The Instigator
TheMan2
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
BlackVoid
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

Resolved Drone Warfare is effective at completing military goals.

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
BlackVoid
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/16/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,726 times Debate No: 24308
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (10)
Votes (2)

 

TheMan2

Pro

Before we start I would like to define Drone warfare as: a pilot less air or ground vehicle equipped for military purposes being for either offensive, defensive or recon uses. Assuming that this definition is acceptable I would like my opponent whom ever that ends up being to ask any kind of questions, post comments about the topic as well as address my definition.

I would like to ask however that you dont begin your real argument until the second round. Just talk about the definition as well as any other thoughts you may have.

Thank you very much for accepting the topic and good luck to you.
BlackVoid

Con

Thanks to TheMan for the interesting debate.

Pro never responded to my query in the comments section, so I ask him to do so in his R2. Essentially, we can keep the resolution as-is, or adjust it to the pros and cons of Drone Warfare in general, and not just about whether they complete military goals. This is a better discussion imo, but its my opponent's choice.

If Pro keeps the resolution as it is, I define Military Goal as the "desired end-state of a war or campaign" (1). Its a broad definition, but better than nothing.

I accept my opponent's definition of Drone Warfare, namely that it includes offensive or defensive uses. However, given that the term is Drone Warfare, the majority of the debate should be about their offensive use.


I look forward to Pro's next round.



1. http://tinyurl.com...
Debate Round No. 1
TheMan2

Pro

TheMan2 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
TheMan2

Pro

Im very sorry, but somthing has come up and i wont be able to do this debate.
Debate Round No. 3
TheMan2

Pro

TheMan2 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by socialpinko 4 years ago
socialpinko
The previous resolution said it was morally permissible.
Posted by BlackVoid 4 years ago
BlackVoid
I ask because it appears it was more broad, like "drone warfare is moral" or something, which I would still be fine with and wouldn't argue anything about objective morality. The issue I have with the current wording is that it kind of circumvents a lot of disadvantages of drones. For example, if our "military goal" was to kill X terrorist leader, we could theoretically nuke the entire country to do it. It would complete the military goal (affirm the resolution) but would undeniably be wrong.

Basically, I'd request the wording to be "Drone warfare provides more benefits than drawbacks" or something like that. I would note the change in my R1. But if you really want to keep the current resolution, I can do that too. Just a request.
Posted by BlackVoid 4 years ago
BlackVoid
Just curious, what was the resolution before?
Posted by TheMan2 4 years ago
TheMan2
The new resolution should negate any kind of debate about objective morality.
Posted by THEBOMB 4 years ago
THEBOMB
that is if you don't want a metaphysical debate.
Posted by THEBOMB 4 years ago
THEBOMB
You're still presupposing an objective morality. You may want to take out the word "morally" and just leave it at militarily.
Posted by TheMan2 4 years ago
TheMan2
Well I would say the defining factor behind "morality" would be easy to define. Just look to the Geneva conventions ruling as a guideline. As in people dying and suffering is morally bad, while improving quality of life is morally good.

I dont want a metaphysical morality debate. More of a Pro/Con of are drones good.
Posted by THEBOMB 4 years ago
THEBOMB
*hint* someone is going to argue there is no objective morality defeating the resolution because you cannot argue something is "right" if there is no standard of right and wrong.
Posted by TheMan2 4 years ago
TheMan2
Yeah your right about the old LD topic. Never was a fan of LD, I was a congress debater. Honestly however would rather not have the entirety of the argument be about simply the morality of drones but partly about the logistics of use militarily as well but phrase your argument however you would like.
Posted by TheOrator 4 years ago
TheOrator
This looks like a spinoff of a recent LD argument. I'd take it, but I'm not sure how to go about doing it. I know a good philosopher for the occasion that links both moral and military permissibility, though. Let me think about it.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by socialpinko 4 years ago
socialpinko
TheMan2BlackVoidTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Y U no debate?
Vote Placed by Maikuru 4 years ago
Maikuru
TheMan2BlackVoidTied
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 Checkmark-1 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: Full forfeit by Pro