The Instigator
titicoco
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Bob13
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points

Can you fight terrorism with military activity?

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...
Bob13
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/29/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 492 times Debate No: 80322
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

titicoco

Con

First round is acceptance.
Bob13

Pro

I will be arguing that terrorism can be fought with military activity. If this is correct, than I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
titicoco

Con

titicoco forfeited this round.
Bob13

Pro

It looks like my opponent forfeited. I will provide some definitions, then present arguments.

fight- to contend against in or as if in battle or physical combat. [1]

terrorism- the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal. [2]

Terrorism is currently being fought with military activity. [3] Therefore, it can be fought with military activity.




That was easy.
Debate Round No. 2
titicoco

Con

Sorry about last round I have been very busy and lost track of my debates.

Bean02 recently put the definitions of fighting and terrorism in his argument. To start my argument im going to provide a few examples. During the 1960s and onwards there was alot of terrorism in britain from irish groups such as the IRA. For many years Britain had forces in Ireland in an attempt to stop the terrorism. All the terrorism stopped when the military forces were withsrawn from Ireland.

Since the invasion of iraq and the USA's military involvement in afghanistan Islamic terrorism has more than tripled. I believe you cant fight terrorism with military activity because terrorism happens because of anger. If you invade a country with terrorists inside that country then you will cause more anger.

That is why terrorism cannot be fought and beaten with military activity.
Bob13

Pro

This debate is over whether terrorism can be fought with military activity, not whether it can be fought effectively. You stated that terrorism has been fought with military activity. Therefore, it can be done. I have already fulfilled the burden of proof.

But just for fun, I will argue over whether it can be fought effectively.

The war on terror has already defeated the Taliban, almost completely destroyed Al-Qaeda, killed Osama bin Laden, and prevented many terrorist groups from taking over the world. Considering how many people were killed by these groups, these acheivements likely saved more lives than it took. Many terrorist attacks have been prevented by the military, and removing troops won't stop terrorism. ISIS has targeted a lot more than soldiers. They have tried to kill anyone who doesn't support them, including thousands of innocent people. The military is the only solution to terrorism. If you try to negotiate with them, they'll ignore you, and if you leave them alone, they'll kill you, but if you fight them, they'll never take over more than a few countries.
Debate Round No. 3
titicoco

Con

titicoco forfeited this round.
Bob13

Pro

Con has forfieted once again. I guess this means I win.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
titicocoBob13Tied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by Varrack 1 year ago
Varrack
titicocoBob13Tied
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: ff
Vote Placed by Hayd 1 year ago
Hayd
titicocoBob13Tied
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: FF