The Instigator
banker
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
1stLordofTheVenerability
Con (against)
Winning
26 Points

Economic Sanctions is it right?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/1/2010 Category: Politics
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,602 times Debate No: 11046
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (8)
Votes (6)

 

banker

Pro

I am no debating fan or a debating guru. but responding to a idiotic debate topic,that made my blood boil due to its stupidity istarted this debate.!! as its apparent that some here are so ignorant of history and its lessons, that they are willing to support charlatans who's only goal is jihad and terror.!!
liberty is one of our Alienated Rights.!! we are granted that from birth.!! but if we are not ready to fight for it we will surely lose it..!!

fighting as a nation is going to war.!! and war is only one thing "killing".! is it morally right to kill.? no..!! do we have to kill for liberty.? yes.!!
no one ever had liberty if he was not ready to fight for it..!! "give me liberty or give me death" was what patric Henry said..!! of curse liberty is moral right.!!

factually its proving that killing killers is moral just and a act to promote freedom for the righteous..!!

Economic Sanctions is a diplomatic way to and more liberal way to solve issues
1stLordofTheVenerability

Con

Greetings, Banker, good luck and have fun. Keep 'er clean.

Firstly, I wish to maintain that I am no pacifist. I believe that what we are doing in Afghanistan and Iraq is a justified course of action. However, this debate is apparently not about these Muslim conflicts in particular. As such, even though my opponent made it sound like this, I intend to debate that economic sanctions do and have, all throughout history, a time with which not to escalate aggressions to war when a trade embargo or some similar action will suffice.

I'm going to largely ignore my opponent's assertions for this round, as I'm not sure how they are relevant. Instead, I'll use my remaining 300 characters to put across my own point.

War can often be avoided with appropriate measures. No, we should not fall before a tyrant in appeasement, as had happened in the controversial years before WWII. However, it has been demonstrated that Trade Embargos and other economic sanctions do, indeed, work.

Have fun
Debate Round No. 1
banker

Pro

thanks for your partnering with me in exploring ,and bringing clarity to this issue. between us ,the right approach will be discovered .
I agree with you, that Islam is not unique to this debate. the reason I brought it as a example ,is that this is our decades struggle. otherwise I would use Russia and refer to Reagan as the president not to obama..!!
therefore my point stands that if we will not fight for our liberty we will lose it..!!
and the ones fighting against us are jihad's as a example of today..!!

my assertions was proving that since liberty and freedom granted to all, is a moral obligation a Nobel state should have. and achieving this, is done by fighting against the forces who are fighting to take it from you.factualy proving the need for fighting for liberty..!!
my pointing out that economic sanctions is liberal way to do it is not knocking it liberal is not bad thing all the time..! its a must to do it to prevent killing..! we must use it if we can
1stLordofTheVenerability

Con

You're welcome. It has been fun, thus far. :D I'm sure it shall be. : )

My next argument will be to assert on the dangers of war between powers in this nuclear era. UN and National Sanctions are often necessary to avert such devastating conflict.
War in our nuclear age could be a very tedious affair. It is appropriate that efforts be taken to dissuade war between two nuclear powers, or a Third World War may ensue, except that it will be far more devastating than any conflict ever seen before. This said, it is important that we not fall back to the demands of a tyrant, but merely avert a disaster when possible.
Of course, there needs to be a means behind the economic sanction. It has to be sure to severely economically harm or punish the aggressor, or threaten a punishment (war), in order to work. A meaningless sanction (such as Egypt boycotting China's tea, let's say), will not avert China at all. However, if North America agrees to boycott all plastic items as well as tea...
Debate Round No. 2
banker

Pro

Thanks it appears you're a good partner for any event and a gentlemen!
It appears we are more alike then apart! however since its a debate, i will focus on what i would disagree with you. and here it is: I would agree with the level of danger in our era, i furthermore agree that if your calculating the benefit of war vs. the liability thereof, its a losing proposition..!! However that's not what a nation like ours (that is striving to be a positive force) should do while establishing foreign policy..! Quite the contrary.! If we could save even one life.! And refrain from killing even one person, by using a alternative like economic sanctions. It's the right and just way. moreover it's our obligation to use economic sanctions!
war and its alternatives are designed for self defense, from a identity that established itself to harm and endanger peaceful civilizations..!! punishments and police tactics should not be our goal, senctions is not going to help anyway in that case..!!
1stLordofTheVenerability

Con

Thank you. I try my best to be honourable in debate. : ) I agree, our ideals do seem to be similar. I was just intrigued on your seeming opinion that economic sanctions don't have a place or time, which, in fact they do. heh, and it appears that you agree with me on this, after all. lol

In this round I'm briefly going to point out that even in war, economic sanctions were taken and proved successful in halting it earlier than was likely predicted without them.
In the US Civil War, a tight Blockade on the Confederacy left the Confederate Army/economy in shambles, ending the war much sooner.
In WWI and II, the Allies created trade embargoes and blockaded the naval ports of Germany/Continental Europe. In WWI, especially, where Attrition was key, this was successful.
Next, I will point out how sanctions that weren't war accompanied were still successful. Quite a few.
Debate Round No. 3
banker

Pro

You try to be honorable, and you're successful at it as well..!!

Conscious is a major player when implementing sanctions..!!

If one regime like Iran, (who are crushing its people ,and using shaira law to hang kids disobeying Allah) is being sanctioned by the world its showing support to Iranian citizens. However on the other hand. If a nation like ours,( being a good positive force fighting for liberty)is going to be sanctioned for warming the world globally, its not going to bring a positive result and the citizens will reject it..!! most will believe that global warming is a hoax

Its great to read, how sanctions curtailed war therefore resulting, in less killing. Proving that when sanctions is used its resulting in peace and a contribution to humanity..!!

any alternative to war is great
1stLordofTheVenerability

Con

Thanks. *doffs feathered hat*
I agree, sanctions need to be issued for appopriate reason. Blasting the US for Global Warming when there are dozens of countries committing atrocities far worse is an absurdity.
That it is, and I will proceed to mention a few examples of successful sanctions for round four:
the United States placed an embargo on Cuba for more than fifty years in order to undermine Fidel Castro's despotic regime. It has apparently been successful and left the Cuban economy more reliant upon the black market than Government enterprises.
British Rubber embargo of 1915. Though this did not leave the American Economy in shambles, the lack of rubber supplies to the United States left them much in need and forced them to conceed to no trade of rubber with Germany or its Allies.
Debate Round No. 4
banker

Pro

in this round (bieng its limited to a small word count) i would like to thank you, for joining me in this debate/conversation. and for your outstanding manners, and well informed historic information..!! filled with rational and logic.!!

while we are here venting anger on our apposition, its important te remember why we are here.! and why we are here, in my view is: becuase we share the same hobbies. and also the same idea, about the impotance of staying informed.

on that note i want you all to join me in uniting a gathering where we all could meat each other and have fun..!!
1stLordofTheVenerability

Con

I also will take this round just to end and say thanks for the debate. : )

It was good fun and very enjoyable. Good fortune in the voting ahead. I hope that we will be able to debate again, in the future. :D Or, perhaps, I'll just see you about in the forums.

Thanks! Indeed, it's quite important to maintain a high degree of information on world events.

Cheerio, until next time.
Debate Round No. 5
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by 1stLordofTheVenerability 7 years ago
1stLordofTheVenerability
I don't have a working Cell Phone (my last broke), so I couldn't verify my account with a text. -_- And my phone plan has long expired. Thus, I cannot vote.
Posted by Cherymenthol 7 years ago
Cherymenthol
"Great debate and good luck in the voting ahead, Banker. :D I can't vote, so I would consider it a great kindness if you didn't, either, unless you fall far behind and need to close the gap a little bit. :D"

Can't vote pro que?
Posted by 1stLordofTheVenerability 7 years ago
1stLordofTheVenerability
Great debate and good luck in the voting ahead, Banker. :D I can't vote, so I would consider it a great kindness if you didn't, either, unless you fall far behind and need to close the gap a little bit. :D

Cheers
Posted by banker 7 years ago
banker
"meat" each other...!! wow what a typo..!! i hope its not going to be taken out of context i am sorry
Posted by 1stLordofTheVenerability 7 years ago
1stLordofTheVenerability
Thanks! :D
Posted by banker 7 years ago
banker
here it is

http://www.debate.org...
Posted by 1stLordofTheVenerability 7 years ago
1stLordofTheVenerability
Ugh, a one thousand character limit is annoying.
Posted by 1stLordofTheVenerability 7 years ago
1stLordofTheVenerability
I'm curious. Could I have the link to that forum thread that 'inspired' you to start this debate? I'd like to give it a gander and maybe rant.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by brycef 7 years ago
brycef
banker1stLordofTheVenerabilityTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Vote Placed by DavidSSabb94 7 years ago
DavidSSabb94
banker1stLordofTheVenerabilityTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
banker1stLordofTheVenerabilityTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Xer 7 years ago
Xer
banker1stLordofTheVenerabilityTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by popculturepooka 7 years ago
popculturepooka
banker1stLordofTheVenerabilityTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by banker 7 years ago
banker
banker1stLordofTheVenerabilityTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70