Resolved: North Korea poses a more serious threat to United States national security than Iran.
Debate Rounds (4)
I'd like to introduce myself as Feng, highschool debater.
This resolution is being featured currently for Public Forum debates and I'd like to do some practice here.
I'll be responsible for arguing the affirmative of the resolution.
I'll be responsible for arguing the negation side of the resolution.
I stand as the affirmative today on the resolution: North Korea poses a more serious threat to the United States national security than Iran.
First, I'd like to go over definitions provided within the resolution.
-North Korea, I am defining as a "communist one-man dictatorship" that controls the nation of North Korea (CIA World Factbook)
-Threat, I am defining as "a thing likely to cause damage or danger" (Oxford Dictionary)
-United States national security, I am defining as a collective term that besets on both national defense and advantageous foreign relations for the protection and survival of the United States of America.
-Iran, I am defining as a "theocratic government" that controls the nation of Iran (CIA World Factbook)
The weighing mechanism I'd like to provide for this round is net benefits.
The two contentions I'd like to provide for our stance on the resolution are…
1. North Korea's One-Man Dictatorship and Succession
2. North Korea is causing an arms race with U.S. Ally, South Korea
In our first contention, I'd like to reason why North Korea's governing "One-Man Dictatorship" gives its nation a greater chance of threatening U.S. national security than Iran. I'll also be logically explaining why the weight of North Korea's succession of leadership would contribute to this chance.
Although the North Korean government labels itself as a socialist republic, the CIA considers it as a totalitarian state because its leader, Kim Jong-il, has total power upon all political decision. Because there is no law or check-and-balance system for Kim Jong-il to follow (something that Iran has), a drastic decision that would threaten our national security could be possible without his self acknowledging precautions. But as an ailing leader who's lived for over 70 years, he has enough knowledge to reason with risks before making decision. The transfer of power from Kim Jong-il to son, Kim Jong-un, will be problematic because the son could then make an extreme decision that could affect U.S. national security. Therefore the succession of North Korean leadership will amplify the chances of the nation's threat towards our national security.
The North Korean government has a greater chance of launching a nuclear strike on the U.S. than Iran, because unlike Iran - the North Korean leader has a greater chance of ignoring the risk of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD).
In my second contention, I'd like to explain how North Korea is causing an arms race with South Korea and how it is relevant to U.S. national security.
At the moment, South Korea is the 12th largest economy in the world and a vital trade partner with the United States. Currently, North Korea has the fourth largest active army in the world according to statistics provided by the International Institute for Strategic Studies. The constant fear of the communist North attacking the capitalist South has forced the Southern government to build up its own army to become the 6th largest active in the world. According to an evidence-based conjecture created by NYTimes writer, David Frum, South Korea, Taiwan, and Japan have prepared themselves to be fully capable of making nuclear weapons. Therefore North Korea will not only create deadly conflict between South Korea, which will cause major loses in trade funds for U.S. national defense - but also have the U.S. risk losing 3 valuable allies in East Asia, causing disruption the U.S. National Security.
These two contentions prove that North Korea is an astronomically higher threat to U.S. National Security than Iran. The high chance of North Korea disrupting American National Security is why the affirmative should win this case.
Feng forfeited this round.
Rinexe forfeited this round.
Feng forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: Con attempted a concession in the final round, but at least he cared enough to be there.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.