The Instigator
potatolover
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
nerdykiller
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

Modern Warfare has become dangerous to the citizens of most countries.

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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/11/2011 Category: Health
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,098 times Debate No: 16440
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (3)

 

potatolover

Pro

This is a simple topic and should prove a fun debate to whom ever wants to continue with it.
I will post my argument in the second round when my challenger posts his thoughts in the first round.

Any examples will be given when needed and good luck.
nerdykiller

Con

Thank you for a good debate topic.
I wish my opponent well.

Definitions.
Modern Warfare- concepts, methods and technologies that have come into use during and after the Second World War and the Korean War
http://en.wikipedia.org...

Become- to come, change
http://dictionary.reference.com...

Dangerous- able or likely to cause physical injury
http://dictionary.reference.com...

Citizens- a native or naturalized member of a state or nation
http://dictionary.reference.com...

Most- in the majority of instances
http://dictionary.reference.com...

Countries- a geographical region
http://en.wikipedia.org...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I let my opponent take the floor.
I will begin my argument in round 2.
Debate Round No. 1
potatolover

Pro

I accept my opponents definitions and offer the following argument:

Firstly:
The World War II
My sources: http://en.wikipedia.org...

Ok lets start off with just the sheer number of death of civilians in this war alone. The number came to between 37 million and 55 million, to put that into perspective that is about 1/5 of the U.S. gone or dead. To put some numbers together, that was the most civilian deaths even for any war known to man up until then. The cause: modern weapons that have grown to catastrophic proportions. A few weapons that could be large factors in this, The atomic bomb was a large one, killing millions in a flash and many more later form the radiation.

The shock from this war was horrible as well, people could not get over it. It became the most devastating war ever no doubt about it.

Ok lets look back to prove my point further.
World War I.
Not near as many casualties as World War II, but a huge factor came into that.
First:
The weapons of that war where crude and unfinished to their true potential. After World War I people felt the need to further their weapons to much better then they where.
The effect:
Better weapons
More deaths military and civilian

This proves my point in today's debate.
Any questions and concerns are welcome
I urn this over to the Con and wish them well.
nerdykiller

Con

There is 5 rounds in this debate so can we take this round as a break.
I am sorry that I can't write my arugment.
I am writing this on my friends phone.
I am sorry and hope I can deliver a good argument next round.
Debate Round No. 2
potatolover

Pro

I await my opponents argument when he is ready.
nerdykiller

Con

Thank you for being so kind to wait for my arguments.

Rebuttal
"Ok lets start off with just the sheer number of death of civilians in this war alone. The number came to between 37 million and 55 million, to put that into perspective that is about 1/5 of the U.S. gone or dead. To put some numbers together, that was the most civilian deaths even for any war known to man up until then."
- Using your same resources the causes of civilian death were from disease, famine, war crime, and holocaust victims.
The resource you gave says one of the causes was strategic bombing which I believe is referring to the atomic bombs dropped in Japan. Even though that is one of the reasons I believed more civilians died by the holocaust which isn't a modern warfare technique. Both of the atomic bombings took an estimate of 150,000 - 246,000, while the holocaust took estimate of 5,933,900. The death caused by modern warfare took only a 4.1% of the total number of death that was caused by the holocaust.

http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...

"The cause: modern weapons that have grown to catastrophic proportions. A few weapons that could be large factors in this, The atomic bomb was a large one, killing millions in a flash and many more later form the radiation."
- I do agree the atomic bomb is a devastating weapon, but fire ovens a terrible type of primitive weapon used to burn many civilians. Holocaust is a great example because many people died of these horrible fire ovens that burnt millions of Jews during the war.

"Ok lets look back to prove my point further.
World War I.
Not near as many casualties as World War II, but a huge factor came into that.
First:
The weapons of that war where crude and unfinished to their true potential. After World War I people felt the need to further their weapons to much better then they where.
The effect:
Better weapons
More deaths military and civilian"
- World War I didn't have to many death because they was almost no fight in the east, but in World War II Empire of Japan conquered most of Asia and many soldiers of Japan died with other Asian soldiers. Of course the second World War had the better weapon, but I don't believe that caused majority of civilians to die.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Arguments

-If you believe modern warfare causes more death then what about the Korean War?
The death of soldiers were somewhere between 1,965,735 - 2,323,875
Civilian death was somewhere 2.5 million.
Both death were almost same. There was improve meant in modern warfare, then where was the increase of civilian death than World War II.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

-Now take a look at the Vietnam war.
http://en.wikipedia.org...
There was more soldier death than civilians death even though there was improvements in the weaponry.

I have made my point and I hope Pro will give his argument accordingly.
Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
potatolover

Pro

potatolover forfeited this round.
nerdykiller

Con

I shall await my opponents argument when he is ready to write.
He did this for me so I will do the same for him.
Debate Round No. 4
potatolover

Pro

potatolover forfeited this round.
nerdykiller

Con

The Pro has not rebuttaled my debate.
My argument stands.

vote CON!!
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by nerdykiller 5 years ago
nerdykiller
Its okay..
I hope to debate you again soon...
:P
Posted by potatolover 5 years ago
potatolover
Sorry I had a lot of stuff going on this Summer and I'm not able to reply to any of my debates. I hope in the future we are able to debate again without these interruptions.
Posted by nerdykiller 6 years ago
nerdykiller
thanks man...
Posted by potatolover 6 years ago
potatolover
Whenever you are ready to give an argument I'm willing to hear. You can take your time.
Posted by nerdykiller 6 years ago
nerdykiller
There might be a chance I might not post my argument...
My computer is acting up.
I need to fix it...
And I have California Standard Test thing.....
If I don't post my argument then sorry....
Posted by potatolover 6 years ago
potatolover
This is about actual real life modern warfare, the game not so much.
Posted by Apollodoros 6 years ago
Apollodoros
serious question, is this debate about the game, or literal modern warfare?
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
potatolovernerdykillerTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by quarterexchange 5 years ago
quarterexchange
potatolovernerdykillerTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: forfeit
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 5 years ago
Ore_Ele
potatolovernerdykillerTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited and so did not refute any arguments.