The Instigator
ccshortt
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
HostileBelief
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Having Nuclear Weapons is immoral

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/20/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 947 times Debate No: 34930
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

ccshortt

Con

I believe that when a country has nuclear weapons at their disposal the use of these is justified by the actions of other countries.The weapons themselves are justified by the fact that there is no other way to launch a warhead unless the president is giving the go-ahead.The people in the US are protected by these weapons because if any country decided to launch a nuclear weapon against us there would be severe consequences with our arsenal of weapons.
HostileBelief

Pro

Hello Everyone, First of all, I would like to thank my opponent, CCShortt for this very interesting debate. This is actually my first debate so I'm going to give it my all here. In this debate, we are talking about whether or not nuclear weapons are moral or immoral. CCShortt thinks that nuclear weapons are not immoral but I would like to represent the opposite position by saying that nuclear weapons are immoral.

Before I get to my own arguments, I'm going to refute my opponent. What he believes is that nuclear weapons prevent war from happaning and that no one would dare fire on someone like the U.S or Russia or any of their partners. That is unless you are a sadistic, religious fundementalist psychopath who doesn't care if a nuke is coming towards them after they fire their own missle. Take Iran for example who has repeatedly shown that they are making nuclear weapons despite the sanctions against them. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said before that he wants Israel wiped off the face of the earth. They don't care if they are being threated that they might fire back, they will do it anyway for the name of their god.

Let me give you another example, North Korea who has been making nuclear weapons and has made several threats towards the United States. Now I would like to begin with my own points.

First, As technology advances, nuclear weapons will become more accessable to terrorsts. Even as of today, we are seeing tons and tons of hackers and that seems to be the future of infiltration for terrrorsts. War would be more and more complicated.

Second, Let us imagine if one was fired. Imagine the impact it would have. The bomb on hiroshima for example caused 46% of leukemia deaths are due to the effects of hiroshima. Chernobyl's effects are lasting even today where you can't even be in certain areas for long periods of time. That's pretty all I have to say as of now at least. Thank you!
Debate Round No. 1
ccshortt

Con

ccshortt forfeited this round.
HostileBelief

Pro

Whatever reason my opponent had for forfeiting, I'm going to give my opponent a chance to respond to these arguments but before I give him the chance, I'm going to post my references from my last argument considering how I forgot.

Iran President Wants Israel off the map: http://www.globalresearch.ca...

North Korea will likely fire missile: http://worldnews.nbcnews.com...

Hiroshima and Leukemia : http://www.ratical.org...

Chernobyl Documentary:

For future debates, maybe a bit more rounds so that new arguments can be put to the table and be answered.
Debate Round No. 2
ccshortt

Con

ccshortt forfeited this round.
HostileBelief

Pro

HostileBelief forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.