The Instigator
Pandas
Pro (for)
Winning
1 Points
The Contender
loves2argue
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Go into world war 3 for the sake of humanity.

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...
Pandas
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/26/2013 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 816 times Debate No: 37033
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

Pandas

Pro

First round acceptance only.
I am looking forward to debating with you on such an interesting topic.
loves2argue

Con

as am i. wish you all the best of luck. may the best argument win.
Debate Round No. 1
Pandas

Pro

Pandas forfeited this round.
loves2argue

Con

i don't think that we should go into a world war 3 for the sake of humanity. is that not going against the point? also after world war 2 they said that there will never be another world war i personally would like to keep it that way.
Debate Round No. 2
Pandas

Pro

I apologize for forfeiting round 2. I was so busy I forgot I have a debate going on.

As for my arguments:

By going into World War 3, there will be lots of benefits to mankind.

1. Less population. Surely if World War 3 occurs, soldiers and civilians would be killed. However, they are not being cruelly "murdered". They would be just "unlucky victims" who happen to die from the influences of the war. With a big clearance of our population, the global issues like greenhouse effects or over-usage of resources would be solved.

2. Renovation. With war comes destruction. Old buildings will be destroyed as well as old factories and industries. After the war, they would be renovated using a more high-tech technology and more advanced construction skills. An example had been seen when Japan lost World War 2. It had been greatly renovated and is regarded as one of the most developed countries in the world.

3. Banned military. In countries that lose the war, they would have to face the consequences of not having any military forces to protect their country. Here, the funds that are normally used with military forces will be used for renovation and improving the state of the country. Looking back at Japan, with no military forces, it spent all of the country's fund on improving the country. It had no reason for any protection because America was protecting it.

Is it justified?
Sacrifices are needed for the betterment of the people.
loves2argue

Con

loves2argue forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Pandas

Pro

Because my opponent had forfeited the third round, I have no rebuttals for this round. However, I would like to add that by going into World War 3 and facing despair, we may learn to love each other. Humans had been, and is being, cruel to each other. With World War 3, we would finally come to sense how important others are, related or or not. We would learn to be caring and loving for others. Without mistakes, we won't learn.
loves2argue

Con

loves2argue forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Pandas

Pro

I am sorry my opponent had forfeited the last two rounds, making this a one-sided argument. I wish he/she comes to present the rebuttals. Thank you.
loves2argue

Con

loves2argue forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Buntiazad2020 3 years ago
Buntiazad2020
We will certainly go into world war 3 but not for the cause of humanity. Cause of war is always greed.

This time it is Greed of USA, Russia, China and Inhuman Wahabi Muslims will drad world to world war 3. Center of all greed will start with Petroleum and Natural Gas reserves of Afghanistan and Will end with Water resource of India and China. Attack on syria is just the beginning. USA has already created a cold war like situation in EU and Asia.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by imabench 3 years ago
imabench
Pandasloves2argueTied
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:10 
Reasons for voting decision: pro's arguments are retarded but con ended up forfeiting the debate anyways.