English assignment

Mantilla 2

Cirelda mantilla

Carlos Canizares

Enc1105

8 February 2024

Israeli-Hamas War

I. Introduction

A. “War does not determine who is right - only who is left.” Bertrand Russell

B. The 2023 Israel-Hamas war has drawn attention worldwide due to its continuous onslaught.

II. Thesis: Although there may be good reasons to intervene in the Israeli-Hamas War militarily, the U.S. and its Allies should not intervene militarily in Gaza because it may lead to escalation of conflicts, recourse allocations, Risk of civilian casualties

III. First supporting paragraph: Military intervention is not ideal for Gaza because it could lead to increased conflict.

A. Foreign military forces have been known to incite local vengeance and anger, worsening hostilities (Souleimanov, Siroky, & Colombo).

B. Even when intended to restore peace, military operations can create new grievances or encourage extremist factions.

IV. Second supporting paragraph: Additionally, military intervention could worsen the situation by diverting resources from pressing issues within the nation.

A. Military operations and occupying forces would be funded instead of Gaza's essential social, economic, and humanitarian needs.

B. Prioritizing military projects above development and social initiatives can perpetuate cycles of poverty, instability, and dependency, threatening the region's long-term peace and prosperity (Reliefweb).

V. Third supporting paragraph: Moreover, military intervention could increase tensions, leading to more civilian casualties and deaths, thus worsening the situation.

A. Military forces in densely populated regions increase the risk of civilian casualties since armed conflict typically overflows into civilian areas and infrastructure (Shumilova et al 580).

B. Military actions can start a cycle of violence in which each act of aggression is retaliated, killing more innocent people and worsening the humanitarian catastrophe.

VI. Opposing view: Despite these concerns, military intervention supporters say armed action is necessary to enforce international law or protect human rights.

A. Military intervention advocates claim that the international community has a moral obligation to interfere when human rights abuses occur (Tomes 12).

B. International law and resolutions are used to justify military intervention as required to protect the rule of law and prevent further crimes.

VII. Rebuttal to Opposing view: While military action may assist human rights, the risks outweigh the advantages due to irrevocable damage to resources and people.

A. Despite good intentions, military operations can cause massive destruction, death, and conflict escalation.

B. Diplomatic, humanitarian, and peacebuilding initiatives should be emphasized over military power to address conflict fundamental causes and develop durable solutions that benefit all parties.

VIII. Conclusion: Overall, while military intervention could be directed towards a good cause, allies and other humanitarian initiatives should consider the fatal impacts it could have on the nation, including escalating conflicts, poor resource allocation, and increased casualties and deaths.

A. Instead of military action, diplomatic efforts should be increased to foster communication and negotiation.

B. Mediation by neutral third parties or international organizations could help Israel and Hamas reach a solution.

Works Cited

Reliefweb. “Risk of Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Threatening Stability of Wider Region Remains High, Senior UN Political Official Warns Security Council.” (2023). Retrieved From: https://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/risk-israeli-palestinian-conflict-threatening-stability-wider-region-remains-high-senior-un-political-official-warns-security-council

Shumilova, Oleksandra, et al. "Impact of the Russia–Ukraine armed conflict on water resources and water infrastructure." Nature Sustainability 6.5 (2023): 578-586.

Souleimanov, Emil Aslan, David S. Siroky, and Roberto Colombo. "Blood Revenge in Civil War: Proof of Concept." Security Studies 32.1 (2023): 101-136. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09636412.2023.2153731

Tomes, Robert. "Operation Allied Force and the Legal Basis for Humanitarian Interventions." The US Army War College Quarterly: Parameters 30.1 (2020): 12.

1

Mantilla 2

Cirelda mantilla

Carlos Canizares

Enc1105

8 February 2024

Israeli-Hamas War

I. Introduction

A. “War does not determine who is right - only who is left.” Bertrand Russell

B. The 2023 Israel-Hamas war has drawn attention worldwide due to its continuous onslaught.

II. Thesis: Although there may be good reasons to intervene in the Israeli-Hamas War militarily, the U.S. and its Allies should not intervene militarily in Gaza because it may lead to escalation of conflicts, recourse allocations, Risk of civilian casualties

III. First supporting paragraph: Military intervention is not ideal for Gaza because it could lead to increased conflict.

A. Foreign military forces have been known to incite local vengeance and anger, worsening hostilities (Souleimanov, Siroky, & Colombo).

B. Even when intended to restore peace, military operations can create new grievances or encourage extremist factions.

IV. Second supporting paragraph: Additionally, military intervention could worsen the situation by diverting resources from pressing issues within the nation.

A. Military operations and occupying forces would be funded instead of Gaza's essential social, economic, and humanitarian needs.

B. Prioritizing military projects above development and social initiatives can perpetuate cycles of poverty, instability, and dependency, threatening the region's long-term peace and prosperity (Reliefweb).

V. Third supporting paragraph: Moreover, military intervention could increase tensions, leading to more civilian casualties and deaths, thus worsening the situation.

A. Military forces in densely populated regions increase the risk of civilian casualties since armed conflict typically overflows into civilian areas and infrastructure (Shumilova et al 580).

B. Military actions can start a cycle of violence in which each act of aggression is retaliated, killing more innocent people and worsening the humanitarian catastrophe.

VI. Opposing view: Despite these concerns, military intervention supporters say armed action is necessary to enforce international law or protect human rights.

A. Military intervention advocates claim that the international community has a moral obligation to interfere when human rights abuses occur (Tomes 12).

B. International law and resolutions are used to justify military intervention as required to protect the rule of law and prevent further crimes.

VII. Rebuttal to Opposing view: While military action may assist human rights, the risks outweigh the advantages due to irrevocable damage to resources and people.

A. Despite good intentions, military operations can cause massive destruction, death, and conflict escalation.

B. Diplomatic, humanitarian, and peacebuilding initiatives should be emphasized over military power to address conflict fundamental causes and develop durable solutions that benefit all parties.

VIII. Conclusion: Overall, while military intervention could be directed towards a good cause, allies and other humanitarian initiatives should consider the fatal impacts it could have on the nation, including escalating conflicts, poor resource allocation, and increased casualties and deaths.

A. Instead of military action, diplomatic efforts should be increased to foster communication and negotiation.

B. Mediation by neutral third parties or international organizations could help Israel and Hamas reach a solution.

Works Cited

Reliefweb. “Risk of Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Threatening Stability of Wider Region Remains High, Senior UN Political Official Warns Security Council.” (2023). Retrieved From: https://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/risk-israeli-palestinian-conflict-threatening-stability-wider-region-remains-high-senior-un-political-official-warns-security-council

Shumilova, Oleksandra, et al. "Impact of the Russia–Ukraine armed conflict on water resources and water infrastructure." Nature Sustainability 6.5 (2023): 578-586.

Souleimanov, Emil Aslan, David S. Siroky, and Roberto Colombo. "Blood Revenge in Civil War: Proof of Concept." Security Studies 32.1 (2023): 101-136. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09636412.2023.2153731

Tomes, Robert. "Operation Allied Force and the Legal Basis for Humanitarian Interventions." The US Army War College Quarterly: Parameters 30.1 (2020): 12.

1