The Instigator
MarsUltor
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
ColeTrain
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

Could Canada and it's allies beat America and it's allies in a war.

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 1 vote the winner is...
ColeTrain
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/4/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 668 times Debate No: 74756
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)

 

MarsUltor

Pro

Here are the rules
1. The war just started no one invaded.
2. You may use civilian weaponry
3. You can talk about what happens after the war and whether the other side could hold the land it had taken
I think Canada and it's allies could beat America and if not inflict massive causalities on America's military. This is because Canada has many allies such as Ireland, United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, Netherlands, and Many African nations. Canada also has better snipers than america does which would help a lot. Canadians also would likely not take to kindly to losing our Healthcare and may start rioting or even rebel.
ColeTrain

Con

Preface:

As my opponent has not specified, I will assume the BoP will lie on Pro to prove his claim that the United States could be beaten by Canada and its collective allies. My job will be to prove this claim false and rebut my opponent’s arguments.


Introduction:

Renowned as arguably the greatest superpower on Earth, the United States has power unmatched by other countries, especially comparative to Canada. As I will later explain, this topic boils down to a showdown between Canada and the United States. I will statistically prove that the United States is indeed capable of pulling off a win when faced with such a situation as proposed in the resolution.

C1) Canada’s allies are similar to the United States’ allies.

My opponent mentions in the first round that Canada has many allies, but gives no source to back up those claims. However, assuming that he is correct, I will show that the relations between Canada and these nations he exemplifies are relatively similar to the relations between the US and those nations as well.

Let’s start out with Ireland, the first country my opponent brings up. Ireland is on good terms with the United States and is considered an ally. Furthermore, 67% of Irish citizens agree with US leadership. [1] This shows the relations to be good between the two countries.

Secondly, my opponent mentions the United Kingdom. The UK is highly regarded as the United State’s biggest ally. [2]

Thirdly, my opponent brings up Australia. This once again is an ally to the US, and an important one in regards to North Korea and China and their activities. [3]

Next, New Zealand was mentioned. The defense relationship between the two lends significant insight to the possible return to the future solidification of a total alliance between the two countries. [4]

The Netherlands is brought up once more by my opponent. This is one of the United State’s oldest alliances, going all the way back the the Revolutionary War in the US. [5]

The United States is also on peaceful terms with Africa, which is the last region my opponent specified. [6]

All of these statistics prove that the United States is on good relationships, if not totally allied to, every country my opponent brought up. That said, if Canada were to turn on the United States, the allies of which he speaks would be of no help to the Canadian cause. They would instead opt to maintain positive relationships with the United STates and remain neutral. This is for a few various reasons. A few of which being the diversity and acceptance of America to different races and the overall trading net benefits that the United States has. Furthermore, the United States offers some of the best job opportunities and education opportunities to countries around the world.

Thus, Canada is now alone to face the United States.


C2) Military presence belongs to the United States.

Now facing only Canada, the United States has a staggering advantage in regards to military. In virtually every category, the United States has a vast superiority. [7] Moreover, the United States has more police authority to crack down on potential crimes that could arise in the period of the war, that could also assist in fighting Canada. [8] Because of these reasons, we find that the United States could indeed fulfill the resolution and defeat Canada.


Sources:


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...

[2] http://www.pewglobal.org...

[3] http://www.slate.com...

[4] http://thediplomat.com...

[5] http://www.state.gov...

[6] http://en.wikipedia.org...

[7] http://www.globalfirepower.com...

[8] http://www.nationmaster.com...

Debate Round No. 1
MarsUltor

Pro

Sorry I forgot both sides have burden of Proof.
I do agree you are a military super power.
Sorry for no links forgot
http://thecommonwealth.org...
The commonwealth would pull all the countries to Canada unfortunately Ireland isn't there I thought it was part of the commonwealth as it used to be British. Netherlands is a Country Canada liberated in World War 2 who has sent flowers every year to Canada in remembrance so they likely wouldn't take kindly to Canada being invaded.
Also North Korea, Vietnam, and the Middle East could Join on Canada's Side to get back at you for Napalm, and Carpet bombing them.

Canada is multi-cultural unlike america which has a strategical advantage in that we are unpredictable, one second your fighting an Irishman next an Indian both have different strategies, so you have to memorize many different strategies.

Canada has Happier people which would mean a much higher likelihood of rebellion.
http://www.cbc.ca...

You have more soldiers but could you wage a war against half the country in the case of rebellion. Also we have Mounties so we win as they are pretty tough and are more effective as we have the lower crime rate.
ColeTrain

Con

BoP

I will accept my opponent's suggestion that the BoP will be shared.


Military Super Power

My opponent concedes this point, it must be awarded to Con.


Allies

I accept my opponent's apology and wish the debate to continue unaffected by this.
He next brings up, in concurrence with this point that North Korea, Vietnam, and the Middle East could join in. However, the simple fact is that North Korea is skittish. They are afraid to launch any attacks on the United States. [1] Furthermore, Vietnam doesn't have sufficient military to attack the US [2], nor would they like to get into another major conflict after the Vietnam War. [3] As for the Middle East, they are already dealing with a number of problems, most of which pertain to the Islamic State. [4]

Multi-cultural

It is indeed the United States that is multi-cultural. [5] It as also been referenced as the "melting-pot" of the world. [6] This promotes unity and pushing beyond social and economic differences to create one unified system. This combines natural talents of each race into one strategic army. Thus, these strategies can be combined to create an elite force like no other. This refutes the argument my opponent brought up.


Happiness

Though happiness plays a minute role, we must consider factors that are more important to war than rebellions within countries. Manpower is a more important statistic, one that the US owns. In fact, manpower and resources were the primary reason as to why the Union won the Civil War. [7]


Manpower:

Manpower is one of the most important statistics. The United States has 145,212,012 available manpower comparative to Canada's mere 15,786,816. [8] I encourage voters to visit this linke [8] to read further statistics rather than list them all here. This manpower also outweighs "better" snipers and health care reforms.


Conclusion:

Conclusively, we find that I have refuted my opponent's points while he has left many of my points either conceded or unargued.

1. Canada must face the US alone.
2. US is a super power (conceded).
3. Military presence belongs to the US.

Sources:

[1] http://www.antiwar.com...
[2] http://www.globalfirepower.com...
[3] http://www.history.com...
[4] http://www.theatlantic.com...
[5] https://www.boundless.com...
[6] http://photos.state.gov...
[7] http://www.historytoday.com...
[8] http://www.globalfirepower.com...
Debate Round No. 2
MarsUltor

Pro

You forgot to address the British Commonwealth and how it would be drawn into a war. This would be dangerous because the commonwealth has a total population of 2.2 billion. http://thecommonwealth.org...

Canada is much more multi-cultural encouraging citizens to be individuals and keep their old culture, it has been specifically founded on multi cultural beliefs.

With happiness I was pointing out that Canadians like our socialism and will not be happy with america who will likely take it away this could easily anger Canadians making america have to deal with millions of rebels. Manpower wise if Canada gains the commonwealth we would have an incredible manpower, especially from India.

Canadian Snipers are better than Americans this helps because we can just bump off your officers meaning your command structure collapses, Snipers are also a nuisance when they attack because soldiers have to stop and eliminate them which can take hours.

Conclusions
Canada is likely to have many allies to aid us.
America's individual military may be powerful but not enough to combat the commonwealth, or in the case of rebellion hold of millions of angry people.
ColeTrain

Con

British Commonwealth

This point was addressed via the allies point. The British Commonwealth includes Great Britain (United Kingdom) who would not oppose their greatest ally, the United States. [1] , [2]


Multi-Cultural

The multi-cultural argument falls so heavily on the Con side, as the US is world-renowned for being the greatest multi-cultural country in the world, the "Great Melting Pot." [3] , [4] Furthermore, my opponent fails to back up his/her side by providing evidence. Thus, this point must be awarded to the more credible side (Con).


Happiness

Once again, happiness would succumb to manpower, which the United States owns. Furthermore, however, democracy is generally preferable to citizens because they have more freedoms. Under socialism, these views and opinions are stifled if not prohibited.


Allies

My opponent keeps drawing up new allies to assist Canada, but each are on good terms with the United States and would decline entering the war to maintain such relationships. The same is true with India, who has just recently entered into a global strategic relationship with the US. [5]


Snipers

My opponent brings no card of evidence to support his claim that Canadian snipers are "better." This subjective opinion holds no merit when compared to factual manpower and superiority of the US. Moreover, out of the top 6 deadliest snipers, Canada has only one winner, at 5th position. [6] On the other hand, the United States holds 3 positions, 6th, 4th, and 3rd. [7] This proves that Canada does not have "better" snipers than the US. Prefer the Con side becuase evidence was provided.


Conclusion:

I have already proved that Canada would face the US alone, which my opponent has not refuted.
The commonwealth my opponent speaks of includes many of the United States' allies, who wouldn't help the Canadian cause.
I have refuted all of my opponent's points, whereas my opponent has left many of mine standing. They are as follows:
1.Canada must face the US alone.
2. US is a super power (conceded).
3. Military presence belongs to the US.

Sources:

[1] http://thecommonwealth.org...
[2] http://www.pewglobal.org...
[3] http://mrl.nyu.edu...
[4] http://www.economist.com...
[5] https://www.indianembassy.org...
[6] http://www.therichest.com...
[7]
http://www.therichest.com...
Debate Round No. 3
MarsUltor

Pro

You have been in Two wars with them we still have the same head of state as them the Queen. This would mean that Britain could very easily defend an old ally and colony.

America isn't very open you keep trying to block immigration with bigger walls. Canada encourages people to come and not to change to suit what other's culture is.
http://www.cic.gc.ca...

So basically Europe isn't democracy because it is socialist. We Canadians love our socialism, you do to do you like any of the following: Social Security, Health Care, Welfare, and Unions. In the world Socialist countries are happier than america is.
https://emsnews.wordpress.com...
Taking our socialism would likely cause massive riots and rebellions.

Francis Pegahmegabow - WW1 sniper
http://en.wikipedia.org...

We also have men like these guys showing just how good we are at fighting.
http://listverse.com...
We have also proven ourselves through history in such battles as,
http://www.theglobeandmail.com...

Conclusion
You have not proved Canada would be alone for all you know Zimbabwe might randomly decide to join Canada.

Canada will have allies
Military isn't everything sometimes bravery and intelligence can overcome numbers, Canadians would not like your rule we would fight back as long as it took.
ColeTrain

Con

Britain

We made our independence from them, so we are essentially a branch of Britain. Furthermore, as I have already shown, the United State's biggest ally is Britain, [1] and vice versa. [2] The two countries share a special relationship. [3] The bond in correlation to Canada, however, is less strong. This shows that if anything, the United Kingdom would join forces with the United States rather than Canada. Moreover, government officials view the Great Britain as the United States' closest ally. [4]


Multiculturalism

While my opponent claims the United States isn't as "multi-cultural" as Canada, this is false. The United States is in a majority multi-cultural and moving in the right direction. [5] This shows that the United States is in fact multi-cultural and is acceptant of different races. I don't necessarily see how this pertains to the debate, but I will argue it regardless.


Government

My opponent says that Europe isn't a democracy and is socialist. While arguably true, Europe is not directly pertinent to this debate. Rather, the United States is. It is also a democracy that provides a multiplicity of freedoms and the citizens enjoy the benefits my opponent mentions: social security, health care, welfare, and unions. By this token, the US has everything that Canada does and more to please and keep contented citizens. The claim that the removal of socialism would cause riots and rebellions is inherently flawed and unfounded. Instead, the citizens would likely enjoy having more freedoms and be more contented with their state of being. Moreover, the United States is still a top-3 favorite place to live, as quoted by foreigners. [6]


Snipers

My opponent brings up one example of a great Canadian sniper. However, this skill will not benefit their cause as he died in 1952. [7] Furthermore, a majority of the famous snipers belong to the United States. [8] Many of these Americans are still alive and could assist the US in the disputed conflict. Moreover, the United States has steadily been working to improve elite forces such as snipers to keep their military force strong and unpredictable. [9] The card of evidence my opponent brought up related only to Canadian warriors that were good in their time, yet none of them could be of any help during this conflict, as each one is now deceased.


Proving Through History

My opponent claims that Canada has proved itself in the past with military endeavors and victories. While possibly true, the United States has done this and more. It has proved itself to be a world superpower. [10] It has also shown its superiority throughout the ages since it became such. [11] Besides being a military superpower, the US is also an economic superpower. [12] This would also be helpful in the chance of a long war. Furthermore, the US has been involved in some of the most defining wars in history. [13] In fact, the US was a major reason of victory in WW1. [14] The same is true for other wars, such as WW2. [15] This overwheliming assistance has proved the United States more than any other country, and has established itself as a global power.


Conclusion

My opponent claims that Canada would not be alone, and that Zimbabwe could randomly join Canada's side. This rebuttal is very weak. Consequently, this assistance would be of little help to Canada. Compared to the United States military, Zimbabwe looks almost meaningless. [16] On the same token, Zimbabwe has the same chance to join the United States, which is actually more likely. An obscure country such as Zimbabwe would be much more likely to join the side with a more promising chance to win. In this scenario, as I have proved, it would be the United States.


In regards to bravery and intelligence, it is true that it can overcome numbers. But with such a great disparity as recognized in previous rounds, the chance is very slim. Furthermore, bravery and intelligence also belong to the United States, because of programs such as the FBI. [17] Besides the FBI, the US has the CIA, Navy SEALS and other programs, many of which are listed in this source. [18]

I believe I have already effectively shown that Canadians would likely not fight back if the US were to take over.

With this, I have effectively and comprehensively refuted all of my opponent's points. Even still, I have points standing with either little to none resistance, or concession. They are as follows:
1. Canada must face the US alone.
2. US is a superpower (conceded).
3. Military presence belongs to the US.

Sources:

[1] http://pentagist.com...

[2] http://www.freerepublic.com...
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[4] https://fas.org...
[5] http://www.nbcnews.com...[6] http://www.cnbc.com...
[7] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[8] http://www.cbsnews.com...
[9] http://www.businessinsider.com...
[10] http://www.thenation.com...
[11] http://www.thenation.com...
[12] http://www.theatlantic.com...
[13] http://faculty.polytechnic.org...
[14] http://www.wsj.com...
[15] http://www.bbc.co.uk...
[16] http://www.globalfirepower.com...
[17] http://www.fbi.gov...
[18] http://www.baseops.net...
Debate Round No. 4
MarsUltor

Pro

You separated from Britain violently, we separated with negotiation. We stayed loyal and declared war with Britain during WWII even though we could have ignored them. Also it doesn't matter what the U.S. thinks it matters what Great Britain says. Also you Americans seem to be shunning Britain.
http://www.theblogmocracy.com...
http://www.nydailynews.com...

Multi-Cultural isn't about races, it's about trying to make everyone keep their culture, it's a policy. It pertains to the debate because every officer will act very different, making our army completely unpredictable.

You said that "Under socialism, these views and opinions are stifled if not prohibited." this is not true, Europe is socialist but also a Democracy just like Canada. Canadians love socialism and we would not want to lose it. America does not have an incredible Healthcare system like Canada. What are all these things america has that Canada doesn't. Canada is the 6th happiest place in the world the 5 above are all also socialist.
http://www.forbes.com...
Canada is the best place for women to live in the world.
http://www.reuters.com...

Canadian Snipers can't be released to the public. There is however a few who have been given medals by your army for bravery.
http://www.thestar.com...
http://afghanistan.nationalpost.com...

America got destroyed during the Vietnam war, Canada probably could have won that. Could America have won Vimy Ridge, with as little casualties as Canada did. On D-Day only three units made it to their objectives all three were Canadians. Canada was the army the Germans feared most
http://www.canadaatwar.ca...
http://www.warmuseum.ca...
http://www.warmuseum.ca...
http://www.warmuseum.ca...
http://www.warmuseum.ca...
http://www.battlefield-tours.ca...
http://secondworldwar.co.uk...

Conclusion
I was only pointing out how unpredictable people can act, Russia or China could also randomly go to war with you which would mean you would lose as together they would have more men then you.

FBI = Mounties, CIA = CSIS, Special Forces = JTF2.
https://www.csis.gc.ca...
http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca...
http://en.wikipedia.org...

Canada will have Allies
Canada will have great soldiers fighting for their home, our soldiers will fight harder than yours because it is to defend their home land.
ColeTrain

Con

Introduction

As this is the last round in this debate, I would like to extend my gratitude to both my opponent and the readers for making it this far. I will conclude the debate by utilizing this round to rebut my opponent's arguments and rebuild my own. Thank you.

Separation

My opponent says that our separation from Britain was violent. While true, we had tried peaceful revolts in the past, to no avail. Moreover, in those days, Britain was imposing unfair taxes and laws that stifled our freedom, the same as it hand in the UK itself. [1] Furthermore, we also supported Britain's cause, to a greater degree than Canada, in WW2. [2] Moreover, our involvement ultimately ended the war, ensuring victory for the Allies. [3] My opponent also insinuates that the UK is objectively better than the United States. This is not true, as proven by military power [4] and their global presence. [5] These statistics both place the US above Canada as well.


Shunning

My opponent claims that the US is shunning Great Britain. I will countervail this claim through three angles. Firstly, the evidence he chooses to use from "theblogmocracy" is an opinion poll and is very partisan and biased. Secondly, both cards of evidence used by my opponent are old and outdated. Thirdly, Barack Obama =/= Americans. Just because the president (which is what my opponent's evidence is referring to) may shun Great Britain, that does not equate to America as a whole. Moreover, Obama's approval ratings do not suffice to even remotely prove that America shares the same views. [6] Furthermore, obscure opinions disagree with this notion. Without non-partisan evidence citing more than one reference, the US cannot be proven to "shun" the UK.


Multi-Cultural

Being multi-cultural doesn't require a policy, as my opponent believes it does. A country that accepts and allows other cultures can be multi-cultural. This, the United States is, and has been. [7] This multicultural state also extends into education. [8]


Socialism

I was referring to total socialism, which is a moving trend in both Europe and Canada. Natural tendencies direct more and more towards socialism when the governmental system is set up. Men in power seek for more power, and social democracy (Europe and Canada) transition into socialism, which eventually ends up in communism. There is no denying the fact that socialism and communism, however small it starts, often waxs worse and worse. Take, for example, the known fact of Hitler. Prior to his rule, Germany was not as horrific and immoral. However, when he took over, things began to go down. This is not to say that such a thing would or will happen in Canada or the UK, but it does show that capitalism is often times more pleasing to the populace.


Happiness

The happiness argument does not pertain to the debate. However, I will counter it regardless. Happiness holds no water when a war is started, because war angers the people. People are not happy when war is happening. [9] This counters the argument, showing that happiness will not matter if this scenario takes place, as everyone will be upset. The women argument has no pertinence in the debate whatsoever, so I will not address it, as it is a moot point.


Snipers

My opponent has yet to refute any arguments I have made, nor contested the American examples I provided. For example, the US has greats like Christ Kyle and Carlos Hathcock. [10]


Battle History

The United States have proved themselves throughout more major battles than Canada. [22] The US was also able to route the British in the Revolutionary War despite being outnumbered 3 to 1. [23] In the Vietnam War, the United States was still successful in some ways. [24] The US took action in WWII that eventually ended the war, proving with uncontested finality that they were indeed the true global superpower. [25] Canada did nothing of the sort.


Conclusion

My opponent has brought up many points in his conclusion, and I will attack each one.


First, he/she mentions that he was "only pointing out how unpredictable people can act" when he was talking about Zimbabwe joining. He then proceeds to bring up two other countries that "could also randomly go to war with you" and cause the US to lose. However, we must attack this point from two angles.

First, being how Russia is afraid of the United States. A Russian publication backs up this claim, and brings to light how Russia has more concerns over the US than Islamic terrorism. [11] Moreover, new US developments in missiles also cause Russia to be "deathly afraid." [12] This shows that Russia would not have intentions of attacking the US based on its fear of US missiles and its entirety. Moreover, Russia has a "soft-alliance" with China. [13] I will later explain how that is a problem.

Secondly, we find that China also has a healthy and mutually beneficial relationship with the US, and would decline entering a war against them. [14] They also rely on the US, so they wouldn't break off this relationship just because Russia wants them to. The US provides China with soybeans, cotton, and and meat [15], among other things [16], a primary reason for them maintaining a good relationship. Furthermore, the US gives billions of dollars back to China for things we buy from them. [17] These billions of dollars help keep China's economy in check by providing jobs and business. Even more, China needs the US as not only an economic partner, but also as a strategical political partner. [18] Also, the relationship works both ways: China and the US need each other. [19] Thus, China would be unwilling to cut off relationships and join Russia to attack the US. This creates a three-way stalemate, where each country needs the other to sustain their economy.

In reference to the elite forces for each country, the US still has superior forces. In a ranking of the top 10, the US has two forces ranked: Delta Force and Navy SEALs. Canada has only one make the cut: JTF2. The SEALs are above JTF2. [20] This gives the US the advantage. Moreover, the US has multiple different special forces, far exceeding the three my opponent brought up. [21]

My opponent has not proven that Canada will have allies, as each one of the countries he provided has been refuted.
His claim that Canadians will fight harder than Americans is bogus: they would both be fighting for their homelands as the countries share two borders.

In total conclusion, we find that I have successfully refuted each of my opponents points, while he has left some of mine either conceded or weakly argued. They are as follows:
1. Canada must face the US alone.
2. US is a superpower (conceded).
3. Military Presence belongs to the US.

This leaves voters no option but to vote Con. Thank you for your time.

Sources:

[1] http://www.loc.gov...
[2] http://www.history.co.uk...
[3] http://2001-2009.state.gov...
[4] http://www.globalfirepower.com...
[5] http://www.mapsofworld.com...
[6] http://www.gallup.com...
[7] http://www.lmg.pf.bw.schule.de...
[8] http://www.sunypress.edu...
[9] http://www.themoscowtimes.com...
[10] http://www.wearethemighty.com...
[11] http://www.themoscowtimes.com...
[12] http://theweek.com...
[13] http://www.ecfr.eu...
[14] http://www.state.gov...
[15] http://www.washingtonpost.com...
[16] http://www.forbes.com...
[17] http://www.forbes.com...
[18] http://www.cnn.com...
[19] http://content.time.com...
[20] http://www.therichest.com...
[21] http://www.businessinsider.com...
[22] http://www.va.gov...
[23] http://www.military.com...
[24] http://www.virginia.edu...
[25] http://news.bbc.co.uk...
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by ColeTrain 1 year ago
ColeTrain
Lol @Taj
Posted by MarsUltor 1 year ago
MarsUltor
tajshar2k why is that.
Posted by tajshar2k 1 year ago
tajshar2k
U.S is more multicultural than Canada.
Posted by ColeTrain 2 years ago
ColeTrain
@MarsUltor Don't use the comments for more arguing time. I understand what you are saying, and I refuted it. Moreover, what matters is that the judges understand, and using the comments to argue more could cost you conduct points.
Posted by MarsUltor 2 years ago
MarsUltor
You seem to never understand anything I say. Happiness is important under american rule Canadians would be unhappy and would be extremely likely to revolt, Canadian riots can be very violent just look at the one in Montreal over a racist call in hockey.

At Vimy Ridge Canadians were outnumbered 2 to 1, had to fight uphill against an enemy who was dug in, who had previously defeated the British 3 times and the French 2. Canada took it and advanced so far, so fast they captured Heavy Artillery. You Americans were even reenacting right outside Washington you were so amazed. You guys tried to sit out WWII while we declared one week after it started.

Hitler was a Fascist which is on the exact opposite side of the political spectrum.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 2 years ago
16kadams
MarsUltorColeTrainTied
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 really tried to argue that Canada would have allies, but this doesn't make sense because the resolution says Canada, alone, would beat the USA *and* allies. Plus all of Europe would probably side with us... but whatever... Pro also accepted that the US is a superpower which, by definition, concedes that we are superior both militarily and economically -- two things needed to win a war. That alone makes me vote Con, and Pro's case is really extreme. So he has the BOP and barely made any convincing arguments for his position. Con also argued we have better special forces. Which is significant for covert ops and combating any Canadian insurgents. COn wins.