Failed nations are a greater threat to the us than stable nations
Debate Rounds (5)
This debate is set in the following way.
Round 1: arguments presented.(contention form)
Round 2: cross x
Round 3: summary of arguments
Round 4: cross x
Round 5: Final focus (New arguments are not allowed)
The characteristics that make a nation ‘'failed' are…
•loss of physical control of its territory, or of the monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force therein,
•erosion of legitimate authority to make collective decisions,
•an inability to provide reasonable public services, and
•an inability to interact with other states as a full member of the international community.
The characteristics that make a nation, "stable"....
A) Not subject to sudden or extreme change or fluctuation;
B) Maintaining equilibrium; self-restoring;
C) Enduring or permanent.
With that in mind, because stable nations pose a greater economic threat, stable nations are the reason any failed nation is at any level of threat, and stable nations are organized, I stand con.
Resolved: Failed nations are a greater threat to the US than stable nations.
Contention 1: Stable nations often pose a greater economic treat to the United States.
By Ben Franklin and George Margolin
‘'In the past, Japan has taken our technology for the transistor radio, TV, steel, VCR, automobiles and many other products and has eliminated or severely damaged these industries in the U.S.'
Failed nations are failed because they either have little or no economy. Stable nations like Japan have quickly become world super-powers because of their secure and stable economies. These economies allow these nations to fund large armies and other potential threats against the US. Failed nations lack the resources, economies, and unity needed to be a threat. This leads me to my second contention.
Contention 2: Stable nations are the reason any failed nation is at any level of threat.
From an Afghan war vet…
‘' When the Soviets finally ended operations in Afghanistan, they left behind a lot of their own equipment to make for a quick pull out which added to the overwhelmingly large amount of weapons already residing in that country. The Soviets also left behind millions of anti-personnel landmines during the pullout because they were ***** off that their operation was unsuccessful.'
The Taliban are a threat (ill give pro that) they did a great job in making America a fairly unorganized nation after the 9/11 terrorists bombings. But without stable nations the Taliban would be a fraction of their current self. Iraq and Afghanistan are exceptions, but even in the exceptions my points still rain true.
Contention 3: stable nations are organized.
‘'The attack on Pearl Harbor was a surprise Military strike conducted by the Imperial Japanese navy against the United States naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii on the morning of December 7, 1941.'
Organization allows nations to attack with swiftness and vigor. This example proves the position CON firmly. The attack on Pearl Harbor (as most should know) was a surprise attack that left Pearl Harbor in ruins. Japan was and is a very Stable nation that proved to be a greater threat than any failed nation at the time.
In conclusion, failed nations over all lack the stable governments needed to govern all of the ingredients to become a threat to us. In the past stable nations have proved to be a much greater threat to the United States. Because stable nations pose a greater economic threat to the United States, stable nations are the reason that failed nations are at any level o threat, and stable nations are organized, I urge a Con vote.
Contention 1: Failed nations are aided by ninjas
"I as a ninja aid failed nations" Grandmaster Goddamn, President of the ninjas
As the above quote states, the president of the ninjas would help failed nations however possible, which means that if he thought USA posed a threat, he would dispose of them with his own bare hands and a shurikin.
Contention 2: Ninjas used to be oppressed peasants, so they will always root for the underdog, failed nations
Ninjas were the result of a reign of samurai's from Japan, they were lowly peasants that rose up to destroy the samurai though fear and stealth. This proves that the ninjas would always root for the people with bad lives like they had before they rose up.
Contention 3: USA would be a pushover to conquer
The United States has a leader, the president, who if he were to "disappear" the American people would be scared. But the USA has a backup for that, the vice president, but what if he disappeared too, what if the entire line of successors disappeared in a planned ninja attack, the country would become mass chaos, it would be devastating.
It is for the reasons above that I believe my opponent has lost this debate, thank you.
My opponents first contention is obviously made-up. I have yet to find a site that even mentions 'grandmaster kodamonu'
the only site that shows up is THIS DEBATE. http://www.google.com...
until my opponent shows me their source for their quote, their first contention is destroyed.
As for his second contention, I'm not even going to try.
His third contention is a complete opinion. its one of those things i would have to see to believe.
i advise my opponent to write arguments around sources that are real next time. For those of you that enjoy serious debates not silly debates, vote con.
My main point in this debate is that Sable nations pose an economic threat to the United States. I used japan as an example but every stable nation is a prime example of this. the United States no longer produce many of their own products. because of this, most of the products in our everyday lifestyle have been imported from stable nations. if one of these 'stable' nations were to have some disruption that would discontinue the shipping and/or production of the product. the United States would be left, economically hurt.
It is as a result of this and the fact that my opponent has yet to even address my case, vote Con.
Batmon forfeited this round.
Batmon forfeited this round.
Batmon forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.