The Instigator
Miserlou
Pro (for)
Winning
19 Points
The Contender
Xelos
Con (against)
Losing
14 Points

Ninjas are Better than Pirates

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
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: 1/11/2008 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,739 times Debate No: 1686
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (3)
Votes (9)

 

Miserlou

Pro

This debate is for fun, obviously, but I warn you I will argue it seriously.

I argue that ninjas are better than pirates in the following ways:

Ninjas are more skilled than pirates
-They undergo intensive training to master ninjitsu in order to be successful assassins. Ninjitsu is an umbrella term to describe espionage skills, which range from spying and disguise, to poison, explosives, and other stealthy ways to kill. Ninjas followed the same basic lesson plans as samurai, albeit taking a different route. Whole schools are devoted to the teaching of this art, as it is no easy task.

Ninjas are more moral than pirates
-Although some were assassins for hire, a good number of ninjas were loyal to particular nobleman or clan, or a political cause, and familial groups of ninjas usually protected the village where they lived from from robbers or others. Pirates on the other hand, were rarely loyal to anyone themselves and killed indiscriminately except when fear for impracticality made it illogical.

A ninja could kill a pirate before a pirate could kill a ninja.
-Pirates were rarely trained at combat (at least formally) and used to direct confrontation, where as ninjas are used to sneaking, and would be able to take a pirate when he least expected it. They are assassins; they're trained to kill.
Xelos

Con

"This debate is for fun, obviously, but I warn you I will argue it seriously."
As will I, and i will assume we are talking about ancient ninjas and colonial pirates (and privateers) of 1300-~1900s.

"Ninjas are more skilled than pirates
-They undergo intensive training to master ninjitsu in order to be successful assassins. Ninjitsu is an umbrella term to describe espionage skills, which range from spying and disguise, to poison, explosives, and other stealthy ways to kill. Ninjas followed the same basic lesson plans as samurai, albeit taking a different route. Whole schools are devoted to the teaching of this art, as it is no easy task."

1. Disagree, First what skill may be to a ninja may not be useful to a pirate on a ship, and vice versa. Espionage skills are completely useless in the pirate setting on the high seas. The skill of a pirate is really indeterminable until you face one. That pirate could of been a former military officer and a trained fencer. What seems what you are doing is pitting a Master Ninja versus some slob out of a bar, which seems unfair.

"Ninjas are more moral than pirates
-Although some were assassins for hire, a good number of ninjas were loyal to particular nobleman or clan, or a political cause, and familial groups of ninjas usually protected the village where they lived from from robbers or others. Pirates on the other hand, were rarely loyal to anyone themselves and killed indiscriminately except when fear for impracticality made it illogical."

2. Using the same method as you there was a number of bar brawling,brain damaged pirates (due to heavy alcohol use probably) but there was professional pirates. These also called privateers, they worked for not a mere clan or nobleman but they worked for empires of England, France, Spain and others through letters of Marque. Sir Francis Drake for Elizabeth I. Yet, I dont understand how being moral makes ninjas better than pirates.

"A ninja could kill a pirate before a pirate could kill a ninja.
-Pirates were rarely trained at combat (at least formally) and used to direct confrontation, where as ninjas are used to sneaking, and would be able to take a pirate when he least expected it. They are assassins; they're trained to kill."

3. Major disagreement here, Ninjas may beable to sneak around but sneaking aboard a ship is extremely hard. I find it difficult to believe an asian man/female fitting in with a group of pirates so disguise is somewhat out of the question. So how about the night strike at port? Well this is probably the only chance the ninja has got a chance and a little one at that because the pirate I would use someone like Robert Morris (millionaire American privateer/pirate) his crew would be well paid (and loyal) and well armed and skilled. Throwing ninja stars is great but they are quite hard to kill with and very inaccurate; daggers may be the only hope for ranged other than arrows. For throwing daggers or stars a blunderbuss and pistols would easily match them. For bows we have rifles as the equal and little skill needed to operate. Remember also Pirates are trained to kill to and receive lots of hands on training. As for hand to hand/ sword combat many pirates were skilled fencers/swordsman, they would be matches for even the best samurai which were considered much better in sword combat than ninjas.

I don't consider ninjas better than pirates but i also don't consider pirates better than ninjas they have their pros and cons for certain situations.
Debate Round No. 1
Miserlou

Pro

"As will I, and i will assume we are talking about ancient ninjas and colonial pirates (and privateers) of 1300-~1900s."

Yep

"1. Disagree, First what skill may be to a ninja may not be useful to a pirate on a ship, and vice versa. Espionage skills are completely useless in the pirate setting on the high seas. The skill of a pirate is really indeterminable until you face one. That pirate could of been a former military officer and a trained fencer. What seems what you are doing is pitting a Master Ninja versus some slob out of a bar, which seems unfair."

Some pirates are trained and some aren't, but ALL ninjas are trained. True, they're trained to do different things, but all ninjas will be skilled in what they do, except maybe a few exceptions who would be dead pretty quick. A man with no skill or training besides natural strength can be a pirate. The majority of pirates were just thugs who were stronger and more violent then everyone else. Even if some of them were skilled, I'll say again that all ninjas were skilled.

"Yet, I dont understand how being moral makes ninjas better than pirates."

It makes them better in the same way any of these points do; they're just ways society sometimes measures what's better- in this case morality.

"2. Using the same method as you there was a number of bar brawling,brain damaged pirates (due to heavy alcohol use probably) but there was professional pirates. These also called privateers, they worked for not a mere clan or nobleman but they worked for empires of England, France, Spain and others through letters of Marque. Sir Francis Drake for Elizabeth I."

True. However, as a collective group I would still argue that ninjas were more moral than pirates. Pirates who were not privateers would cause a lot of useless destruction; they would ravage ports and towns sometimes; killing, stealing, and raping. There were very few ships where prisoners were treated kindly, if they took prisoners at all instead of just killing them. Ninjas on the other hand would only hurt their intended target; any collateral damage was purely collateral and not the result of a desire to kill and pillage further. Of course there are exceptions and special cases on both sides, but this was the general rule, so as a group ninjas were more ethical than pirates.

"3.Major disagreement here, Ninjas may beable to sneak around but sneaking aboard a ship is extremely hard."

They wouldn't necessarily have to be aboard the ship to kill them

"So how about the night strike at port? Well this is probably the only chance the ninja has got a chance and a little one at that because the pirate I would use someone like Robert Morris (millionaire American privateer/pirate) his crew would be well paid (and loyal) and well armed and skilled."

A samurai or daimyo isn't just as hard? They are noblemen who are not only skilled in their own right, but also have very loyal followers, and perhaps even their own army, all of whom could certainly match a pirate crew at the very least. These are the people ninjas are trained to kill; taking out a pirate captain at port wouldn't be much different than anything else.

"Throwing ninja stars is great but they are quite hard to kill with and very inaccurate; daggers may be the only hope for ranged other than arrows. For throwing daggers or stars a blunderbuss and pistols would easily match them. For bows we have rifles as the equal and little skill needed to operate. Remember also Pirates are trained to kill to and receive lots of hands on training. As for hand to hand/ sword combat many pirates were skilled fencers/swordsman, they would be matches for even the best samurai which were considered much better in sword combat than ninjas."

Two points to address here:

A) Stars and daggers aren't the only weapons ninjas use. They are trained to use poisons, or even explosives (primitive as those explosives would be...). Being assassins they know a million ways to kill, since throwing a dagger or shooting an arrow isn't always the best way to go about it. And even if the pirate is of the same skill as a samurai, I'll say again that ninjas are trained to assassinate samurai (among others), it's nothing that's above what they normally do.

B) You seem to be imagining a ninja rushing in and shouting "I'm going to kill you!" A pistol is a good weapon, but a ninja plans to already have killed, incapacitated, or left their victim before he or she has time to draw a gun. And if a ninja was ever confronted, they would most likely escape before an actual fight could commence, and then go back and finish the job the later. It's sneaky, but it's not cheap; neither the pirate nor the ninja probably has a good reason for killing the other and so the assassin method isn't a low blow; it's just a method.

My point isn't that a pirate couldn't kill a ninja, only that a ninja would have an easier time killing a pirate then vice-versa.

Ninjas are more skilled than pirates, they are more moral than pirates, and they could kill a pirate easily; therefore they are better.
Xelos

Con

"Some pirates are trained and some aren't, but ALL ninjas are trained. True, they're trained to do different things, but all ninjas will be skilled in what they do, except maybe a few exceptions who would be dead pretty quick. A man with no skill or training besides natural strength can be a pirate. The majority of pirates were just thugs who were stronger and more violent then everyone else. Even if some of them were skilled, I'll say again that all ninjas were skilled"

-First, training does not make someone automatically better better equipment can offset training. Ie: Swords versus Firearms. Since you say any man can be a pirate because they have to have strength this would discount some of the most successful pirates who weren't necessarily physically strong (female pirates) but very intelligent.
By your argument since any person can become a pirate with enough strength than any person can be a ninja with training.

"It makes them better in the same way any of these points do; they're just ways society sometimes measures what's better- in this case morality."

-The morality of a killer is not something thats valued, to contemplate morality can lead to fatality.

"True. However, as a collective group I would still argue that ninjas were more moral than pirates. Pirates who were not privateers would cause a lot of useless destruction; they would ravage ports and towns sometimes; killing, stealing, and raping. There were very few ships where prisoners were treated kindly, if they took prisoners at all instead of just killing them. Ninjas on the other hand would only hurt their intended target; any collateral damage was purely collateral and not the result of a desire to kill and pillage further. Of course there are exceptions and special cases on both sides, but this was the general rule, so as a group ninjas were more ethical than pirates."

-Useless destruction to one may be useful destruction to another, ravaging ports and stealing were ways for the pirates to make money; and for privateers to beat down the other empires trade. The morality argument is quite weak. I want a moral police department I don't want a moral assassin or pirate.

"A samurai or daimyo isn't just as hard? They are noblemen who are not only skilled in their own right, but also have very loyal followers, and perhaps even their own army, all of whom could certainly match a pirate crew at the very least. These are the people ninjas are trained to kill; taking out a pirate captain at port wouldn't be much different than anything else."

I agree with you but this doesn't make a ninja better than pirates.

"Two points to address here:

A) Stars and daggers aren't the only weapons ninjas use. They are trained to use poisons, or even explosives (primitive as those explosives would be...). Being assassins they know a million ways to kill, since throwing a dagger or shooting an arrow isn't always the best way to go about it. And even if the pirate is of the same skill as a samurai, I'll say again that ninjas are trained to assassinate samurai (among others), it's nothing that's above what they normally do.

B) You seem to be imagining a ninja rushing in and shouting "I'm going to kill you!" A pistol is a good weapon, but a ninja plans to already have killed, incapacitated, or left their victim before he or she has time to draw a gun. And if a ninja was ever confronted, they would most likely escape before an actual fight could commence, and then go back and finish the job the later. It's sneaky, but it's not cheap; neither the pirate nor the ninja probably has a good reason for killing the other and so the assassin method isn't a low blow; it's just a method."

-A) First using poison requires real no special training except for making it. Secondly because ninjas are trained to kill samurai doesn't correlate to being able to kill pirates or being better in any respect.

-B) A Japanese ninja fitting in with pirates inorder to even get close would be quite difficult. No matter what method a ninja uses it doesn't make them better, just different.

"My point isn't that a pirate couldn't kill a ninja, only that a ninja would have an easier time killing a pirate then vice-versa.

Ninjas are more skilled than pirates, they are more moral than pirates, and they could kill a pirate easily; therefore they are better."

-Final response is that a pirate would have just as much trouble killing a ninja as a ninja would killing a pirate.

As i believe the burden of proof is on you to prove that ninjas are better than pirates you have failed because ninjas in general may be skilled but pirates have experience, morality has no implication therefore they are merely different creatures.
Debate Round No. 2
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by KIRA_OKASHI 9 years ago
KIRA_OKASHI
okay i have to say one thing about pirates . . . . .they truthfuly were usualay deserters of military so where is the honor in that and when it comes to firearms they used flintlock pistols which only have accuracy up to 50 feet
Posted by lazarus_long 9 years ago
lazarus_long
Pirates, however, are the Flying Spaghetti Monster's chosen people (well, OK, pirates AND midgets), and therefore are first among all peoples. Has He touched YOU with His Noodly Appendage yet?
Posted by Pluto2493 9 years ago
Pluto2493
hmmmm pirates are better than ninjas
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by Pyromaniac 7 years ago
Pyromaniac
MiserlouXelosTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by tmhustler 7 years ago
tmhustler
MiserlouXelosTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by dura_to_the_max 8 years ago
dura_to_the_max
MiserlouXelosTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by geekypirategirl 9 years ago
geekypirategirl
MiserlouXelosTied
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 Xelos 9 years ago
Xelos
MiserlouXelosTied
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 superninja 9 years ago
superninja
MiserlouXelosTied
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 Miserlou 9 years ago
Miserlou
MiserlouXelosTied
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 Cindela 9 years ago
Cindela
MiserlouXelosTied
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 wingo101 9 years ago
wingo101
MiserlouXelosTied
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