The Instigator
vinavinx
Pro (for)
Losing
12 Points
The Contender
qwarkinator
Con (against)
Winning
15 Points

Freedom is not free and the cost is war. Freedom is the reason we are in Iraq.

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: 2/19/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,658 times Debate No: 2776
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (9)

 

vinavinx

Pro

All of us have heard the term "Freedom isn`t free.". It is commonly said and we read it on cars everywhere! So I am guessing that this simple fact is "common knowledge". If it is common knowledge then why do so many people (*cough* liberals *cough*) act like its not a fact?! The war over in Iraq is all about FREEDOM! The Iraqi people WANT FREEDOM! The one problem is, is that they dont have the streangth to take it for themselves, so we are helping them! Freedom is not free! War is the price we have payed for freedom. Why not help another nation get theirs?
qwarkinator

Con

I agree freedom is not free however I do not believe the cost of freedom has to be war. I believe there are more effective ways than war to gain freedom for the people of Iraq.

A more effective way to get what you want out of country is to cut off their source of income. For example we could have chosen not to purchase oil from Iraq until they guaranteed freedom for their citizens. I believe this could have been a rather effective method considering Iraq's main export is oil and the US consumes more oil than any other country. Iraq would have been forced to change something or suffer the economic consequences.

You could argue that the US would have suffered dramatically from this decision. I mean we need oil to run our country if we lose the imports from Iraq how can we still run.

Here is the problem with the previous statement. What is more important a life or a barrel of oil? If you choose a barrel of oil we should be having an entirely different debate, however, I suspect that you choose a life. In that case it is more effective to force Iraq to do what we want through economic means rather than using force and wasting soldier's lives.
Debate Round No. 1
vinavinx

Pro

Your before statement was a total contradiction. In the middle ages one of the tacticts of war was to cut off a castle from recieving food or money. This was a blockade. To quit buying oil and slowing a nations income for a political purpose is an ACT of war. Doing this would probably cause more problems cause it would also affect the income of the un-free citizens. It would actually probably affect them more than the high government we have overthrown. Taking away their income is an act of war. Also taking away a supply of money would not get rid of the terrorist threat in that country. In order for the Iraqis to completely be free you need to remove the terrorists.
qwarkinator

Con

Since when has a boycott become an act of war, it is our choice as a country not to buy oil from Iraq. We are not blockading them from receiving imports as stated in your example; we are choosing not to buy their exports. I have no idea what you are talking about. You may believe that the method I presented was not effective but it is not an act of war. All I am saying with my example is there is more than one way to gain your freedom. War is not always the cost of freedom as stated in your topic. For example Gandhi employed peaceful civil disobedience in the Indian community's struggle for civil rights in South Africa. In Africa, he organized poor farmers and labourers to protest against oppressive taxation and widespread discrimination. Gandhi led his nation in the disobedience of the British salt tax imposed in India with a 248 mile Dandi Salt March in 1930. These are all examples of freedom gained without the use of war.

"In order for the Iraqis to completely be free you need to remove the terrorists."

I agree with this statement but there is no way we can achieve this goal with the use of war. This is the definition of terrorism as defined by the American Heritage Dictionary. "The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons." By this definition the reason for the terrorist's use of force is ideological reasons, how can you fight a war to stop an ideology. It would be like fighting a literal war against racism, sexism, any set of ideals you can think of. The only actual way to stop ideologies is through education and let me assure you that is not an act of war.
Debate Round No. 2
vinavinx

Pro

I agree that education is not an act of war. But how do you educate a radical people who throw away lives for their ideals. These radical islamic terrorists care nothing for life outside their ideals. You cant stop suicide bombings and plane crashes by sitting and talking to people who would shoot you as soon as they look at you just because you believe differently. These same people have torchered and oppressed the innocent peaceful people of iraq. The only way to stop them is to chase them out of the country. We can not do this by talking!
qwarkinator

Con

What you are proposing is a temporary solution to the problem of Terrorism. I agree we might be able to chase the Terrorists out of Iraq but we will never be able to completely change their ideals with the use of war. The only way to completely solve this problem is through education and removing the Terrorist ideology from the society and this cannot be completely achieved through the use of war.

In addition let me remind all voters that vinavinx said that "Freedom is not free and the cost is war" and he did not prove that in all circumstances this is true therefore I have won the debate. Any vote that goes against this is a vote on opinion and not the facts and arguments of the debate. Please keep this in mind as you vote on the debate.

Lastly I would like to thank vinavinx for debating me and hopefully each of us learned something new from this debate.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by qwarkinator 9 years ago
qwarkinator
First of all, if you would look into the actual statistics the Iraqi people do not want us in their country. Second by staying there we are completely contradicting ourselves because we are trying to set up a democracy and we completely ignore the Iraqi people in all our decisions. We think we own the world and it is some how our right to run their country without their consent, it seems to me you are the one who is being mislead.

I did not included the statistics because i believe it is common knowledge ,however, if you would like to see them i would be happy to look them up for you.
Posted by vinavinx 9 years ago
vinavinx
Clearly sir you are one of many being very much so miss-lead about the war in iraq.
Posted by blond_guy 9 years ago
blond_guy
"The Iraqi people WANT FREEDOM!"

Freedom from the bombs we drop over their heads maybe.
The Iraqi people never wanted us there, that is ludicrous.
Ask yourself this question. What is better, Saddam's regime having the people poor and hungry. Or our army in there dropping bombs and putting bullets through their heads, while they ARE STILL poor and hungry?
Posted by bluejoewho 9 years ago
bluejoewho
i would of loved the con to this. My mouth is watering as I type.
Posted by mmadderom 9 years ago
mmadderom
"A more effective way to get what you want out of country is to cut off their source of income. "

We did that. Perhaps you are unaware but there was a UN sanctioned embargo against Iraqi oil for years. They were allowed to sell only enough to pay for food and medicine for their citizens. It didn't work.

War is always a last resort. In the case of Iraq, a decade of economic sanctions, negotiations, UN resolutions, selected bombings, and threats did not result in compliance from the Saddam regime. Quite the opposite, he only became more resistant and isolated, using the "oil for food" money to fund his own extravagant lifestyle rather than care for his citizens.

Regardless of your position on U.S. involvement in the war, it was the only way the oppression of the Iraqi people was going to end and the only way the threat to his neighbors would cease. All other options were exhausted long before the invasion.
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by Oolon_Colluphid 9 years ago
Oolon_Colluphid
vinavinxqwarkinatorTied
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 Daddy_Warbux 9 years ago
Daddy_Warbux
vinavinxqwarkinatorTied
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 polka-dots323 9 years ago
polka-dots323
vinavinxqwarkinatorTied
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 slammin 9 years ago
slammin
vinavinxqwarkinatorTied
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 vinavinx 9 years ago
vinavinx
vinavinxqwarkinatorTied
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 blond_guy 9 years ago
blond_guy
vinavinxqwarkinatorTied
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 Acureforthemondays 9 years ago
Acureforthemondays
vinavinxqwarkinatorTied
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 mmadderom 9 years ago
mmadderom
vinavinxqwarkinatorTied
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 qwarkinator 9 years ago
qwarkinator
vinavinxqwarkinatorTied
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