The Instigator
besthbk
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
utahjoker
Pro (for)
Winning
13 Points

Resolved: Current U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East undermines our national security.

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
utahjoker
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/16/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 783 times Debate No: 27297
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (3)

 

besthbk

Con

Today, my partner and I stand in strong negation of this debate"s resolution: The current US foreign policy in the Middle East undermines foreign policy. We negate this resolution for three main reasons 1- sanctions have pressured Iran to stop nuclear production 2- our foreign policy reaches out to Israel 3- US support of Arab Spring movements helped to reduce Al Qaeda"s recruiting appeal. Before I begin I would like to define national security by Merriam-Webster"s Dictionary as a collective term, "for the defense and foreign relations of one country."
Sanctions are tools used by countries or international organizations to persuade a particular government or group of governments to change their policy by restricting trade, investment or other commercial activity. The nuclear threat in Iran has escalated to high levels. Iran has made steadily made progress in developing high power nuclear missiles. The country has repeatedly insisted that it has nuclear capabilities, and are capable of attacking the United States. But in recent talks, President Obama was nearly able to curb Tehran"s nuclear ambitions, a major issue going on for about a decade. R. Nicholas Burns, who led negotiations with Iran as undersecretary of state in the George W. Bush administration stated that Iran"s nuclear program "is the most difficult national security issue facing the United States. Sanctions have led to Iran"s currency to plummet by 40%. In May 2012, President Obama signed into law the "Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012" which strengthened sanctions against Iran"s energy sector by increasing the number of sanctions the Administration is required to impose from three to five. The law also imposes sanctions against foreign companies who conduct business in Iran"s energy sector and any company that insures, sells, or leases oil tankers to Iran. This action has led to higher insurance costs for Iranian tankers and has resulted in major insurance companies refusing to insure Iranian ships.
The Obama administration has increased security assistance to Israel every single year since the president took office, providing nearly $10 billion in aid -- covering roughly a fifth of Israel's defense budget -- over the past three years. To put this in perspective, this is about 20 percent higher than the remaining six dozen recipients of U.S. FMF (Foreugn Military Financing) combined. Historic aid levels have been complemented by other steps to ensure Israel's unrivaled military advantage in the region, including high-level consultation with Israeli officials on U.S. arms sales to the region, operational cooperation to improve Israel's conventional military and counterterrorism capabilities, and providing Israel with advanced technology.Under Obama's direction, the United States has also deepened defense cooperation aimed at helping Israel address its most pressing security concerns, including rocket and missile threats emanating from the Gaza Strip, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran. When then-Senator Obama traveled to Israel in 2008, it wasn't for a political fundraiser. Instead, he visited Israeli victims of Palestinian rocket fire in the southern town of Sderot, declaring "I came to Sderot with a commitment to Israel's security." These were not just words. As president, Obama has championed efforts to provide Israel with $275 million over and above its annual FMF to help finance Iron Dome, an anti-rocket system that has already saved Israeli lives by intercepting approximately 90 percent of projectiles launched against protected areas in the country's south in the past year.
This assistance is part of a comprehensive package that underwrites Israel's multitiered rocket and missile defense. The package includes U.S. aid for the development of the David's Sling long-range rocket defense system and the Arrow ballistic missile defense (BMD) systems. It also involves maintaining an advanced U.S. X-band long-range radar system in Israel's Negev desert, positioning U.S. Aegis BMD ships in the eastern Mediterranean, and conducting the largest joint military exercises in history to improve U.S.-Israel missile defense cooperation.
Before the takedown of bin Laden, the Arab revolutions had already cast serious doubt on alQaeda"s self-declared role as the engine of rebirth in the Muslim world. In the Arab Awakening narrative that was fast emerging, the largely secular and democratic character of those revolutions had repudiated al-Qaeda"s narrative of religious upheaval in which the word of God, not man, was paramount. Thus, al-Qaeda had taken a major political hit. Furthermore, when secular dictators such as Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak succumbed to substantially nonviolent pressure from youthful protesters, the convenient "apostate" targets of al-Qaeda rhetoric became fewer, the purported necessity of violence was refuted and the organisation"s portrayal of Muslim youth as its army fell flat. Moreover, the fact that the protesters could carry forward their revolutions without attacking the United States " al-Qaeda"s celebrated "far enemy" " and the eventual political support that Washington extended to the movements, made al-Qaeda"s demonisation of America ring hollow. All of these factors reduced al-Qaeda"s political appeal and recruiting power.
utahjoker

Pro

. The three points I will be discussing. My three points are fist history has proven it undermines our national security; America is in more danger there, and lastly doing more harm than good.

First point is that history has proven that when the United States is occupying and putting sanctions on Middle Eastern Countries like Iraq. On December 16, 1998 Bill Clinton launched a four day bombing campaign against Iraq who was already blockaded and starving. Hundreds of civilians where killed in the campaign. This and already having put sanctions and occupying Iraq for more than eight years lead to over half a million children dying or already dead because of bombings and the lack of medicine and food because of the sanctions the United States put on the country. How this all relates to national security let us jump to the date of September 11, 2001 where four planes where hijacked and flown into the world trade centers and the pentagon. This lead to the deaths of 2, 996 innocent Americans. How does this relate to what happened in the 90"s with Iraq well in October 2001 only a month after the 9/11 attack a video of Osama Bin Ladin Being asked about why he was a part of the 9/11 attacks That he was angered with how many of his people died because of America"s sanctions. That why are they being attacked from the world when America committed a similar crime.
Unconstitutional act of war that America showed to the people of Iraq and Middle East.

My second point is that the United States is in more danger there than anywhere else. The biggest threat to Americas national security is not any military the Middle East has it is the rogue groups of terrorist would be America"s most feared opposition. The last time America was attacked by an actually military from a nation was 60 years ago in Pearl Harbor by the country of japan. Terrorism can"t be stopped is can only be prevented by having a strong defense and being in a country instead of being in America to defend our country. Terrorism is not a place, person, or thing it is an action an idea a military tactic. Terrorism can"t couple of bullets.

My last point is that United States is doing more harm than good. In the ten year war of have died, and for the United States army around 5,000 have died. The bandage the U.S government tried to give its people by going and fighting against these terrorist groups in the Middle East has led to another 5,000 deaths that is 2,000 more than 9/11 and 8,000 total and growing. Iraq and Afghanistan 132,000 civilians have died I thought the government was trying to bring peace and democracy to the Middle Eastern people how they can enjoy freedom when they are decaying the streets.

In conclusion America needs to come back home it is time to protect our freedom and give the best national security by not being involved in the Middle East.

Just to let the voters know most likely this will be one of the last rounds I can do on this debate because I found out that it is only 3 hours between arguments and some of use have lives.

Sources

http://antiwar.com...
http://www.nytimes.com...
http://dictionary.reference.com...
Debate Round No. 1
besthbk

Con

besthbk forfeited this round.
utahjoker

Pro

utahjoker forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
besthbk

Con

besthbk forfeited this round.
utahjoker

Pro

with my opponent forfeiting two times I have little to go with, but I will say why not send our troops home and leave the Iraq people in peace for one in the last 25 years. It is time for America to take the stand of peace instead of sinking down to level of our enemies and sometimes even lower. The United States national security is in trouble, but having troops here keeping us save is much better than killing innocents.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Spartan136 4 years ago
Spartan136
lol this is the new pf topic
Posted by AlextheYounga 4 years ago
AlextheYounga
I totally agree with this.
Posted by truthseeker613 4 years ago
truthseeker613
Too much in 1st round scares people off.

On the other hand, maybe that's a good thing as it gives you more exposure.
Posted by TheElderScroll 4 years ago
TheElderScroll
I tend to believe that the topic is too broad. There are too many countries in the Middle East. Many are allies whereas many are enemies.
Posted by Zaradi 4 years ago
Zaradi
This topic is the new "We should suspsend all assistance to pakistan" topic.

I NEED A TROLL ARGUMENT.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by RyuuKyuzo 4 years ago
RyuuKyuzo
besthbkutahjokerTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: plagarism + FF = full victory for pro
Vote Placed by Ron-Paul 4 years ago
Ron-Paul
besthbkutahjokerTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con plagarized, then forfeited twice.
Vote Placed by emj32 4 years ago
emj32
besthbkutahjokerTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit