The Instigator
SeniorIntelligentDebator
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
baseballkid
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

China is stronger than the US.

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...
baseballkid
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/10/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,932 times Debate No: 27105
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

SeniorIntelligentDebator

Pro

China has a stronger military, inflated population, and a much harsher government; therefore, they are clearly stronger than us and can incite wars with us however and whenever they please.
baseballkid

Con

Just to rebut what my opponent has said. http://www.globalfirepower.com... America has the best military. Inflated population is just more food they need. Harsh governments have nothing to do with world power. If they attacked us they would be off the map.
Debate Round No. 1
SeniorIntelligentDebator

Pro

Harsh governments have everything to do with world power. And is your citation a biased source or is it reliable?
baseballkid

Con

First of all as pro and the starter of this debate you have burden of proof. I could sit and say nothing and win because you have not backed up your points up at all.
http://shareranks.com... (best navy)
http://thediplomat.com... (air force)
China has no way to attack the United states. You say that they could beat us in war and I have rebut it.
As these were your points and they have been rebut you have not met the BOP. I would write longer speeches but meh, BLEEP it.
Debate Round No. 2
SeniorIntelligentDebator

Pro

My points do not need to be backed up. China is a communistic nation; therefore, as I have said, "they have a harsher government" than us, and can incite wars with us whenever they please. If I needed to provide proof, however, I would, but I do not need to. It only takes common sense to examine the "proof." We have a smaller population, and we wouldn't be able to handle ourselves in a war, even if we do have gun rights, because, since China has a larger population, in a logistical sense, they have a larger military as well.

Therefore I have reached a point. Need citations? Here: http://en.wikipedia.org...
baseballkid

Con

Wikipedia is not accepted on this website. I gave proof that we have a better military that you did no refute. Harsh governments do not mean anything. If they attacked us they would lose. I feel like a noobstomping weakling :(.
Debate Round No. 3
SeniorIntelligentDebator

Pro

Really? I did not know Wikipedia was unacceptable as an implicit statement of proof on this website. Please do not penalize me since I am a noob.

Yes I did refute your claim that we have a larger military ("...because, since China has a larger population, in a logistical sense, they have a larger military as well.) with factual evidence to support my claim that China has a larger military and therefore they can incite wars with us just like we can incite wars with any inhabitant of the Middle East if we very well wanted to.

Harsh governments mean everything. It is what dictates the mortality rates of ones country; it is what dictates the country's overall immortality. Why didn't you cite a source to support your opinion that "harsh governments do not mean anything?"

In what way would they lose if they attacked us? They have a larger military, harsher government, and inflated population.
baseballkid

Con

Manpower does not mean anything if china ca not reach us. They have a larger army but we have a better navy and air force. Inflated population just means that when we block all trade from having a better air force and navy they will lose. Harsh government does not mean jack diddly crap. The harsh Germany was stopped in WW1 and WW2. The were harsh and America was still the same and the people with freedom won. My opponent did not prove that China is stronger than the United States. You should vote con.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by DeeZeeQuinn 4 years ago
DeeZeeQuinn
SeniorIntelligentDebatorbaseballkidTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: That was a fairly good debate, not strong in the war sense but overall deceit. Pretty smooth.
Vote Placed by Rayze 4 years ago
Rayze
SeniorIntelligentDebatorbaseballkidTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro sufficiently backed their position up earning source point. conduct and s&g are tied. Also wikipedia is at times a credible source, but in this debate it is a poor source in the context of the argument. Neither side made convincing arguments so that is also a tie.