The Instigator
1stLordofTheVenerability
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
brian_eggleston
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Impromptu Debate

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 1 vote the winner is...
1stLordofTheVenerability
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/22/2010 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,256 times Debate No: 11840
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (10)
Votes (1)

 

1stLordofTheVenerability

Pro

Greetings to my opponent and all readers. Good luck, have fun.

We're going to attempt a new debate format called 'Impromptu', so please consider that we only have ten minutes to post when judging for errors or discrepancies in spelling. We each have two arguments; the first will introduce the topic and greet the opponent. The second will create an -in-depth argument on the topic. We would have five or ten minutes to argue in round two.

The exhilarating part would be that we don't debate the same topic. We requested of two others to create three topics (three for him and three for me). Then we each picked one and argue upon our own without rebutting the opponent. The most outstanding, solitary, five/ten minute argument wins.

Marauder gave me these three topics, "1) Lay Ministers (aka local pasturs) should be requried to commit to the same amount of training and education as ordained pastures or have them removed from ministry if they dont.

2) If they were the only two canidates, Bobby Jindal would beat Tim Pawlenty in the GOP presidentail primaries for 2012.

3) Had Napoleon waged war against the US (leaving Britain alone) he would have won.

this gives you a variaty of catagories to choose from, politics, religon, alternative history."

And I have decided to choose number 3, "Had Napoleon waged war against the US (leaving Britain alone) he would have won." I will argue that he could have indubitably emerged victorious.

Good luck, Brian, and may L not choose the most difficult topics that she can spontaneously think of.
brian_eggleston

Con

Many thanks to 1stLordofTheVenerability for proposing this intriguing debate format.

At short notice, TheLwerd very kindly proposed the following topics:

1. War in Afghanistan
2. Tobacco Rights
3. Utalitarianism

I have decided to argue in favour of tobacco rights.

May the battle commence and the best man win.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 1
1stLordofTheVenerability

Pro

Same to you, Brian. Thanks for debating.

All right, as I have previously stated, I am going to argue that if Napoleon had decided not to sell the Louisiana Territory and thus fought the United States in a conflict while disengaging from conflict with England, he would have won.

Let us briefly analyze the War of 1812. At this time, the US Army had a regular force of perhaps 36,000. It had an untrained, illprepared and poorly equipped militia of about 450,000. Napoleon, in contrast, had a vast professional Grande Armee of 750,000 at the peak of France's Glory.

France's Naval Fleet could have easily crushed the American scattering of ships, as England's did.

Napoleon was a brilliant military commander. He defeated professional armies in European nations for ten years. In contrast, the American armies weren't any renowned strategists. Napoleon's army had resources far beyond that of the Americans (such as modern heavy cannon, mortars and howitzers).

I'll briefly consider also that England never had a force of over 40,000 regulars available in the american Theatre, yet they sacked Washington and prevailed.

Hence, even if Napoleon was forced to fight a war across the sea, like England, he would have prevailed with a victory.
brian_eggleston

Con

Greetings!

Here's my argument in support of tobacco rights:

Tobacco plants have rights, just like other plants, but sadly they are all too often ignored.

How would you like it if you were taken in the prime of your life, left out in the burning sun until you were almost completely dehydrated and then wrapped up in paper and set light to?

Those dirty, selfish smokers don't care – of course – but surely someone else should step in to protect these poor plants from the serial and widespread abuse they suffer on a wholesale basis?

Where is Royal Society for the Protection of Plants in their hour of need?

Oh, just a moment…PM from theLWerd…that's not what she meant apparently…

Okay, I'll try again.

They don't stop the obese from going into fast food restaurants and gorging themselves even though it might kill them so why ban smoking in pubs for the same reason?

It's pure prejudice and if the non-smoking bar staff object, they should find another job.

After all, a Jew or a Muslim wouldn't apply for a job in a bacon factory, would they?

It's the same principle.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by 1stLordofTheVenerability 7 years ago
1stLordofTheVenerability
Well, he first ruled it as intenable for defence. Hence, it was useless to Napoleon... just an extra avenue to have to send soldiers. He didn't need the money that desperately that if he waged war on the USA he would sell it to England. In fact, if he was fighting the US, it would become most strategical, rather than 'indefensible'. And the USA wouldn't cause such war costs as the coalitions of Europe did to him. :P One insignificant military rather than massive armies of all of the powers of the known world.
Posted by Marauder 7 years ago
Marauder
Not to mention the fact that Napolien starts out with all the lousian purchase and doesnt sell it too america.
Although as I understand it in real history he needed the cash from selling it to fund his war. He might of sold it britan for cash to fund a east cost assult to make up for that.
Posted by 1stLordofTheVenerability 7 years ago
1stLordofTheVenerability
Thanks... I was just warming up, too. *sighs morosely* I had lots to say about England's successes with a scant few men. Imagine one of the most innovative (for his time, and besides Brock and Wellington) commanders of all time with over 500,000 men at his back verse the rabble? O_o America is fortunate that France wasn't aggravated by them.

heh, but this was undoubtedly fun. I enjoyed it immensely.
Posted by brian_eggleston 7 years ago
brian_eggleston
I am amazed you managed to post such an eloquent reply in such a short time. I'm suitably impressed, no doubt the voters will be too!
Posted by 1stLordofTheVenerability 7 years ago
1stLordofTheVenerability
For sure we have to do it again, sometime. :D
Posted by 1stLordofTheVenerability 7 years ago
1stLordofTheVenerability
LOL tobacco plants have rights, too... ha ha ha ha, good show, Brian. Congradulations if you emerge victorious. :D This was fun.
Posted by brian_eggleston 7 years ago
brian_eggleston
And thanks for the topics, theLWerd!
Posted by brian_eggleston 7 years ago
brian_eggleston
Ha-ha! That was brilliant fun. Must try that again. Thanks The 1st Lord of the V!
Posted by 1stLordofTheVenerability 7 years ago
1stLordofTheVenerability
Thanks, Marauder! Thanks also for your help in setting this up. It'll be great fun. Thanks also to Lwerd for giving Brian his topics.

Good luck, Brian.
Posted by Marauder 7 years ago
Marauder
So that all know know Pro did not make those up I confirm hear in the comment section no cheating occured, these are the topics I gave him
1) Lay Ministers (aka local pasturs) should be requried to commit to the same amount of training and education as ordained pastures or have them removed from ministry if they dont.

2) If they were the only two canidates, Bobby Jindal would beat Tim Pawlenty in the GOP presidentail primaries for 2012.

3) Had Napoleon waged war against the US (leaving Britain alone) he would have won.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Marauder 7 years ago
Marauder
1stLordofTheVenerabilitybrian_egglestonTied
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