The Instigator
Adiatorix
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Tophatdoc
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

American leaders seeking oil reserves in Middle East, using false wars to justify?

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 3 votes the winner is...
Tophatdoc
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/29/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 758 times Debate No: 43081
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (3)

 

Adiatorix

Pro

Note how I put American Leaders, I'm not addressing American people but their higher ups. I did this specifically to draw American debators into this argument as no one would know better than the citizens and to outline that I'm not just arrogantly throwing Americans the blame.

I firmly believe that the war(s) in the Middle East are of suspicious nature; the war(s) seems to follow a trail of oil and wealth, Syria was known for its huge gold reserves? (Correct me if I'm wrong). I understand that the USA is taking a freedom fighting stance in the war and I have no doubt that the MAJORITY of US soldiers that are deployed in these war zones are convinced that they are doing good and they may well be. I am not in support of the various Taliban groups, I'm Muslim and trust me they aren't.

What I'm trying to ask here is:

1. Do you agree that this war has a deeper agenda?
2. Do you agree that this war follows resources? (Gold, Oil)
3. Do you agree that this war should have been stopped long ago?

Another point i would like to address is abuse. I came across a biased website however it had photographical evidence of US soldiers raping and torturing Middle Eastern people. Here is the website:

http://beforeitsnews.com...

I'm not asking American people to feel responsible, I just want to know exactly how these pictures make you feel. Please write it as a last paragraph in your argument.

**Please deliver serious answers in a respectable matter which would not incriminate any culture or race. Please do not argue with blind arrogancy and ignorance. I would prefer American arguments however the more opinions given the better the argument and the better the outcome**
Tophatdoc

Con

I would like to thank Pro for hosting this debate. My opponent has the BOP to show how American leaders are seeking oil reserves.

"I firmly believe that the war(s) in the Middle East are of suspicious nature; the war(s) seems to follow a trail of oil and wealth, Syria was known for its huge gold reserves?"

American interference in the Middle East goes back to the Cold War. The wars are not started for the search of oil. That is a conspiracy theory grounded by people who have no understanding of foreign policy and how it works.

The United States' invasion of Afghanistan is a reaction to Al Qaeda's attack on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001(1). Previously, Al Qaeda attacked the United States several times but went unanswered. These events included the attack on the USS Cole and the attacks on American embassies in the 1990s(2). American leaders decided to act against them after the World Trade Center attack.

(1)http://www.history.com...
(2)http://edition.cnn.com...

The invasion of Iraq was started to stop Iraq from obtaining Weapons of Mass Destruction. American intelligence was faulty. Americans only found a gas centrifuge in a backyard. The nuclear program was abandoned a decade earlier(3).

(3)http://abcnews.go.com...

Currently, the United States is considering intervening in Syria for various reasons. One of the main reasons is that Israel, Jordan, and Turkey want the United States to intervene in order to end the conflict(4). The conflict is spilling over into Israel and Turkey. This has led to many refugees fleeing from Syria to these countries for safety. Israel, Jordan, and Turkey have considered taking the Syrian conflict into their own hands if Americans didn't intervene(5). The other main reason for American intervention is the weapons that President Bashar al-Assad is using in this war. The use of biological and chemical weapons has led to many people wanting the United States to have a humanitarian intervention to stop the usage of these weapons(6).

(4)http://www.policymic.com...
(5)http://www.wnd.com...
(6)http://worldnews.nbcnews.com...

" I understand that the USA is taking a freedom fighting stance in the war"

Freedom fighting is not why the wars were started at all. That just happens to be the result in Afghanistan and Iraq that now elections are held.

"Do you agree that this war has a deeper agenda?"

No, I don't. The world is not complex. Human beings make things complex by imputing our opinions and emotions over observing the actions that are taking place. If Americans wanted oil, why would they allow these countries to become democratic? It would be much easier to have a dictator in charge who will sell the oil reserves cheaply back to you.

Do you agree that this war follows resources? (Gold, Oil)

No, I don't. It may be a result of some of these wars but not the cause of it.

"Do you agree that this war should have been stopped long ago?"

No, I don't because when the United States leaves the regions become more unstable. This is why the Iraqi government when the United States pulled out. This is why President Karzai is upset with President Obama's vow to pull out American troops of Afghanistan(7). President doesn't like the actions of American soldiers but he wants their security. Their security stabilizes Afghanistan. When Americans leave, the Taliban may take down the Karzai government. But Iraq and Afghanistan have new governments, that are inexperienced and unstable. When Americans leave there is mayhem just like there is in Iraq now. The United States gave the countries democratic elections and they should be held responsible until these new governments become mature and stable.

(7)http://www.washingtonpost.com...

"I just want to know exactly how these pictures make you feel."

The pictures are deplorable and disgusting. But this is the character of war, it will be cruel, hateful, disgusting, and it will release the worse behavior human beings can muster. War crimes exist so the abuse does not exist as much as it once did. Abuse will always happen in a war and it needs to be punished accordingly.
Debate Round No. 1
Adiatorix

Pro

Adiatorix forfeited this round.
Tophatdoc

Con

Extend all arguments.
Debate Round No. 2
Adiatorix

Pro

Adiatorix forfeited this round.
Tophatdoc

Con

Extend all arguments. Vote Con please.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by ararmer1919 3 years ago
ararmer1919
"There are many false flag events in our history"

Name one and now I assume you believe that 9/11 was such an instance. IF this is the case then this automatically qualifies you as a moron. No the war was not for resources though they were certainly one of many factors. Numbers do not lie and so if you want to know the truth about all this just go luck up where Iraqs oil goes. **cough,cough** China**cough**. Prior to the Invasion the US imported 3.1% of its yearly oil from Iraq. Today that number is around 2.6%. If this war was for oil why did the amount we get from Iraq DECREASE since the invasion and conquest of that nation? And last but not least "no hostile action"?????? REALLLYYYYYY???? Because breaking dozens of sanctions, laws, including rebuilding their military beyond what they were authorized to do, keeping their stockpile of chemical weapons, rebuilding their scud missile stockpile, firing on US planes maintaining the No Fly Zones, using the Food for oil program to increase his military strength rather then feed his people, honestly I could go on but there's no point. The fact is this is a war that should have happened YEARS before 2003 and honestly it should have been the Europeans, not the US, to have carried it out.
Posted by ararmer1919 3 years ago
ararmer1919
First off the CIA did NOT create Al Qaeda. What you are trying to refer to is the Afghan/Soviet war of the mid 80s in which the United States aided and supplied the group known as the Mujahideen, a group that was made up of thousands of Arab Muslims from across the globe that answered the call to defend Afghanistan from the Soviets. This was NOT AL Qaeda nor the Taliban. Usama was NOT the leader of this group though he was a high ranking official. I wasnt tell near the end of the war that the various factions that made up the Mujahideen began to naturally splinter off and create their own groups, all fighting for power in Afghanistan. 2 of these dozens of splinter factions later became known as Al Qaeda and the Taliban. In fact the Taliban didn't even come to be until the early 90s. Now this is all a simple thing to miss or not know and so I dont hold it against you. However what I can not just let go is this part.

"America did not want the soviets to take control of that land because of the oil production it is valued for."

This shows direct proof of a complete lack of knowledge on this subject and jeopardizes the legitimacy of every argument you have or will make. Because all it would take is a simple Wikipedia search and you would have know this very important fact. There is NO oil in Afghanistan. You fail miserably. So no, this was not the reason for US involvement during that time. If you knew anything about the Cold War period you would know why we did that.

On to the part were you talk about Iraq. Failed again. No the US did not give them the major weapons they had. Yes we gave them some but so did 20 other nations including the UK, Germany, Italy, Ect. And contrary to popular belief the US did not provide Saddam with his chemical weapons. That would have been the French thank you very much.
Posted by ararmer1919 3 years ago
ararmer1919
There really wasn't a single thing in that comment that wasn't wrong.
Posted by Letsdebate24 3 years ago
Letsdebate24
Pro has valid points, Al Qaeda was a group created by the CIA to combat a soviet invasion in Afghanistan. America did not want the soviets to take control of that land because of the oil production it is valued for. Tim Osman (Osama Bin Laden) was the leader of the group. America did not invade Iraq because a terrorist group or because it was believed they had WMD primarily because we sold them the major weapons they had. There are many false flag events in our history as a means to get what we want. Of course we invaded for the resources. We launched a pre-emptive strike against a country that had made no hostile move towards us. Imagine the reaction America would have if another country attempted to do to us what we did to Iraq.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by ararmer1919 3 years ago
ararmer1919
AdiatorixTophatdocTied
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 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 FF and con was the only one to make an actual argument. Pro spend a lot of time talking about soldiers mistreating prisoners in gitmo and I fail to see how that has anything to do with US control over MidEast oil.
Vote Placed by STALIN 3 years ago
STALIN
AdiatorixTophatdocTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: ff. Con presented more arguments to support his position. Pro presented almost none.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
AdiatorixTophatdocTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit.