The Instigator
Solid.Snake
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
m93samman
Con (against)
Winning
22 Points

If a country were to take over America coffee supplies would be the first target

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 6 votes the winner is...
m93samman
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/29/2010 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 965 times Debate No: 14197
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (6)

 

Solid.Snake

Pro

This is intended to be a humorous debate so without further ado, let us begin.

If another country was preparing to invade America, its first target would be coffee supplies and let me explain why.

"America runs on Dunkin' Donuts"--not sleep. Several studies suggest that the average employed American is being overworked and not getting enough sleep. This in turn makes them rely on coffee as a substitute for sleep--over half of all Americans drink coffee on a regular basis according to some studies.

Coffee, as we know, contains the drug caffeine which is responsible for many of coffee's wonderful (and potentially harmful) effects. As with any drug taken on a regular basis a tolerance for that drug is built. Once the drug is removed withdrawal occurs, rendering the person unable to work or function at their best. Some of the effects of coffee withdrawal include anxiety, sleeplessness as well as fluctuating blood pressure.

Let's not forget that it's not only the average Joe that drinks a few cups of coffee a day--CEOs and Wall Street bigshots also use this wonderful drink to keep on chuggin'. Without their daily dose of coffee, they would not be able to manage their companies to the best of their abilities. This in turn would be very harmful to the US economy.

Coffee is also a very large import in the US and without that cash flow, the already crippled economy would be in an even worse state.

Therefore taking away coffee would have a very noticeable effect on the US.

This makes coffee a prime target for the country who wishes to invade America. Once over half of all American adults are unable to function properly because of withdrawal, the invading country would have a great advantage over America. The next target would be oil--but that is for another debate.

I will end my argument here for now.
m93samman

Con

I thank my opponent for this debate, and look forward to a good one.

I will be approaching the topic with 2 cases, if the character count (5,000) permits me.

==> CASE ONE: COFFEE ISN'T THE MOST DESIRABLE AMERICAN PRODUCT <==

It is not a surprise to us that the US has more than just coffee available to foreign invaders to take. As a matter of fact, thousands of objects are available in the land of abundance and joyousness. For example, health and beauty products. Countries around the world shy away from the US when it comes to actors and actresses, musicians, artists and otherwise in terms of their looks. I believe that they would go for all of the products we have for beauty before they look for tooth-yellowing coffee. Look for health and beauty products here: http://www.americansworking.com...

Further, what other country on earth could claim to be so well entertained? Just look at a map of Xbox live participants http://upload.wikimedia.org...(January_2007).PNG Although we have no numbers available, we will readily infer that the US leads the world, which they do. So, why wouldn't invading countries take our games? http://en.wikipedia.org...

Coffee would not be anyone's first priority in the US.

==> CASE TWO: WHAT COFFEE? <==

http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.ico.org...
http://www.coffeeresearch.org...

According to all the sources I've found, we don't even HAVE coffee- that's how insignificant we are. If we were to be invaded, the invading country would NOT get their coffee from us. They would get it from somewhere where they have their own coffee, so that they can:

1) Have coffee,
2) Control the coffee market,
3) Have more coffee, and
4) Get coffee.

The US is not worth spending billions of dollars against militarily to make a few thousand dollars worth of coffee.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

My opponent has made the ridiculous choice of choosing coffee, which is clearly an interesting decision because I personally can't fathom of a pragmatic defense for the case. I wish my opponent luck, and a happy holiday season! Happy holidays to everyone else as well!
Debate Round No. 1
Solid.Snake

Pro

Thank you Con, for your nice points. I will now refute them all in this round.

"CASE ONE: COFFEE ISN'T THE MOST DESIRABLE AMERICAN PRODUCT"

o The key word here is "Desirable". Coffee may not be the most DESIRABLE American product but it sure is one of the most useful. Could we do without Xbox live? Sure, why not? Would we suddenly have millions of bored teenage gamers? Yes, but the negative consequences of that are far less than if we take away coffee. The only negative consequence of destroying Xbox Live somehow, for example, would be that we would have a lot of bored teens with nothing to do but sit around and try to play the single players versions of their games which would still keep them occupied. They could also invite their friends over and play together. And no, they would not suffer withdrawal symptoms because video game addiction is not classified as a mental disorder/disease yet. Coffee/caffeine addiction however, is very real.

As for beauty and aesthetics products--so what? All that would stop is people from looking good. I don't think that the other country would really benefit from targeting beauty supplies. It is completely non-essential because unlike coffee, you do not ingest eyeliner and suffer from withdrawal when you stop it's use. The reverse is true for coffee however.

The aforementioned things mentioned by Con are completely non-essential and are things we can do without. Coffee however is something that is almost second nature to many Americans--something that we could simply not do without.

"CASE TWO: WHAT COFFEE?"

o I believe that my opponent is being a bit ignorant when he/she is saying that we do not have any coffee. Where do you think all the coffee we drink comes from? Obviously most of it is imported. So where would the invading country start? By stopping those imports, of course. They would target the ships/airplanes containing coffee coming into the country and stop them before they could reach American soil. We would then be left to use whatever coffee we have left in America in an effort to try to keep functioning normally. Eventually this supply would run out and we would be an easier (not entirely easy, but easier) target for the invading country.

I never said that the invading country would invade us with the primary goal of taking over our coffee supplies. The sole reason for invading America would not be to obtain more coffee, because that is just silly. I stated that IF a country wanted to invade America (for reasons such as economic, geographical and political gains) coffee would be the first target it would need to take down in order to weaken us as a nation. This would make it easier for the advancing army to take control.

Thank you Con for your cases. However you have not entirely rebutted my points that I provided in round 1 and I hope that you will do so soon.

I would also like to wish everyone Happy Holidays and a Happy New Year!
m93samman

Con

I thank my opponent for his response and clarifying his position; I believe it was a simple misunderstanding, because I had understood that my opponent meant that *after* we are conquered, nations would want our coffee. That being said, I will have an entirely different approach.

Very simply, to address all of my opponent's points, we have thousands of alternatives to coffee in terms of energy and caffeine. To list a few; red bull, monster energy drinks, tea (so many subsets of tea), hot chocolate (my personal favorite), gatorade, powerade, vitamin water, and sobe' energy, among many others. Addiction to coffee stems primarily from the energy it provides the consumer; all of the alternatives I provided could do the job individually; if not, then in groups.

For the NEW Con case, I have a very simple argument to make. I believe that an invading countries first target would be our trees. They would launch napalm strikes on all of our front yards and parks and forests, burning down the greenery. Us being the largest consumer of gasoline and oil in the world, the green house gases would take effect, burning up the ozone and exposing us to the ultraviolet light. The result:

1) We would have dark tans that will ultimately become horrendously outbalanced by our white skin underneath our clothes, murdering our self-esteem.
2) Sunburns would leave us begging for mercy at the ruthless hands of our clothes, that rubs against our sensitive skin when we lack beauty products (which would be our invading country's next target).
3) It would be REALLY hot, so we'd sweat to the point where the combined heat of solar radiation and napalm convection equals the Heat of the Miami Heat, which is too intense to handle- hence the 10-game road winning streak.

Clearly, vegetation would be the first target of any invading country. Not much more needs to be said.

Happy Holidays everyone!
Debate Round No. 2
Solid.Snake

Pro

Solid.Snake forfeited this round.
m93samman

Con

I guess I win. Happy Holidays everyone, please vote CON.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
Hah :p
Posted by Superboy777 6 years ago
Superboy777
was just going to take it
lol
Posted by GORGIAS 6 years ago
GORGIAS
Hawaii is the only U.S. territory that produces coffee. So... This sounds possible; but the invaders would still have to shut down a multitude of trade routes, and in doing that cause war with other nations, there has to be a better way lol
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by GORGIAS 6 years ago
GORGIAS
Solid.Snakem93sammanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Nails 6 years ago
Nails
Solid.Snakem93sammanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:04 
Vote Placed by nonentity 6 years ago
nonentity
Solid.Snakem93sammanTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by BlackVoid 6 years ago
BlackVoid
Solid.Snakem93sammanTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by gavin.ogden 6 years ago
gavin.ogden
Solid.Snakem93sammanTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
Solid.Snakem93sammanTied
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:01