The Instigator
SuperRobotWars
Pro (for)
Losing
13 Points
The Contender
darkkermit
Con (against)
Winning
15 Points

Humans Should Wage War Against Cockroaches

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  
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: 9/11/2010 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,121 times Debate No: 13126
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (8)

 

SuperRobotWars

Pro

My argument is that humans should wage war against cockroaches because they mooch off of hard working homo sapiens and give us nothing in return. This is a war we must wage to exterminate the bugs.

Sources:

Kill Em All (the cockroaches I mean)!
Vote Pro.
darkkermit

Con

As CON I will say that we should not age a war, since we would lose. Cockroaches are virtually indestructible. If you nuke them, they will survive the nuclear blast.

If you chop off their heads, they will still survive.

If you crush them, they will lay their eggs.

Our best option is to never engage in war with them, for it is our best chance of survival.
Debate Round No. 1
SuperRobotWars

Pro

We humans have the capacity to produce biological and nanobot based weaponry which would only attack specific organisms. And also remember the fact that cockroaches are not one of the species with the capacity for war, and that currently we would win for the main weapon humans have been using to drive other organisms to the point of extinction for as long as our specie existed is fire (and roaches are easily burned) and we are the only specie (except for earlier hominids which have evolved into us) to use fire (except for a few species of plants which use it to disperse their seeds but its not really a direct usage of fire).

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
darkkermit

Con

"And also remember the fact that cockroaches are not one of the species with the capacity for war"

If this statement is true, then this debate is worthless considering that if cockroaches are incapable of war, then we can not declare war against cockroaches, since cockroaches are incapable of war. It would instead be a pesticide, or mass killing of pests or cockroaches without retaliation. This not war since a war requires both sides to retaliate. For example, hitler did not declare war on the jews, he did a genocide on jews, since the jews were powerless to fight.

"biological and nanobot based weaponry which would only attack specific organisms"

However, PRO's soure states that "Nanomachines are largely in the research-and-development phase" which means that they are not in full production, so nanobots would not work. Also there are few biological weapons that do not harm other animals, including humans and it is possible that these biological weapons can mutate to something more dangerous.

Also PRO states that one can set fire on cockroach, however the use of fire is unstable and cause buildings and unstable forest fires and case massive destruction.
Debate Round No. 2
SuperRobotWars

Pro

What my opponent said that the roaches could not retaliate and it would be like genocide is completely true and those are the reasons why I chose roaches: roaches do nothing for our civilization and are just mooches. You could not compare roaches to people in any aspect except we share the same domain and kingdom (dogs, cats, chicken, rats, mice, pigs, frogs, worms, and many more species are not mooches they earn their keep y helping us with work, food, medical research and more). And also my point still remains that by humanity having a common enemy (the enemy of my enemy is my ally) we will avoid conflicts with our own specie. And roaches fight us every day by ruining food and carrying diseases (though they couldn't retaliate in a full scale manner).

Your argument on nanobots is wrong. Although nanobots are in the research and development stage you cannot discount them as a weapon (during WWII the nuclear bomb was still in its development stages but it helped to end the war so why discount nanobots) for they could turn the tides of war. I know the virus could eventually come to kill us (via mutation and evolution) but we could create a cure and the virus at the same time and the virus could be designed with specific defects to limit how many generations it could produce and how dangerous it is to the human immune system.

And in the case of fire, though it is unstable it is highly efficient and is the original super weapon (just ask any caveman or specie, and forest we destroyed with it). And buildings can be rebuilt and with new cloning technologies we will probably be able to reseed entire forests and reproduce entire populaces of organisms in the matter of days.

The main purpose of my argument was to create a war that would unify humanity and prevent conflict against us and our fellow humans. In essence its roaches being a martyr for peace (even if its against their own will) and it would benefit the whole of humanity.

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.ornl.gov...
http://en.wikipedia.org...

I would like to thank my opponent for this debate.
Vote Pro.
darkkermit

Con

Thanks to PRO for creating this debate and for responding quickly.

"What my opponent said that the roaches could not retaliate and it would be like genocide is completely true and those are the reasons why I chose roaches"

Except the resolution states "humans should wage war against cockroaches" not "humans should wage genocide against cockroaches". PRO has thus refuted oneself. This alone refutes the resolution.

However, for the sake of arguing, I will continue to tackle PRO's points.

Engaging in a 'pesticide' will not cause peace as PRO state. In fact it would cause more problems, since many people will be against this extermination, the ecosystem could by impacted by exterminating them (cockroaches are both a food soruce for animals and are decomposers), and war would still exist even if cockroaches were fought. Hitler enaged in war even though he engaged in genocide of jews. The United states still fought in wars even though it committed genocide of Native Americans. There are many common threats to society, threats much greater than cockroaches: Poverty, Global Warming, and Crime yet war still wages on between other countries (ex: war in the middle east, conflicts in africa).

My opponent does not refute that using fire and biological weapons can be dangerous, so why are we taking the risk of destroying houses, forests, sickness, and even possible death of humans just to get rid of cockroaches? Surely, the cost way exceeds the benefit. A large amount of money will be used to cause the killing of cockroaches using fire, biological weapons, and nanobots and even more money will be used to pay for the cost of damage. We would be causing more harm to ourselves then these cockroaches ever did.

The resolution is negated, vote CON.
Debate Round No. 3
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Chrysippus 7 years ago
Chrysippus
Hmm, posted that before I was finished with it. Con won arguments because he answered Pro's contentions, pointed out the dangers of Pro's suggestions, and Pro contradicted himself fatally.
Posted by Chrysippus 7 years ago
Chrysippus
This debate brightened my day :)

RFD (as if it were needed on a debate like this):

C: Tied.

SP/G: Tied.

A: Con. The distinction between waging war and hunting to extinction is as valid a point as any in this debate.

Lol at sources. Con used none; Pro: "Martyr" and "human cloning", seriously?
Posted by TheAtheistAllegiance 7 years ago
TheAtheistAllegiance
LMAO!! This debate is HILARIOUS!!
Posted by SuperRobotWars 7 years ago
SuperRobotWars
Unfortunately This Is Necessary
Posted by Lamza61 7 years ago
Lamza61
Tony Montana: You little cockroaches....
Posted by m93samman 7 years ago
m93samman
smh...
Posted by brian_eggleston 7 years ago
brian_eggleston
It's a good topic - and an important one - those parasitic, er...parasites have been sponging off us humans for too long now. Let's exterminate them now!
Posted by SuperRobotWars 7 years ago
SuperRobotWars
The debate is rational but the videos were just for humor to lighten the mood of war. Why should humans fight each other when we have a common enemy, the cockroach. Waging war (trying to send to the extinction list) against other animals is what originally unified humans and prevented conflict between us and ourselves (human vs human) so why not wage war against the freeloading cockroaches?
Posted by I-am-a-panda 7 years ago
I-am-a-panda
DDO - THE site of intellect and rational discussion.
Posted by Brendan21 7 years ago
Brendan21
Lol?
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by Man-is-good 6 years ago
Man-is-good
SuperRobotWarsdarkkermitTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: Con convinced me that waging war against cockroaches is an utter waste of time. However, Pro had the sources, but he failed to use them to his advantage....
Vote Placed by BillBonJovi 6 years ago
BillBonJovi
SuperRobotWarsdarkkermitTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Postup10101 7 years ago
Postup10101
SuperRobotWarsdarkkermitTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Koopin 7 years ago
Koopin
SuperRobotWarsdarkkermitTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by Marauder 7 years ago
Marauder
SuperRobotWarsdarkkermitTied
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 Chrysippus 7 years ago
Chrysippus
SuperRobotWarsdarkkermitTied
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 TheAtheistAllegiance 7 years ago
TheAtheistAllegiance
SuperRobotWarsdarkkermitTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Vote Placed by michaelmalachi 7 years ago
michaelmalachi
SuperRobotWarsdarkkermitTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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