The Instigator
TheSkeptic
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
vorxxox
Con (against)
Winning
28 Points

In a total war excluding WMD's, the USA can defeat any other country.

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  
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: 12/24/2008 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 861 times Debate No: 6332
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (4)

 

TheSkeptic

Pro

[Definition - Total War]
1. Total war is a conflict of unlimited scope in which a belligerent engages in a total mobilization of all available resources at their disposal, whether human, industrial, agricultural, military, natural, technological, or otherwise, in order to entirely destroy or render beyond use their rival's capacity to continue resistance.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

Basically, a total war is when a country/nation/etc. devotes the entiriety of it's resources at hand (ranging from military to economic) to destroy it's opponent.

[Definition - WMD]
1. A weapon of mass destruction (WMD) is a weapon that can kill large numbers of humans and/or cause great damage to man-made structures (e.g. buildings), natural structures (e.g. mountains), or the biosphere in general.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

While the definition is vague, a simple search can distinguish some weapons. Biological weapons, nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, and even radiological weapons. According to the resolution of this topic, WMD's are NOT involved in this debate.

=====Arguments=====

My position and argument is simple and brief. In a total war, excluding WMD's, the United States of America can defeat any other country existing today. My argument is that the United State's combined military power surpasses any other country today.

Remember - it's USA vs. 1 (any) country. NO WMD's are allowed. It's a total war. Saying that a country can have allies help would violate the rule that it's USA vs. 1 (any) country. With these rules and definitions set in place, I await my future opponent.
vorxxox

Con

Hello to my opponent.

I negate the resolution that In a total war excluding WMD's, the USA can defeat any other country.

I declare that the affirmative holds the burden of proof.

In fact, WMD would be the only way we could beat any other country in a total war. A country like China twice the amount of people in their army compared to ours would bloww the 'F out of our forces.

Vote con
Debate Round No. 1
TheSkeptic

Pro

TheSkeptic forfeited this round.
vorxxox

Con

vorxxox forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
TheSkeptic

Pro

TheSkeptic forfeited this round.
vorxxox

Con

well, this was a failed debate. Everyone please ignore it
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
My sincerest apologies for forfeiting my last 2 rounds. I started this debate during my trip (in Japan), and I had written my entire argument already. However, upon reaching Taiwan (another part of my trip), Debate.org banned me from connecting because they apparently considered Taiwan to be a "high-risk area".
Posted by jjmd280 8 years ago
jjmd280
I agree.
Posted by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
This should be an interesting debate.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by DictatorIsaac 7 years ago
DictatorIsaac
TheSkepticvorxxoxTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 8 years ago
rougeagent21
TheSkepticvorxxoxTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by DiablosChaosBroker 8 years ago
DiablosChaosBroker
TheSkepticvorxxoxTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by vorxxox 8 years ago
vorxxox
TheSkepticvorxxoxTied
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:07