The Instigator
BornDebater
Pro (for)
Winning
33 Points
The Contender
revleader5
Con (against)
Losing
24 Points

Keeping Troops In Iraq

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: 12/22/2007 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,806 times Debate No: 814
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (19)

 

BornDebater

Pro

I firmly believe that the United States, among others should have a consistant presence in the Middle East.
revleader5

Con

I would need to know what you mean by presence. Like a war-like presence, or just an embassy or something. If you mean a war-like presence, I would love to see your positioning on why.

Are you a Bush supporter?
Debate Round No. 1
BornDebater

Pro

I was initially a Bush supporter, as most, untill the administration handled its foreign policy terribly wrong. I say presence as in a constant military presence. An embassy is necesary and is already established. Obviously without a constant military presence the Kurdish, Sunni's, and Shi'i will completely annihilate eachother. Democracy will fold, and only provide a negative influence for the rest of the countries.
revleader5

Con

It didn't prove negative on other countries until WE invaded. Iraq is just a farther away Cuba. It's been proven mutliple times that the religious terrorism groups had nothing to do with attacking us.
Debate Round No. 2
BornDebater

Pro

Although this may be true from a civilian standpoint, I would much rather control or have the opportunity to control the violence, as opposed to having a Dictator that was killing people in mass amounts. An unpredictable, ruthless, killer who just simply dominated the country. I gaurentee you, that if we kept troops in Iraq untill a stable and safe Democracy is present, which could be 5, 10, or 15 years in the making, and then left them when the time is right; the ratio between ammount of deaths there after and during would be dramaticly far less than if Suddam Hussein had continued his terror. Perhaps we invaded for the wrong reasons, perhaps the outcome of invading backfired, perhaps the U.S. has to take a step back and spend massive ammounts of money, and even life to preserve what we as American's have thought true since 1776 and our Founding Fathers' Patriotism. Truth be told, in order to spread peace, we have to give some to get some. Freedom isn't free and just think about the poor people in Iraq and the type of environment they have to live through, and think about what it could be if we continue to decrease the ammount of violence in Iraq. Don't just watch tv, research what they are saying, what they are doing. They're coming back! Violence is going down, the surge is successful. Now keeping a consistent presence in Iraq, whether it be 10,000 troops or 5,000 its not for me to determine. But I do know that it would solve a problem we created, and it would be the American thing to do, it would be the right thing to do. Politicaly and humanely. We need to set an example for Afganistan and Iran that we don't back down. That we finish business. That we will do what it takes to preserve freedom. We absolutely need Iraq to succeed, and in order to obtain this we must keep troops in Iraq. Thank you for reading, and I am positive that if you have any sense of what is right, be it politics, humanity, or morality, I believe you will realize that it is absolutely imperitive that we keep the troops in Iraq.
revleader5

Con

Democracy in Iraq will never stay because the people are just having it forced on them now. In America, democracy was decided as our political status by us, not another country 10000+ miles away which had nothing to do with us until they invaded. You cannot argue that democracy will instill itself in 5,10,20 years because 4 years ago you probably were saying it would take 5 years. Look where we are now! Coming up on 5 years and what have we done? Set up the terrorists to be even more pissed when we leave? After the 08 election, the troops would only be removed in Ron Paul was elected, so it'll probably stay the same.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by BornDebater 9 years ago
BornDebater
thank you das kapitel thats exactly what I was trying to illistrate in a nutshell.
Posted by das_kapitel 9 years ago
das_kapitel
Our present situation in Iraq cannot allow us to pull out. If we pulled out of Iraq now, the insurgent groups would only take over again. We need to wait until the Iraqi government can keep a stable and peaceful environment, from which the insurgent groups have been eliminated. Even after this environment is created, we should keep a military peacekeeping force in Iraq.
Posted by BornDebater 9 years ago
BornDebater
Okay revleader, the violence in Iraq is lower than it was since 2004. The answer is a small consistant presence. As i said that the people are coming back, we are gaining their trust. They voted for a president. We have made great advancements in 5 years. hey lets do this again some time. peace bro
Posted by Rousseau 9 years ago
Rousseau
Born Debater: I challenge you to a debate. Don't care on what, preferably something foreign (Africa would be nice).
19 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by SexyLatina 9 years ago
SexyLatina
BornDebaterrevleader5Tied
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 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 9 years ago
Tatarize
BornDebaterrevleader5Tied
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 Chob 9 years ago
Chob
BornDebaterrevleader5Tied
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 Duron 9 years ago
Duron
BornDebaterrevleader5Tied
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 
Vote Placed by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
BornDebaterrevleader5Tied
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 
Vote Placed by das_kapitel 9 years ago
das_kapitel
BornDebaterrevleader5Tied
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 
Vote Placed by NSG 9 years ago
NSG
BornDebaterrevleader5Tied
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 ccdem 9 years ago
ccdem
BornDebaterrevleader5Tied
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 thelistman 9 years ago
thelistman
BornDebaterrevleader5Tied
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 wheelhouse3 9 years ago
wheelhouse3
BornDebaterrevleader5Tied
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