The Instigator
blamonkey
Con (against)
The Contender
theITdude
Pro (for)

Resolved: The US should continue its "containment policy" in regards to China

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
theITdude has forfeited round #1.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/28/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 218 times Debate No: 103314
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)

 

blamonkey

Con

It should not be possible to automatically accept this debate, please apply in the comments first.

This debate was inspired by the Open Debates Project that bsh1 started to prevent overused topics from becoming the norm on DDO. For the entire list of topics, you can find the link here:

(http://tinyurl.com...)
It should open in Google Docs.

Definitions

"Containment Policy” - attempt to limit the influence of a nation through coercive, often militaristic practices a la what the US embraced during the Cold War (1).

“Continue” - persist in activity or process.

Please tell me if there is any confusion on the terms of the debate before we begin, I would really like to avoid a semantics debate.

Round Structure

R1

Pro offers their constructive case

R2

Con offers their constructive case, Pro offers first rebuttal

R3

Con offers first rebuttal, Pro offers summary/crystallization/final refutation

R4

Con offers summary/crystallization/final refutation, Pro waives round

If you think you are going to forfeit a round, tell me beforehand so I can change the round structure to try and fit your needs.

Do not join the debate if you are simply going to forfeit, stick around to the end!

Additional Rules:

No Kritiks
No Ad Hominem attacks
No new arguments in the final speeches given
Cite your sources
A violation of any of the rules will result in forfeiture
No trolling


Note: I may not be available for a while due to my offline life, so please be patient if you do apply. That being said, I plan to be dilligent and try to debate this topic.

1. (http://tinyurl.com...)



This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by blamonkey 5 months ago
blamonkey
I challenged you, if you want to accept, be my guest. But please stick through the entire debate.
Posted by theITdude 5 months ago
theITdude
My definiton of the Pivot To Asia comes directly from Hillary Clinton, as outlined by then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. She described the Pivot to Asia in an article for the magazine Foreign Policy. Clinton outlined the following six points of the program: strengthening bilateral security alliances; deepening America's relationships with rising powers, including China; engaging with regional multilateral institutions; expanding trade and investment; forging a broad-based military presence; and advancing democracy and human rights.

Many others have defined it in a radically different manner; I prefer to stick to the one outlined by Clinton. The State Department implemented diplomatic and millitary actions as part of the initiative. However, they never acknowedged "containment of China" as an official goal.

I hope that gives you an insight to my definiton of the Pivot To Asia.
Posted by blamonkey 5 months ago
blamonkey
I should mention that the containment policy would not apply to non-coercive moves, such as diplomatic talks, but strong-arming Chinese influence through our military presence and intentionally forming military alliances to stop China from expanding would fall under the "containment policy" doctrine. I am curious what you mean specifically by the Pivot to Asia, since there are a multitude of approaches to defining it. However, if you can prove that we are diplomatically engaging with countries to decrease China's influence, then technically it would be containment.
Posted by blamonkey 5 months ago
blamonkey
I am a bit late answering, but both would certainly apply to the debate since it is a move from the US that limits Chinese expansion.
Posted by theITdude 5 months ago
theITdude
HI blamonkey,

I would really like to debate you. I have one question about the scope of "containment policy". You define the policy as " attempt to limit the influence of a nation through coercive, often militaristic practices a la what the US embraced during the Cold War". Which actions are representative of this policy? Does this include military actions, such as strategic placement of militaryforces in the South China Sea? Do you include diplomatic initiatives (Pivot to Asia) as part of this policy? I just want to be clear on what you define as containment policy.
Posted by theITdude 5 months ago
theITdude
HI blamonkey,

I would really like to debate you. I have one question about the scope of "containment policy". You define the policy as " attempt to limit the influence of a nation through coercive, often militaristic practices a la what the US embraced during the Cold War". Which actions are representative of this policy? Does this include military actions, such as strategic placement of militaryforces in the South China Sea? Do you include diplomatic initiatives (Pivot to Asia) as part of this policy? I just want to be clear on what you define as containment policy.
Posted by canis 5 months ago
canis
The US is owened by China...(finanscially).
This debate has 6 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.