The Instigator
Titanicexpert
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
ChosenWolff
Con (against)
Winning
30 Points

Should South Africa begin to invade the rest of Africa

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 6 votes the winner is...
ChosenWolff
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/22/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 618 times Debate No: 59389
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (6)

 

Titanicexpert

Pro

South Africa should invade the rest of Africa because it is the only country in Africa with the military and economic resources to develop the rest of Africa there by spreading peace within these African nations.
ChosenWolff

Con

I accept

Debate Round No. 1
Titanicexpert

Pro

So I win.
ChosenWolff

Con

No, that just means I'm accepting your challenge. You may begin your arguments mate.
Debate Round No. 2
Titanicexpert

Pro

Ever since the European imperialists left Africa to its own demise, Africa has been riddled with civil unrest, multiple human rights violations and war between nations. But only one nation avoids all of this; South Africa. They have the highest GDP by far of any African nation. They are also the only nation to detonate a nuclear weapon. They have never had any form of civil unrest or human rights violations. It is only there duty to provide the rest of Africa with this.
ChosenWolff

Con

South Africa should invade the rest of Africa because it is the only country in Africa with the military and economic resources to develop the rest of Africa there by spreading peace within these African nations.

1) The South African military isn't the strongest in Africa. Egypt, Ethiopia, and Libya all have larger power indexes than South Africa. I doubt that South Africa could invade and hold even one country, much less 45 + of them.
http://www.globalfirepower.com...

2) South Africa doesn't even have enough money for its people. The average citizen gets 100 claories less than the International Food Standard. Africa doesn't have enough food for its own people, much less a prolonged war. The military and economy would be exhausted in a week. South Africa's military isn't built to sustain offensive operations.

3) South Africa doesn't even have the highest GDP, once again outweighed by Nigeria. The nation still suffers from poverty, rampant crime, and tribal revolts. It is the best of 45 + terrible nations
http://en.wikipedia.org...(nominal)
http://africacheck.org...


But only one nation avoids all of this; South Africa

1) False, for reasons I stated above. South Africa also has terrible corruption problems
http://www.nytimes.com...

They are also the only nation to detonate a nuclear weapon

1) False. Russia, India, Pakistan, North Korea, Israel, United Kingdom, United States, Russia, France, Iran, and China all host and have detonated nuclear weapons.

2) South Africa is the only nation stupid enough to violate the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty

They have never had any form of civil unrest or human rights violations

1) Completely false. Homosexuals and Zulu splinter tribes are often beaten, murdered, and raped by civilians. The problem is our of control and uncontained.

http://www.hrw.org...
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by lefillegal1 2 years ago
lefillegal1
If what you propose did not work for America, how do you feel it will work for South Africa?
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
TitanicexpertChosenWolffTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: con backed up arguments with sources
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
TitanicexpertChosenWolffTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Con proved war would fail.
Vote Placed by Conservative101 2 years ago
Conservative101
TitanicexpertChosenWolffTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 used better arguments to support him. His reasoning was good and he found proper sources.
Vote Placed by dynamicduodebaters 2 years ago
dynamicduodebaters
TitanicexpertChosenWolffTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: Sources, Rebuttals
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
TitanicexpertChosenWolffTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con backed his argument with sources which increased it's viability.
Vote Placed by Romanii 2 years ago
Romanii
TitanicexpertChosenWolffTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con showed that Pro's justification for South Africa conquering the rest of Africa is based on factually inaccurate premises, thus negating the resolution.