The Instigator
aim4debate
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
machiavellian
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points

Can terrorism be justified?

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 2 votes the winner is...
machiavellian
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/26/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 687 times Debate No: 46805
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

aim4debate

Con

I am doing a project for school. And we were told to write a controversial essay, and the topic I picked was "Can terrorism be justified?" Now when I got this topic i was entirely against terrorism. And I still am. However, I feel like the word "terrorist" has many different outlooks. But because of my age... The only thing that comes to mind when I hear the word "terrorist" I think of 9/11. So my question to all of you is...

Q: Can terrorism be controlled?
Q: Do you feel like religion can subject you to being a terrorist?
Q: Is America a possible cause of terrorism?
Q: What do you consider a terrorist?
machiavellian

Pro

It is my personal opinion that terrorism can certainly be justified. Terrorism is often a form of vigilantism, or frontier justice. When the government has full control over what is right and what is wrong, in a society where law is absolute, we are robots. Not all terrorists are "holy warriors" or "anti-americans". Many of them are just people attempting to defend themselves and others against unjust rulings by the government.
Debate Round No. 1
aim4debate

Con

Okay so I guess what am against is the possibility of innocent people being killed or injured. But as far as what you say I can agree completly!
Q: What are some other examples of terrorism, that can be justified?
machiavellian

Pro

The two cases that jump out to me most are as follows: Firstly, freedom fighters attempting to stamp out an autocratic or corrupt government. The second would be vigilantes attempting to take out criminals in a time/community when the officials are paid off, there isn't enough evidence, or the government isn't strong enough to remove the character(s) itself.
Debate Round No. 2
aim4debate

Con

Thank you. Would you mind if I quote some of the things you said?
machiavellian

Pro

You are welcome. And not all, please do.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by machiavellian 3 years ago
machiavellian
Actually, to be fair, the term "terrorism" existed before 9/11.
Posted by Le.Doctor 3 years ago
Le.Doctor
There is no such thing as "terrorism" it is a word that America made up when 9/11 happened.
I do agree with Pro even though there is no real argument. Out of curiosity what would you call a group of people who may have wanted to do good and did by ousting their corrupt government but then turned evil yet united to fight off an invading country that sought to destroy them, would you call the defenders vigilantes? And say that those invaders happened to claim they were doing good while rape, murder and even more corruptness was going around with them in the country, now the original defenders would have done some horrible things without a second thought but if they fought against a country like America, what chance would they have both politically where their party would be ripped to shreds and on the ground where their people, both troops and civilians, would be killed.
Posted by MyDinosaurHands 3 years ago
MyDinosaurHands
This is probably better off in the forums.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 3 years ago
Zarroette
aim4debatemachiavellianTied
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: Tonight on Q&A, we delve into the question: can terrorism be justified? I'm your host, aim4debate, and I will be questioning machiavellian, so that he may make arguments that win him this debate, whilst I ask questions that won't win me the debate.
Vote Placed by Actionsspeak 3 years ago
Actionsspeak
aim4debatemachiavellianTied
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: Pro convinced me, and Con posted no argument, he simply asked questions.