The Instigator
Niall_McGee27
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Reformist
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Send ground troops to Syria where Isis is

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/15/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 388 times Debate No: 85025
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

Niall_McGee27

Pro

Last time we had a big threat we needed ground forces. This time we need ground forces. There is absolutely no way we can take out a force as great as Isis by just air strikes.
Reformist

Con

I accept your challenge
Debate Round No. 1
Niall_McGee27

Pro

Ok well hit me what do you disagree with then. I mean that is how we controlled Al Queda after 9/11.
Reformist

Con

Well I expected that you would do the argument.

Because this is turning into more discussion I wont show fancy graphs or list sources. Ill just argue

Ground Troops unless deployed in the most EXTREME manner will draw the US into a economic quagmire that will cost trillions of dollars. Not only this, but the loss of life on both sides as well as civilans would be in the hundreds of thousands

This would lower support of US in the middle east because occupying a country makes you look like a an oppressor. If you need an example of this just look at Iraq.

Not only this but the Iraq War created the problem of ISIS. More war will just create more destabilization in the middle east.

Even if ground troops were deployed in the most extreme manner (Full out warfare, civilians are targeted, mass destruction weapons are sued), this would again make the US look bad.

Combine all these factors and you have a war that will create a huge deficit and more hatred towards the US
Debate Round No. 2
Niall_McGee27

Pro

Ok well first off who likes us in the Middle East anyways besides Kuwait and Israel. I mean this is the only way we can keep America safe. Are you more worried about the cost than the safety and well-being of the United States. Ok it costs a lot, but in the long run we will be able to pay it off. And you are worried about killing civilians in places where Isis is. Let me tell you air strikes kill more civilians than ground troops. When you are on the ground you have more control and can determine if they are the enemy or not.
Reformist

Con

Just because the governments of certain middle east nations do not like us doesn't mean the civilians don't. Just look at Iran. Sure many of them say "Death to America" but many view America as friends now if you look at some interviews. Invading a county and occupying would decrease that standard some civilians in the middle east.

No this is not the only way to keep America safe. Quite the opposite. Killing of civilians= Radicalism of other citizens. You might think that drone strikes are killing civilians and they are but ground troops would increase civilian casualties. Just because you send ground troops doesn't mean you stop drone strikes. Actually quite the opposite since you've made a commitment you need to increase drone strikes whether it means aiding a battle or some other situation.

Also do you think the US indiscriminately uses drones to bomb specific areas? That's funny!
Debate Round No. 3
Niall_McGee27

Pro

It sounds that you agree with me that we need to send ground troops. I never said that we should stop airstrikes. In fact we need to continue airstrikes and we should send more troops. Also when a president says we are going to send 50 troops to the area. That's a joke.
Reformist

Con

No I don't support ground troops

I was just explaining that just because you send ground troops doesn't mean you stop drone strikes. Drone Strikes actually increase

I believe we should just back out of the middle east and let the middle east deal with ISIS

Even drone strikes in my opinion is too much

And I doubt the president said we need to send 50 troops to that area. If he did he may have been talking about generals aiding Kurdish or resistance forces
Debate Round No. 4
Niall_McGee27

Pro

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com...
This is an article that says it. We need troops to control this problem in the Middle East
Reformist

Con

No I don't support ground troops

I was just explaining that just because you send ground troops doesn't mean you stop drone strikes. Drone Strikes actually increase

I believe we should just back out of the middle east and let the middle east deal with ISIS

Even drone strikes in my opinion is too much

And I doubt the president said we need to send 50 troops to that area. If he did he may have been talking about generals aiding Kurdish or resistance forces
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.