The Instigator
MidnightSpecial
Pro (for)
Losing
9 Points
The Contender
TheMasterBrask
Con (against)
Winning
27 Points

End Genocide in Darfur By Putting Troops on the Ground

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  
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: 12/19/2007 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,664 times Debate No: 698
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (12)

 

MidnightSpecial

Pro

400,000 human beings are dead. The international community have done nothing. The United States Federal Government should put troops on the ground to save the Darfurian people and end genocide to bring peace and stability to Sudan.
TheMasterBrask

Con

Putting troops on the ground in Darfur is not the best motion for the U.S. at this point and time. We already have our hands tied with other wars and battles, and despite how tragic the genocide in Darfur is, we just cannot end it right now. Also, you cannot say that we should wage two wars at once, due to our budget. The U.S. is already in debt, and the value of the U.S. Dollar is also falling, making it harder and harder to pay for things we believe in. THIS IS WHY PUTTING TROOPS IN DARFUR IS A BAD IDEA!
Debate Round No. 1
MidnightSpecial

Pro

As the only superpower in the world the U.S. has the moral obligation to stop genocide in this world. How many people must die before we open our eyes to the situation in the world?

Also, the U.S. would not need to put that many troops on the ground to make a huge impact. By sending a small but substantial amount of man power on the ground to augments the U.N./AU coalition on the ground right now we can save hundreds of thousands of lives. The U.S.'s fire power and air power would give the UN/AU forces the power they need to bring peace and stability.

On the money, we are not going to ruin our economy by committing a small force to end genocide. The UN/AU will be the ones who foot the majority of the bill because we will be putting our forces in their charge.
TheMasterBrask

Con

Darfur doesn't need the United State's Presence in their country. Just because we are a superpower, does not mean we have any obligations to help any other countries. Look at Iraq for example, we went in there thinking we had an obligation to help the people there, only to wind up hating the war not long later. Also, as cheap as you might think it is, the cost to put just a small amount of troops on the ground is enormous. You need to pay for transportation, paychecks, fuel, weaponry, food, water, and a lot of times you pay for food and water for the refugees too. That is a substantial amound of money, especially if you have to pay that amount of money every single day, 365 days a year. Another point is that there are other countries near Darfur that could easily help them, or you could pick another superpower like China to give darfur help. The U.S. shouldnt put troops down in Darfur!
Debate Round No. 2
MidnightSpecial

Pro

According to your argument we should not have stepped in to save the jews in World War II. Your argument allows for genocide to occur unchecked.

Also, I wouldn't cost as much as you think. Since the surge is working in Iraq we could move troops to Darfur without there being any significant pay increase. Like I said before the UN/AU force would pay for all of the charges so your cost argument is null and void.

Other countries are just as weak as Sudan. All they can do is allow a little bit of land for the refugees to come to, but the refugees are still attacked by the government. China supports the Sudanese government because of the oil coming out of sudan. They would never support an end to violence because they depend of the oil trade.
TheMasterBrask

Con

For the purpose of this argument i must tell you that I am jewish.*

I do believe we should not have stepped in during WWII for the Jews. It was not our war, we only wanted to seek revenge on the enemy for what happened at Pearl Harbor, which included destroying the Japanese Ally of Germany. As important a topic as it is, WWII has nothing to do with Darfur and therefore this part of our argument is void.

Second you are saying the UN would pay for all of the charges, which still does not support your argument. The UN is a group of countries who work to seek peace in the world, and are financed by all the countries included in the UN. The US (being the only superpower in your mind) would be paying the most to the UN, and therefore we would technically be paying the UN to pay our troops to fight.

Third, If the UN had the money to do this, and if it was a big enough issue to the world, the invasion would have happened already, therefore you have no argument.

P.S. CHINA IS A SUPERPOWER SO THE US CANNOT BE THE ONLY ONE.
Debate Round No. 3
MidnightSpecial

Pro

MidnightSpecial forfeited this round.
TheMasterBrask

Con

I really do not know what to say since this guy keeps forfeiting. so........... DONT PUT TROOPS IN DARFUR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by ahundredhighways 9 years ago
ahundredhighways
yeah, we need a small force, but not with the UN whose definition of peace is a lack of oppostion, but here how to do it with the UN

together with the EU and their 27 votes in the UN and twice the foreign aid than the united states, the EU has bought more influence since 2000 than any other country has, with their combined political influence

the AU also needs to be involved, but they don't have the influence, just the manpower we need

also, we need help in somolia and maybe liberia, they don't look good in the future

i know i'm all over the place with that, but thats as good as i can explain it
Posted by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
Midnight Special, I'm sorry but they aren't a threat to OUR country and soldiers are already doing 2 or 3 tours and sometimes more. Soldiers are already away from their families for 15-24 months if they are army , so who do you think is going to go there ...???? Are you going to join the military and go over there??????? We have countries that are actually a possible threat to our country... maybe we should worry about that before going to help another country... I suppose you are going to sign the dotted line to go leave your family and fight. You are aginst the war in Iraq , the war on terrorism , but you want us to go into another country .. doesn't make much sense....
Posted by Tryptonique 9 years ago
Tryptonique
It isn't our moral obligation to "save the world" at the cost of our own solider's lives and out of our own coffers when we stand to gain absolutely nothing in return from such involvement. What about the people here in the U.S? What about OUR homeless? What about our unemployed? What about OUR uninsured, our uneducated, and our dying? What about the soldiers and their families that you think we should just wantonly assign to shitty third world countries because they "need us?" Does their need outweigh the lives of our soldiers? I don't really think it does. I think we need to get our own ducks in a row as a country before we start crusading to fix the world's problems. I would love to see you make your case to the wife of an active duty Marine with a baby at home. Tell HER why her husband should go risk his life so some Sudanese people can be free from oppression. Good luck!
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
Ok kids , who is killing whom there

MUSLIMS are MURDERING CHRISTIANS

HELLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Islam is the evil of the world

hands down
Posted by Chuckles 9 years ago
Chuckles
well, we didn't enter WWII to "save the Jews". We entered only after we were viciously attacked. and, on a lighter note, Midnight Special seems to be selling himself (ironic for his name) : "Also, I wouldn't cost as much as you think."
please don't take offense at that, just a joke!
Posted by tjzimmer 9 years ago
tjzimmer
You can go there and fight for the rights of citizens of a nation that has done nothing for you. The typical American citizen would not benefit from this and soldiers will die in a revolution that should be won by the people themselves. We do not want another Somalia.
12 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Chob 9 years ago
Chob
MidnightSpecialTheMasterBraskTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by PoeJoe 9 years ago
PoeJoe
MidnightSpecialTheMasterBraskTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by ahundredhighways 9 years ago
ahundredhighways
MidnightSpecialTheMasterBraskTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
MidnightSpecialTheMasterBraskTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by lindsay 9 years ago
lindsay
MidnightSpecialTheMasterBraskTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by cscanzoni 9 years ago
cscanzoni
MidnightSpecialTheMasterBraskTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by longjonsilver 9 years ago
longjonsilver
MidnightSpecialTheMasterBraskTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by thirdworldpoet 9 years ago
thirdworldpoet
MidnightSpecialTheMasterBraskTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by joesabet2001 9 years ago
joesabet2001
MidnightSpecialTheMasterBraskTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by hark 9 years ago
hark
MidnightSpecialTheMasterBraskTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30