The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
1 Points

Does A Majority Of The World Rely on the US for it's safety?

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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/9/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 540 times Debate No: 69687
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




This is the opening round and acceptence.


I would like to thank RetroToast for instigating this debate, & I accept the challenge.


- Pro has not provided any definitions for the terms used in the Resolution, I shall then take the initiative:

> Majority: greater number.

> World: the sum of its Nations.

> Rely: be dependent on.

> US: the USA & all its resources.

> Safety: National Security: military, political, economic & environmental security as to maintain the survival of a state.[1]


- The Burden of Proof is shared:

> On Pro to prove, with a reasonable degree, that indeed a Majority of the World’s Nations are dependent on the US as to maintain their survival.

> On Con to prove, with a reasonable degree, that indeed not a Majority of the World’s Nations are dependent on the US as to maintain their survival.


Best of Luck.

Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for accepting this debate. I have recently come upon this topic by watching a documentary. For the First round of debating we will talk about Europe & North Africa. The first example is the Bosnian Civil War, part of the Yugoslav Wars. This was an armed conflict were the Bosnian "Serbs", power by Serbia, were fighting against the Muslims and Croat peoples that lived in the Republic of Bosnia. The Serbs resulted to genocide of them by shoveling them into kill houses. The first year, no one intervened. The second year, the countries of Germany and France sent peacekeeping troops that could not fire a single shot. The Third year, the US said to itself, "This is a problem," and intervened. They fought against these Serbian fighters and drove them out after another year of fighting. Many and many died in the U.S. was the only one who was willing to fight. A second example was in WWII in the invasion of France. Americans were the leading force of the Normandy Invasion in 1945. They took 3 out of the 5 slots of landing zones and suffered the most casualties at Omaha. Would have the British and Canadians have done it without the US? No. In North Africa, again in WWII, would Allied troops have gotten through the Africa Korps without the use of the new American Sherman"s? Though Britain did have the General Montgomery, the answer is still no. Back in Europe, after WWII, the Bosnian Civil War was an example of Europe no longer wanting to be involved with any affairs of war. They had survived the two most devastating wars on the planet and don"t want anymore. There was also another of the Yugoslav Wars that happened in the southern region of the broken country. Here the US immediately intervened and asked Europe for support. No one came. The countries of Europe has allowed the US to build many bases all around the region not because they want to be nice, because the want the US to protect them. Also there are many bases on borders such as Russia where many countries are seeing as a desperate economic slump that is desperate and also that they have not to good feelings about each other. Another thing is also that the US in saving the European Union on an economic scale.


[2] Documentary: The World Without US


In this round, I am going to agur for my case, & leave rebuttals to the next Round, for Pro hasn’t yet provided anything for me to refute.

- Pro hasn’t given any reason whatsoever to believe that the Majority of the World’s Nations depend on the US & its resources for the preservation of the survival of their respective states. Instead, Pro:

> Only provided examples (the Bosnian War) where the US played a more or less crucial role in the maintenance of the survival of some (Bosnia) states, which does not count as an argument for the Resolution, for it requires the Majority of Nations to at least fit that category, not just some.

> Brought up examples from past History, such as the time of WWII, before even the United Nations was created, & so they are pretty much irrelevant today.

> Suggested that the permissions given to the US by some states to built military bases imply that these state depend on the US for their Safety!

> Implied that the US is saving the EU on an economical scale, without providing any proof whatsoever.

> Did not account for the several states whose survival is at stake, & where the US is the primary cause of the lack thereof.

> Did not account for the several states whose survival is at stake, & where the US is undependable for the maintain of their Safety.

Case Outline:

Sovereignty. A government which exercises de facto administrative control over a country and is not subordinate to any other government in that country or a foreign sovereign state. [1]

- We can deduce from the definition of Sovereignty that a Sovereign state is not & should not depend on another in the exercise & maintain of its military, political, economic & environmental stability & survival, for it is & should be relying on itself.

- There are currently 190 States whose sovereignty is undisputed, & another 16 with disputed sovereignty. [2]

- The United States has sovereignty over the following inhabited possessions and commonwealths: [3]

> American Samoa.

> Guam.

> Northern Mariana Islands.

> Puerto Rico.

> U.S. Virgin Islands.

- There are 21 countries without armed forces, & thus dependent in their defence on other sovereign states (generally, the former occupying party). [4]

=> From the looks of things, in reality, the Majority of the World’s Nations do not rely on the US for their Safety, for they rely on themselves, at the very least 169 Nations amongst 206.






Debate Round No. 2


RetroToast forfeited this round.


I extend my argument to this Round.
Debate Round No. 3


RetroToast forfeited this round.


- Pro has forfeited twice, he has not contested any of my arguments, nor has he provided any valid arguments of his own. Thus, Pro failed his BOP, while I (Con) carried my BOP, to which Pro did not object.

Vote Con.

Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 2 years ago
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