The Instigator
Addison_Barton
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
joshuaXlawyer
Pro (for)
Winning
21 Points

Resolved: North Korea poses a much greater threat to United States National Security than Iran

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
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: 2/18/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 10,379 times Debate No: 14836
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (15)
Votes (4)

 

Addison_Barton

Con

For the purpose of this debate, I would like to define the following terms used in the resolution:

Threat: A prevalent force imposing harm or danger

National Security: The defense and foreign relations of a country, including protection of its interests (dictionary.com)

Contention 1: Iran has dangerously poor government policies

When comparing the governments of North Korea and Iran, it becomes irrefutably apparent that the Iranian government is a much greater threat than that of North Korea.
A big issue in the Middle East right now is political corruption. Well Iran is no exception to this ongoing threat.
In fact last year, president of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai admitted to accepting under-the-table bribes from Iran. Karzai said that once or twice a year, he would receive a payment of up to $975,000. Iran's incentives for this bribery were to sideline NATO involvement in the Middle East (New York Times). Furthermore, Karzai's chief of staff was also caught excepting more than a million dollars worth of euros once more, from the government of Iran. Further investigation reveals that this bribe was to be distributed as payments to multiple insurgent groups including the Taliban! (guardian.co.uk) However I will touch on this further in my next contention.
Iran is responsible for bribes such as these and it is prudent that we recognize the threats they pose to the United States. It is in the national interests of the United States to end the war on terror, and as long as Iran continues to support the Taliban, they are threatening this cause. In addition, I reiterate that investigations done on these bribes conclude that the payments made by Iran were incentives to weaken NATO involvement in the Middle East. (guardian.co.uk)
It is not only in the interest of the security of our troops, but the overall endeavors of the United States to make political reform in the Middle East as smooth as possible. However it is the political policies of Iran that is degrading to such aspirations of the United States.
Yet another threat that Iran's politics pose to the U.S is their nuclear program.
According to globalsecurity.org, Iran is currently in the process of expanding their nuclear horizons. Further evidence leads experts to believe that Iran is currently working on the production of nuclear weaponry. What's even more unsettling is Iran's attempts to conceal this threat. To this day, Iran continues to restrict full examinations of their nuclear facilities that are allegedly being used for energy production. (guardian.co.uk) But I ask you this; why would Iran be so secretive if they had nothing to hide? For this reason it is widly excepted that that Iran is in the process of obaining the intelegence and materials for building nuclear weapons. Considering tensions between neighboring American allies such as Israel, this is a threat that cannot go ignored.

Contention 2: Iran presents signifigantly greater threats of insurgencie than Iran

As I have already established, the Iranian government has been responsible on multiple recent accounts of supporting terrorist groups such as the Taliban. Iran is supporting the very terrorists that assisted in the bombings of 9/11! The September eleventh bombings were a monumental domestic attack that challenged the national security of the United States and Iran continues to support this threat. It is estimated that there have been 2,304 US and coalition troop casualties that have occurred from the war on terror (CNN), and Iran's financial support of insurgent groups are just further worsening these casualties. The primary military objective that America faces right now is to end the war on terror and impose reform in the Middle East, however Iran is being counterproductive to this goal.
And amidst all this war and tragedy, North Korea continues to sit locked up and politically isolated in eastern Asia.
But the insurgents that Iran supports don't only pose a threat to United States and its troops, but also many American allies in the Middle East such as Israel. Accounts of Iranian bribes and insurgencies are also threatening to the democratic reform that the United States is attempting to develop in nations such as Afghanistan.

Insurgency is a large problem in Iran that poses and an incredible threat to the United States, however this is a threat that North Korea has already contained in their country. Because of an established government, Kim Jong Il has managed to maintain structure in his society thus minimizing instances of insurgencies. This is a key difference between North Korea and Iran; one supports Insurgencies, the other one prevents it.

Contention 3: Iran imposes a larger economic threat than North Korea

When comparing threats imposed by Iran and North Korea, we must also compare their economies.
North Korea has a rather intimidating military; however their willingness to use it is also based on their economic status. According to cia.gov, North Koreas Gross domestic Product is only 40 billion dollars! Compare that to Iran's GPD which is currently over 853 billion dollars. Furthermore, The CIA world fact book places Iran as the 19th most economically stable country in the world. North Korea placed 98th. So when given the numbers, it becomes clear that Iran is the much more economically stable country, while North Korea is hurting.

But even in this time of economic hurt, let's examine where north Korea is getting that 40 billion dollars from. According to cia.gov, 42% of North Korea's exports go to china, and 38% of North Korea's exports go to South Korea. Both of these nations are very close allies of the United States. (state.gov) so now we must ask ourselves, would North Korea really harm a country that has influence over 80% of their already minimal consumers? I don't think so.

Iran on the other hand is in a much more economically stable position, thus deeming them a larger economic threat. Not only is Iran the 19th most economically stable country in the world, (cia.gov) but Iran shares strong alliances with other powerful nations of the world including China, Russia, Germany, and France (rutgers.edu) whereas North Koreas only significant ally is china. (independent.co.uk) But what if china were forced to choose between the countries of Iran and North Korea? Well it becomes clear that china would show more support in Iran simply because they have a much better economy. In fact, as of 2010, Iran is the fourth largest exporter of oil (with china landing sixth). It would be unbeneficial for china to side with North Korea when the real money resides in Iran.

It is for these reasons that I would like to urge a strong vote in the affirmation of this resolution.
joshuaXlawyer

Pro

First off I would like to say that I will argue that North Korea is just as important as Iran or more so, mainly more so.

Opponents case:
My opponents case has contentions so I will attack the tag lines which is the main points of the arguments.

Contention 1: Iran has dangerously poor government policies

This might be a true statement however this doesn't prove North Korea isn't an important conflict to focus on, and that they don't pose much of a threat. This debate is about which poses more of a threat, plain and simple as that.
My opponent talks about government policies are not looked at and I'm sure they are looked at. Such as the nuclear program that Iran claims they have but my opponent over looks that North Korea claims to have nuclear weapons as well making them a threat to the U.S as well as Iran.

(According to globalsecurity.org, Iran is currently in the process of expanding their nuclear horizons. Further evidence leads experts to believe that Iran is currently working on the production of nuclear weaponry. ) ---So is North Korea.---

(Iran is responsible for bribes such as these and it is prudent that we recognize the threats they pose to the United States. It is in the national interests of the United States to end the war on terror, and as long as Iran continues to support the Taliban, they are threatening this cause. In addition, I reiterate that investigations done on these bribes conclude that the payments made by Iran were incentives to weaken NATO involvement in the Middle East. (guardian.co.uk)
It is not only in the interest of the security of our troops, but the overall endeavors of the United States to make political reform in the Middle East as smooth as possible. However it is the political policies of Iran that is degrading to such aspirations of the United States.) --- Agreed however not as dangerous as North Korea seeing how they are backed up by China which has a population of 6Billion people< if North Korea attacks us and we attack them we will have WWIII my dear friends with China and North Korea. Much more of a dangerous and volatile consequence. More so then some puny terrorist WWIII is a more dangerous option.---

Contention 2: Iran presents significantly greater threats of insurgence than Iran

Objection! this is not as dangerous as North Korea seeing how they are backed up by China which has a population of 6Billion people< if North Korea attacks us and we attack them we will have WWIII --- I cross applied---

(As I have already established, the Iranian government has been responsible on multiple recent accounts of supporting terrorist groups such as the Taliban. Iran is supporting the very terrorists that assisted in the bombings of 9/11! The September eleventh bombings were a monumental domestic attack that challenged the national security of the United States and Iran continues to support this threat.) --- Seeing how Afghanistan also was apart of 9/11 since 3 of the people who hi/jacked the planes where Afghanistan's . so we should be there too hmmm..---

(The primary military objective that America faces right now is to end the war on terror and impose reform in the Middle East, however Iran is being counterproductive to this goal.)
----Objection!! this is not our goal, our goal is to seek peace and democracy as well as achieve national security if terrorist didn't mess with us then I'm sure we would have left them alone. Terrorism will never vanish seeing how we would have to get rid of religions all together with religions there will always be extermist to them. ----

(Insurgency is a large problem in Iran that poses and an incredible threat to the United States, however this is a threat that North Korea has already contained in their country. Because of an established government, Kim Jong Il has managed to maintain structure in his society thus minimizing instances of insurgencies. This is a key difference between North Korea and Iran; one supports Insurgencies, the other one prevents it.)
---So what, a WWIII is still a large threat compared to terrorist.---

Contention 3: Iran imposes a larger economic threat than North Korea

(When comparing threats imposed by Iran and North Korea, we must also compare their economies.
North Korea has a rather intimidating military; however their willingness to use it is also based on their economic status. According to cia.gov, North Koreas Gross domestic Product is only 40 billion dollars! Compare that to Iran's GPD which is currently over 853 billion dollars. Furthermore, The CIA world fact book places Iran as the 19th most economically stable country in the world. North Korea placed 98th. So when given the numbers, it becomes clear that Iran is the much more economically stable country, while North Korea is hurting.)
--Yes how ever they are allies with china and china could easliy fund them for their war efforts as much as their own.--

(But even in this time of economic hurt, let's examine where north Korea is getting that 40 billion dollars from. According to cia.gov, 42% of North Korea's exports go to china, and 38% of North Korea's exports go to South Korea. Both of these nations are very close allies of the United States. (state.gov) so now we must ask ourselves, would North Korea really harm a country that has influence over 80% of their already minimal consumers? I don't think so.)
--Objection!! this is not entirely true seeing how the U.S. owes China Trillions of dollars, what if China gets tired of wait? and North Korea Strikes South Korea? WWIII my friend; Then we all might speak Chinese.---

(Iran on the other hand is in a much more economically stable position, thus deeming them a larger economic threat. Not only is Iran the 19th most economically stable country in the world, (cia.gov) but Iran shares strong alliances with other powerful nations of the world including China, Russia, Germany, and France (rutgers.edu) whereas North Koreas only significant ally is china. (independent.co.uk) But what if china were forced to choose between the countries of Iran and North Korea? Well it becomes clear that china would show more support in Iran simply because they have a much better economy. In fact, as of 2010, Iran is the fourth largest exporter of oil (with china landing sixth). It would be unbeneficial for china to side with North Korea when the real money resides in Iran.)

--- You say how Iran economy is so great and etc the only reason they are rich right now would be... you guessed it Oil, sorry to tell you this eventually Iran will cease to be rich when the land runs out of oil. Then you go to say how they have all these allies and etc, well so does North Korea they have China, and China has almost everyone in its pocket being one of the largest economic place of trade without China a lot of countrys would lose big bucks. Why do they need the U.S? we don't have the great economy we use to, why does the other countries need the U.S? its easy to see we are losing our super almighty powerful country postion. As well we are in a recession we are losing money we at the rate we are at now we would lose an all out frontal war. We have no advantage, as well you say China would support Iran simple question why would China support both and take us out? North Korea would be the cause of a WWIII i don't think we would even limp away from.---
Debate Round No. 1
Addison_Barton

Con

Addison_Barton forfeited this round.
joshuaXlawyer

Pro

my opponent has forfeited and all my argument are extended
Debate Round No. 2
Addison_Barton

Con

Addison_Barton forfeited this round.
joshuaXlawyer

Pro

still all points extended..
Debate Round No. 3
Addison_Barton

Con

Addison_Barton forfeited this round.
joshuaXlawyer

Pro

You must look to my case seeing how it has not even been contested and his has been attacked and dropped.
Debate Round No. 4
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Sobriquet 6 years ago
Sobriquet
Next week for me is finals, so I would rather wait until that is over with. Why sue your father? If you don't mind me asking (feel free to post on my profile, or message me if you dont want to do so on this comments section)
Posted by joshuaXlawyer 6 years ago
joshuaXlawyer
go ahead honestly tho i might be busy i am making a case to sue my father so idk if i will reply fast.
Posted by Sobriquet 6 years ago
Sobriquet
I couldn't think you were making that point seriously :P. Are you a high school debater? I may be interested in debating this topic. I judged a national qualifier tournament, so my knowledge is limited to what I've heard, but it may be interesting to see if I can apply it. That, and I haven't debated on this site before.
Posted by joshuaXlawyer 6 years ago
joshuaXlawyer
yeah im kidding its just an exaggeration sir lol I was just trying to get point that they have alot of people
Posted by Sobriquet 6 years ago
Sobriquet
1,331,460,000 - 2009 [ World Bank, World Development Indicators]. I hope you're trolling, because the population of the entire world is only 6.9 billion.
Posted by joshuaXlawyer 6 years ago
joshuaXlawyer
yeah there is most likely more
Posted by Sobriquet 6 years ago
Sobriquet
I gave you reason to believe that China is more likely to not back them. Also, my "lolwut" comment is because you said China has a population of 6 billion.
Posted by joshuaXlawyer 6 years ago
joshuaXlawyer
ah but who's to say china won't back them?
Clearly if China wanted to they could take and own the U.S by force they have way more men and resources to do so?
In a couple of years we might all be speaking Ching Chong lol jk Chinese.
Posted by Sobriquet 6 years ago
Sobriquet
also, pro, " Agreed however not as dangerous as North Korea seeing how they are backed up by China which has a population of 6Billion people" lolwut?

Something to consider: The economic ties between the U.S and China are far too large for China to back N.Korea. N.Korea is extremely dependent on foreign aid, and they can hardly provide necessities to their own people. The primary source of foreign aid? China. What happens if N.Korea declares war and China doesn't back them? N.Korea won't be able to support the war, and as a further consequence, they won't be able to feed their own people.
Posted by Sobriquet 6 years ago
Sobriquet
Or maybe he wanted someone to post a case so he could use any of the arguments or evidence. Its pretty common here with the tournament resolutions. If you pay attention, the instigator hasn't been on here for 2 weeks.
v
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
Addison_BartonjoshuaXlawyerTied
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 BangBang-Coconut 6 years ago
BangBang-Coconut
Addison_BartonjoshuaXlawyerTied
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 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: Tsk Tsk Tsk
Vote Placed by Zealous1 6 years ago
Zealous1
Addison_BartonjoshuaXlawyerTied
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 annhasle 6 years ago
annhasle
Addison_BartonjoshuaXlawyerTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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: CON lost points in Conduct, Arguments and Sources for obvious reasons. Spelling/Grammar was a tie.