Gazans have been living in a perpetual state of crisis which has only worsened with the overthrowing of it's government curtisy of the Hamas. The Hamas is a Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood whos character calls for the destruction of Israel. Most would consider the Hamas a terrorist organization. Hamas constantly conducts terrorist operations, mostly firing rockets into Southern Israel, which leaves Israel no choice but to periodically bomb and invade Gaza in order to destroy terrorist infrastructure and protect its people. This can sometimes get tricky seeing as the Hamas use the tactic of using civilians as human shields, sometimes hiding in hospitals and schools. They are irresponsible anti-semetics who use the Arab-Israeli conflict to deflect the anger of their own population. Internal problems caused by inept governing can be blamed on Israel, a convenient scapegoat, causing the Palestinian people to blindly support them.


But the main issue that we're debating is the Palestinians right to have their own state within Israel, more specifically, the right to the Gaza Strip. The Gaza Strip is in no way self-sufficiant. It has virtually no infrastructure, no power, food shortages, and serious humanitarian and economic problems. In fact most of their food and utilities are provided by Israel or the United Nations. It's a small, already overcrowded piece of land with one of the highest population densities in the world. The creation of a Palestinian state will increase crowding, poverty, and economic pressure. And not to mention the kinds of terrorist threat, the kinds of ecological threat presented by a Palestinian state. With their main target being Israel, this greatly justifies Israeli resistance to it.

Palestinians have shown over and over again that they would prefer killing Jews and annihilating Israel than having their own state, stability, and prosperity. How can we expect the Israeli government to negotiate with the Palestinians when all they want to destroy them? The fact of the matter is that by allowing a Palestinian state to be created in the Gaza Strip alongside Israel is very much like allowing the destruction of the only Jewish state in two thousand years.

Although we are in no way for a Palestinian state to be created, there have been other alternatives presented to the people of the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian government obviously can't come up with a peaceful solution on it's own regarding Israel, and the Gaza Strip can not physically function as an independent country. That is why the idea of Egypt annexing Gaza has been brought to the table.




• clarify who/what are the hamas/ what are their beliefs.
• do you think its responsible to allow terrorists to govern a state?
• can you tell us who the main supplier of weapons to the palestinians is?
• (lol its iran!)
• so a country that is in favor of wiping israel off the face of the earth is supplying weapons to people currently fighting with them, is that correct?
• why would israel want to allow the palestinians to have their own land when the palestinians are pent on israels destruction?
• (followup) how is the israeli government supposed to negotiate with a "government" that doesn't even believe they have the right to exist?
• how is the gaza strip supposed to function on its own with virtually no infrastructure, no power, and major economic and humanitarian issues?
•

Gun control, more specifically the hand gun. Most violent crimes in america are committed with hand guns. Should they be illegal? Of course not! As americans the right to bare arms includes handguns. And besides, even if you made handguns illegal, you wouldn't be taking them out of the hands of criminals, but out of the hands of the good, honest, hardworking gun collectors and hunters. Now why in the world would a hunter need a hand gun? Tons of reasons. Rifles are good and all but they're unwieldy. Hand guns are much better for hunting in close quarters like an abandoned warehouse or a factory. I know someone hunting in a factory sounds a bit ridiculous but lets just say that you track this big buck to the outskirts of town and you find that he's made himself a makeshift home in the bottom of an abandoned warehouse. With a hand gun, you can easily sneak up on him and get a death shot. That way he wont be running around with your daughter anymore and filling her head with ridiculous ideas and corrupting her character.
Now a lot of people will tell you that allowing everyday citizens to own a gun is extremely dangerous. In fact it's been reported that there are new guns being built and sold in underground black markets that can shoot straight through bulletproof vests. Obviously an ordinary citizen shouldn't have the need to shoot through a bulletproof vest. But let me throw this out there. Let's say a bunch of kids with questionable morals go into the woods one day and decide to strap a bulletproof vest to a grizzly bear, a very realistic threat to us seeing as the california grizzly is our state bear. So then what do you have? Exactly, invincible bears. Unstoppable by our regular police issued bullets, they'll roam the streets of major cities long enough to gain human intelligence while the people of our great nation cower in fear without anything to protect themselves with, which will lead us into a situation that I don't care to discus right now.
Some could make the argument that you could just crush the bears with giant boulders. Well if you ban private citizens from owning guns, you could just as easily ban people from using giant boulders because of the thousands killed by giant boulders each year. And although it's very rare for someone to kill another being with a giant boulder, it WILL be something we have to face if you take away their assault rifles.
In america, federal law states that you must be twenty-one or older to purchase a handgun and sale of a firearm by a federally licensed dealer must be documented by federal form 4473, which identifies and includes other information about the purchaser, and records the make, model, and serial number of the firearm. Sales to an individual of multiple handguns within a five-day period require dealer notification to the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. Seems like a lot of paperwork right? How troublesome that must be for the individual trying to purchase the assault rifle they have every right to. Not only is it a tremendous waste of precious paper, but an age limit of twenty-one and over?
Hypothetically speaking, what if a young child is left at home unattended while his parents are out at a dinner party. All of a sudden there's a knock on the door, and being the curious child that he is, he decides to answer it. But WAIT! Upon opening the door he realizes that standing on the threshold to greet him is a gang called the baby skulls, known for wearing baby skulls around their necks. Now of course the kid's got his handy baby skull seeking bullets in his dresser drawer right next to his bible, but because he is not of legal age, he has no gun to fire them off in. If the tight knit laws that we have regarding guns at the moment are causing that much damage, just imagine what would happen if guns were completely out of the picture.
Basically what I'm trying to say is that not only should guns be legal for the safety of our nation, but they should be available to all citizens without discrimination. Everyone has the right to protect themselves, be it from burglars, bears, or baby skull gangs. Thank you.

http://www.nraila.org/
http://www.guncite.com/
http://www.infowars.net/articles/april2007/190407Second.htm
http://www.newsbatch.com/guncontrol.htm