The Instigator
tornado091
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Bugaham
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

America gives a illusion of security

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Bugaham
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/28/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 837 times Debate No: 19029
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

tornado091

Pro

In this context, pro is agreeing that "America gives a illusion of security" whilst con disagrees that "America gives a illusion of security".

First, let me elaborate my belief. I believe that The United States brings a large sense of protection that isn't there. Attempting not to confuse causality and causation, there are only a few occasions that we were attacked on our soil. Knowing that I could be wrong about the count, I count the 1775 british invasion, another british invasion in 1812 (where they burned our capital), The mexico invasion on 1916-- attack on New Mexico, Perl Harbor on 1941, The world trade center attack on 2001. These are only few occurrences and scattered throughout time. I believe that citizens of the United States therefore, believe they are "safe". The attack on the world trade center brought a sense of reality to americans that they could indeed be harmed by external forces. Things have cooled down since, allowing the illusion of security to be fully filled.
Bugaham

Con

First, I will establish my own case and then refute my opponent’s.

America does not give an ILLUSION of security, because we are truly secure. It is not a false idea or belief; we truly are safe from threats.

I. Terrorism is not a threat. Since 9/11, we have greatly increased our security measures. At 9/11, many Americans thought that security from terrorism was merely an illusion; however, now we are truly safe due to our security measures. According to McNeill in 2010, 30 terrorist plots have been stopped as a result of our new security measures. That is just counting attempted terrorist plots; every time a would-be terrorist attempts to plan an attack, but ultimately decides against it because of security measures, that is a stopped terrorist attack. Since September of 2001, there has not been a successful terrorist attack. Terrorism wasn’t even a threat to security anyways; according to Jenkins in 2011, each person between 1997 and 2006 had a 1 in 1 million chance of dying in a terrorist attack.

II. Other countries are not a threat anymore. There are not any examples of America being attacked by another country after WW2. We must look at what is happening currently, not at what has happened; currently, the United Statesis the world’s only superpower. According to the green peace international organization,America has 9,962 nuclear weapons; each having about 30 times the explosive force of theHiroshimaexplosion. Because of this, no country wants to lead an invasion on American soil; no matter how many nukes the other country has, attacking Americais risky due to the fact that 9,962 nuclear weapons can easily destroy a country. There is no point attacking a country that has the ability to destroy you with the push of a button, which is why nobody has done it. Even before World War 2,Americawas still one of the most powerful countries.

Now I will refute my opponent’s case. My opponent is essentially agreeing with me when saying that “there are only a few occasions that we were attacked on our soil.” If there have only been a few occasions, and none of those within the past 60 years, where Americahas been attacked on our soil, then we are essentially safe. Also, the attack on New Mexicois proving my case; it was Americainvading Mexico, as at the time of the Mexican War (which, contrary to my opponent’s 1916 date, took place from 1846-1847) New Mexico belonged to Mexico.America is a very powerful country that not many people mess with, as stated in my second contention. My opponent’s case also agrees with my first contention; my opponent states that “things have cooled down since” 9/11. This is agreeing with the fact that terrorism is not a threat.

In conclusion, America is a safe country; there is no "illusion" about it. Terrorism is no longer a threat, and other countries are no longer a threat. My opponent has essentially agreed with this in his case.

Thank you.

Debate Round No. 1
tornado091

Pro

tornado091 forfeited this round.
Bugaham

Con

Just to reiterate, terrorists are no longer problems and neither are other countries.

Thank you, and please vote con.
Debate Round No. 2
tornado091

Pro

tornado091 forfeited this round.
Bugaham

Con

In conclusion, you should vote con in this debate.

My opponent states that "there are only a few occasions that we were attacked on our soil", which just helps prove my case. He has argued that "things have cooled down since [9/11]", which again backs my case up- the reason that things have cooled down is that we have these 9/11 security measures in effect, and are the only superpower. He has failed to attack anything that I have said, and failed to defend his own statements. Essentially, he is agreeing with both of my contentions.

Thank you, and please vote con!
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by PeacefulChaos 5 years ago
PeacefulChaos
Nvm, I fixed it :)
Posted by PeacefulChaos 5 years ago
PeacefulChaos
Crap . . . I put the points for Pro instead of Con :P

Sorry Bugaham.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by PeacefulChaos 5 years ago
PeacefulChaos
tornado091BugahamTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited every round, with the exception of round one. I think it's obvious who the winner is.
Vote Placed by thett3 5 years ago
thett3
tornado091BugahamTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: This shouldn't even be called a debate.