefficiency of the U.N. and humanitarian organizations in processing and distributing the aid. Additionally, Hamas exacerbates the issue by frequently stealing and diverting aid meant for civilians.

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 every one of these efforts to prevent the creation of an independent Palestinian state.

Granting the right of return would have posed significant security concerns for Israeli citizens because it would have led to a mixed Palestinian/Jewish society. Palestinians harbor animosity toward Jews, which would have created constant distress for Israeli residents. Such practical considerations must be taken into account when evaluating Israel's policies.

refreshLoad More
{{ (total_arguments_per_viewpoint[ "1" ] - allowed_arguments_per_viewpoint[ "1" ]).toLocaleString() }} more Argument(s) are available
close_fullscreenMinimize
Back to the first {{ initially_allowed_arguments_per_viewpoint }} Arguments
Previous Viewpoint
Next Viewpoint