The Instigator
Cowboy0108
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Rayze
Con (against)
Winning
25 Points

America should bomb, colonize, and drain the Middle East(not Israel)of oil.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
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 6 votes the winner is...
Rayze
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/28/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,909 times Debate No: 31835
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (6)

 

Cowboy0108

Pro

This will help to reduce the national debt from oil sales, eliminate OPEC, lower fuel prices, prevent loss of soldiers' lives, and prevent terrorism.
This is just my background
Round 1 is acceptance and short statement of reasoning(no evidence)
Round 2 Will be a common sense argument, no facts, data, numbers, or history lectures.
Round 3 Will be a rebuttal of any previous argument and include final words, limited facts please
As you can tell, I want this to be about sense, not fact. Please use simple language for the voters. No innapropriate language please. Please follow these guidelines.
Rayze

Con

Although I highly doubt that destroying infrastructure, colonizing, and the middle east will achieve what pro desires. I accept this debate and may the better debater win.

Debate Round No. 1
Cowboy0108

Pro

If we do this,
terrorism would be virtually eliminated because the terrorists would be eliminated
Fewer of our soldier's lives would be lost because America would not have them running around enemy streets randomly.
America could drill for oil in the region. Sell it at home for a nickel a gallon and sell it to the rest of the world. The revenue from selling the oil could pay down the debt and America could eliminate one of its major problems, oil. Furthermore, when oil is no longer an issue, America could us extra money, since the debt is gone, to pursue Hydrogen power.
Rayze

Con

Sure, and while we're at it why don't we backstab our friends in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and especially Turkey since they have some of our nukes. Heck lets "eliminate" terrorism by destroying the Middle East and creating bitter people. Lets Destabilize Syria even more so that the chemical weapons stockpile gets lost. Lot of good that'll do for the US economy by pumping billion dollar bombs into a region that we have to rebuild from scratch again. In fact why don't we just commit another holocaust like our old nemesis Hitler since the bitter people will become terrorists... (catch the sarcasm yet?) Lets not forget those Stinger toting Mujahideen in Afghanistan, after all we put them back in power after kicking the Taliban out of Afghanistan. If they can beat the Commies in their (mujahideen) home turf when the rest of us was playing chicken with nukes, I have no doubt they'd be able hold their own against billion dollar bombs. Have you forgotten that there are other nations that are a part of OPEC that don't belong to the Middle East? Heck this is like how to get the rest of the world to hate America by screwing up the oil economy.

Debate Round No. 2
Cowboy0108

Pro

I am glad to see you agree(yes it is sarcasm).
1. All we need to rebuild is the oil rigs. Don't worry about the towns, just the oil.
2. The region is all desert. If everything is flat, we do not have to worry about chemical bombs hiding in buildings, because there are none.
3. The middle east will be a US colony. We can control it.
4. Afghanistan is not my concern. Just the oil producers. We can forget about Afghan and concern ourselves with the ones that can make us money.
5. If we control the oil, we control the world. Any place that threatens us, we will simply cut them off. Try and bomb us with no planes because they have no fuel.
6. I am not concerned with bringing democracy to these people. Abandoning this fantasy will save us money.
7. I have no intentions of rebuilding when we are done. They support terrorists, we don't support them.
Rayze

Con

Final rebuttals

1. Just rebuilding the oil rigs doesn't pump oil into the economy. What is needed are workers, workers that pro would have killed off if this ever does happen.

2. The region is not just desert, there are mountains and caves where people can hide. Bitter people can be scary.
3. Thats what the Soviets tried before the Mujahideen beat them out of Afghanistan.
4. Sure like the Taliban will forget what the US did to them.
5. Wrong, crazy nations who have nukes will do everything in their power to get the fuel. Like North Korea and their insane brinksmanship game.
6. So you want to abandon the US constitution then?
7. Leaving a wasteland instead will bring nothing but an economic drain, the opposite of what pro wants to achieve.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Brycekinney 3 years ago
Brycekinney
Pro is very ignorant. Rather than eliminating terrorism, it would breed more terrorists (let's not forget the source of virtually all terrorism is NATO intervention), kill millions of innocent human beings, and break international law. As Pro very specifically states in round 1 of the debate, he did NOT want this debate to contain facts or evidence.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Majducator 3 years ago
Majducator
Cowboy0108RayzeTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: World Peace
Vote Placed by wiploc 3 years ago
wiploc
Cowboy0108RayzeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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: Con made reasonable objections to Pro's trolling.
Vote Placed by Legitdebater 3 years ago
Legitdebater
Cowboy0108RayzeTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 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: Con had a better and a more rational argument unlike Pro. Pro's arguments would just make the problem worse.
Vote Placed by DebaterAgent 3 years ago
DebaterAgent
Cowboy0108RayzeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: Pro was repetitive and ignorant
Vote Placed by Grantmac18 3 years ago
Grantmac18
Cowboy0108RayzeTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: For the sake of reason and logic let us all hope Pro's "solution" does not infect the minds of others. Pro's arguments were awful; this is DDO, there is a degree of intellectual and rational integrity in which members are advised to abide by
Vote Placed by Misterscruffles 3 years ago
Misterscruffles
Cowboy0108RayzeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 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: Con effectively demolished pro's arguments in both round 2 and 3.