Seize all military involvement in the middle-east
Debate Rounds (3)
I propose my stance:
Since the start of the american military involvement in the middle east, we have poured incredible amounts of money into the war on terror, both in the form of military intervention; supplying forces within our coalition with funds, combat training, aiding with airstrikes, and military equipment such as weapons, ammunition, vehicles, ordinance and artillery units. Some of which has even been lost to the opposing forces as a direct result of an Iraqi retreat. (1)
"the United States has already provided Iraq"s security forces over 1,200 military vehicles, approximately 20,000 smalls arms and heavy weapons, 2,000 additional AT-4 anti-tank weapons and nearly 300 counter improvised explosive device equipment and more than 2,000 Iraqi Kurdish Forces received U.S. military training. In addition, the administration has requested an additional $715 million for the "Iraq Train and Equip Fund" (ITEF) for FY2016, which both houses of Congress"have included"in their versions of this year"s National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)." (2)
"Iraq does not just receive funding through ITEF though. Allocations for U.S."Foreign Military Financing"(FMF) program"began"in FY 2012 for $850 million, originally intended to build up Iraq"s long-term sustainment and logistics capabilities, but as IS gained momentum in Iraq in 2014, portions of FMF funding"were redirected"to urgent counterterrorism supplies, including critical resupply of Hellfire missiles, rockets, tank ammunition, small arms/ammo and individual soldier items. Moving into FY2016, the administration has requested $250 million for FMF, the same amount that was allocated in FY 2015." (2)
We simply cannot continue to pour endless amounts of money into a war that is:
1: Not our own. We should have no significant interest in securing land-masses for the Iraqi government, since there is little to no gain to be acheived for our country.
2: Fought between opressive ideologies (Eg. Saudi Arabia, white daesh and ISIS, black daesh) that both are so far from the values and principles we hold as american citizens. None of them should be funded with american dollars.
3: Never-ending. The conflicts in the middle east have been ongoing for over fifteen years. Still, no end is in sight. Quite the contrary.
As writer Roy Greenslade says in an article: "Daesh has a mother: the invasion of Iraq. But it also has a father: Saudi Arabia and its religious-industrial complex. Until that point is understood, battles may be won, but the war will be lost." (3)
We fight a war that can never be won, as the enemy will never be destroyed. Ultimately, the entire american-led military intervention in the middle-east is futile. To use a common analogy: Cut off one head, and two more will grow to take it's place.
A suggestion can be proposed to stop all funding towards resolution of the middle eastern conflict while seizing all import and export, oil in particular, with any middle-eastern country. Only then will the war in the Arabic countries be resolved, internally, that is.
If this is done, the United States' annual military budget of 597.500.000.000 $ US (4) would be lowered significantly, and the excess funds could be put towards healthcare, education and peaceful scientific research; goals that are far more advantageous for the american people than participating in an endless conflict.
End the war on terror; seize the military efforts in the middle east.
(1): http://www.thefiscaltimes.com... - 2015
(2): http://www.securityassistance.org... - 2015
(3) http://www.theguardian.com... - 2015
(4) https://www.reddit.com... - 2016
The September 11 attacks (also referred as 9/11) were a series of four coordinated terrorist attacks by the Islamic terrorist group Al-Qaeda on the United States on the morning of Tuesday, September 11, 2001. The attacks consisted of suicide attacks used to target symbolic U.S. landmarks.
Four passenger airliners—which all departed from airports on the U.S. East Coast bound for California—were hijacked by 19 al-Qaeda terrorists to be flown into buildings. Two of the planes, American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175, were crashed into the North and South towers, respectively, of the World Trade Center complex in New York City. Within an hour and 42 minutes, both 110-story towers collapsed, with debris and the resulting fires causing partial or complete collapse of all other buildings in the World Trade Center complex, including the 47-story 7 World Trade Center tower, as well as significant damage to ten other large surrounding structures. A third plane, American Airlines Flight 77, was crashed into the Pentagon (the headquarters of the United States Department of Defense) in Arlington County, Virginia, leading to a partial collapse in the Pentagon's western side. The fourth plane, United Airlines Flight 93, initially was steered toward Washington, D.C., but crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after its passengers tried to overcome the hijackers. In total, the attacks claimed the lives of 2,996 people (including the 19 hijackers) and caused at least $10 billion in property and infrastructure damage and $3 trillion in total costs. It was the deadliest incident for firefighters and law enforcement officers in the history of the United States, with 343 and 72 killed respectively.
-The enemy wants to kill Americans on American soil.-
"Russian President Vladimir Putin is tired of Obama’s ineffectiveness in trying to destroy ISIS, decided enough was enough, and started shipping heavy artillery into the war-torn country."
-When the U.S. doesn't have a strong military presence and lead the attack, someone else does.-
GEORGE W. BUSH:
"I've read the intelligence data and it makes it abundantly clear, in plain terms, that, if we let up, we’ll be attacked."
-So George Bush finished his term and the U.S. pulled out of the area.-
-ISIS took over positions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria.-
"Three years ago, the Islamic State (Isis) did not exist; now it controls vast swaths of Syria and Iraq. Showing off its handiwork daily via Twitter and YouTube, Isis has repeatedly demonstrated that it is much more than a transnational terrorist organisation – rather, it is an entity with sophisticated command, control, propaganda and logistical capabilities, and one that has proven its ability to take and hold strategically critical territory at the heart of the Middle East."
-What happens when the U.S. leaves the Middle East? This:
1)"Nigerian radical Islamist group Boko Haram (allegiance to ISIS) burnt children alive in its razing of the northeastern village of Dalori, officials said on Monday as the death toll rose to 86."
2)"ISIS Declares War On ‘The Cross’: 21 Christians Beheaded in Barbaric New Video from the Islamic State"
3)"An FBI document may confirm that the woman who helped carry out a shooting at a community center in San Bernardino, California, that left 14 people dead earlier this month did, in fact, pledge allegiance to ISIS on facebook while the attack was ongoing."
4)"On the evening of 13 November 2015, a series of coordinated terrorist attacks occurred in Paris and its northern suburb, Saint-Denis. Beginning at 21:20 CET, three suicide bombers struck near the Stade de France in Saint-Denis, followed by suicide bombings and mass shootings at cafés, restaurants and a music venue in central Paris.
The attackers killed 130 people, including 89 at the Bataclan theatre,where they took hostages before engaging in a stand-off with police. Another 368 people were injured, 80–99 seriously. Seven of the attackers also died, while the authorities continued to search for accomplices. The attacks were the deadliest on France since World War II."
"The enemy wants to kill Americans on American soil"
If you harass a snake, it will, naturally, attack you. If you, on the other hand, leave it alone, nothing will happen to you. It is very likely the same case with the conflict ongoing in the middle east.
"When the U.S. doesn't have a strong military presence and lead the attack, someone else does."
Why is this a bad thing? This debate concerns the spending of US dollars on a war that is pointless from our perspective, not the military activities of other nations.
"So George Bush finished his term and the U.S. pulled out of the area.
ISIS took over positions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria."
Hardly a valid argument: Bush ended his final term in 2009, but all of your linked sources are from 2015. These events cannot be directly connected to the end of Bush's presidency.
"What happens when the U.S. leaves the Middle East? This:"
As with your previous arguments and sources, this cannot be directly connected to a lack of US military presence. furthermore, we continue to supply both training and military equipment to our allied forces in the areas of operation. Surely these vast amounts of resources would have prevented the events referred to, if they were used properly.
in conclusion, atrocities such as the ones you refer to have occurred both before and after the United States' presence in the area was ended and can therefore not be used as reliable arguments in this debate.
Plagiarism would be if I didn't source my quotes. They are all sourced.
"What he Obama should be doing is following the right things that Bush did. One of the right things he did was treat this as a war on terror. We had no domestic attacks under Bush after 9/11."
-Mayor Rudy Giuliani
What's the point? When terrorists are on the run they are too busy to plan, plot, or attack. It also sways extremists from joining because it isn't worth risking your life. It might seem fun when you're not running from bombs and get to play with guns and bully people.
In the case of ISIS, they were allowed to group up, recruit, plot, and go on a reign of terror because no one was there to challenge them or police the area. They became the ruling class.
Now that they have come into Syria, they are overrun with diseases, dwindling in power, and don't even know who might drop a bomb. That's how you put the muzzle on terrorist organizations' activities. You don't allow them comfort or any safe haven. You make it of no value to join such a group. You make it dangerous to join a terrorist group. Even extremists would prefer not have their arms and legs blown off by the U.S. military or any military.
I will address your point that "If you don't harrass a snake it won't mess with you."
ISIS had plans on taking over Europe by 2020. What had Europe done to them?
ISIS killed people in Paris, France at a theatre. What had the these French people done to Islam? Those with allegiance to ISIS killed 14 people in San Bernardino, CA. An Islamist shot a police officer point blank in Philadelphia in "the name of Allah". The cop had done nothing to him. Islamists bombed the Boston Marathon. These runners had done nothing to the attackers. Islamists bombed trains in London. These passengers had done nothing to them. Germany had held its arms open to Muslim immigrants and had a "rape jihad" asserted towards it in a mass sexual assault of German women. Sweden opened its arms to Muslim immigrants more than anyone, and now it has been labeled the "rape capital of the world". The point? This snake bites whether you poke it with a stick or not. Not only does it bite, but it must hate us according to the Quran, and it is commanded by Allah to conquer Earth. Muhammed was a blood thristy mass murderer, rapist and conquerer. He is infallable in Islam and has kept these people in the mindset of the Arab desert in 600 AD.
"Fight and kill unbelievers until all religion is Allah’s, and Islamic law rules all societies. And slay them wherever you come upon them, and expel them from where they expelled you; persecution is more grievous than slaying. But fight them not by the Holy Mosque until they should fight you there; then, if they fight you, slay them — such is the recompense of unbelievers, but if they give over, surely Allah is All-forgiving, All-compassionate. Fight them, till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah’s; then if they give over, there shall be no enmity save for evildoers.”
“We will cast into the hearts of the unbelievers terror, for that they have associated with Allah that for which He sent down never authority; their lodging shall be the Fire; evil is the lodging of the evildoers.”
“This is the recompense of those who fight against Allah and His Messenger, and hasten about the earth, to do corruption there: they shall be slaughtered, or crucified, or their hands and feet shall alternately be struck off; or they shall be banished from the land. That is a degradation for them in this world; and in the world to come awaits them a mighty chastisement.”
“When thy Lord was revealing to the angels, ‘I am with you; so confirm the believers. I shall cast into the unbelievers’ hearts terror; so smite above the necks, and smite every finger of them!’”
“Fight them, till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah’s entirely; then if they give over, surely Allah sees the things they do.”
“Make ready for them whatever force and strings of horses you can, to terrify thereby the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides them that you know not; Allah knows them. And whatsoever you expend in the way of Allah shall be repaid you in full; you will not be wronged.”
9:73 Be harsh with unbelievers
Whether one is religious or not, Atheists, Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, etc do not pose a serious threat to the national security of the West and the United States. Islam does pose a serious threat to the West and the United States. Most Muslims reside in North Africa/the Middle East, thus we need a military force in the region. Are all Muslims terrorists? No, but these types of verses are taken very seriously, thus they must be delt with by the free peoples of Earth. The U.S. must have a military presence in this region. Tolerance of intolerance is cowardice.
KingKelly forfeited this round.
We went to Afghanistan for a reason: to ensure that Afghanistan never again served as a sanctuary for al-Qaeda, as it did when the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks were planned there under the Taliban. The importance of that mission still remains.
Afghanistan itself still needs help. The situation there is not hopeless, but it is serious.
But all is not lost. Far from it. Kabul is much safer than most cities in war zones—and for that matter, a number of cities in Latin America. Indeed, Afghan forces successfully repelled the attempt on the parliament, killing all the attackers. Kandahar, the original haven of the Taliban, is under government control. Mazar-e Sharif in the north and Herat in the west are doing reasonably well. The country’s ring road and other major highways are generally secure. As the Pentagon’s June “Report on Enhancing Security and Stability in Afghanistan” put it, “The resilient Taliban-led insurgency remains an enduring threat,” but “Although the Taliban spread its footprint across the country, it suffered considerable casualties and did not accomplish any of its major strategic or operational objectives in 2014.” To their enormous credit, Afghan soldiers and police continue to sustain many of the gains of recent years, even after NATO forces have drawn down by 90 percent.
The fact is that when the U.S. leaves areas of the Middle East, bad things happen. Do we want to play world police? I don't, but the reality remains: the Middle East is a dangerous place. The cultures are nothing like the West. Its ideas are infallable or devine in these peoples' minds. Does every Muslim think this way? Probably not, but enough of them do to reek havik and chaos. ISIS likes to cut peoples' heads off and perform mass shootings. Boko Haram burns children alive in cages. The Taliban targets girls' schools. Al Queda likes to blow up buildings. Syria has become a sespool of devastation, destruction, and death. Even the "royal Saudi governing body" has a fixation on executions by beheading and stoning. Iran has anti Europe, Israel, and U.S. chanting screaming "death to America!" We can never leave the region again.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
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.