The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

Should South Korea declare war on North Korea?

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/3/2010 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,297 times Debate No: 12226
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)




Hello members of the I am 9648daniel and I am on the behalf of the PRO side on the topic, should South Korea (ROK) declare war on North Korea (DPRK). This is my first time writing in and is therefore asking thypeople to let me go easy.
Before I go into my main points, I think I need to inform the other side about the relationship between North and South Korea. Korea was devided into two countries after the Korean war that took place in 1950 to 1953. The war happened because the Northern part of Korea was in influence of the USSR and communism, and the Southern part of Korea was in incluence of the USA and democracy. On June 25th, North Korea attacked South Korea. The war went on for 3 years. After the war the heads of both sides of the Party called to a while of stop in the war. So basically, although North Korea and South Korea is not aat battle right now, they could start a battle anytime they want.
Recently, suspection is growing that North Korea sunk the South Korean navy vessel, the CHUNANAN. North Korea is claiming that this is a show caused by the Sotuh Korea, and denies their fault completely. The situation is headed for a climax and there are possible ways of a real war happening in the Korean penninsula going in war.
I so hereby strongly suggest that South Korea declare war on North Korea and attack North Korea.
Firstly, North Korea has provoked south korea immensly, and countinuously. For example the Chunan naval ship explosion. The South Koreans have critical evidence that North Korea is responsible for the death of 46 people, and the North Korea is calling the whole thing a show created by the South Korea.
Secondly, North Korea's threat to the international world is just to much to ignore. North Korea is possesing a lot of nuclear weapons and even sells some of their weapons to countries like Iran. They are one of the most dangerous countries stated by the United States government.

I 'll save the rest of my arguments for the end of the debate.


My opponent's unfortunate resolution is easily negated.

South Korea should not declare war on North Korea because they are in fact incapable of doing so.

The 1950 Korean war was put on hold in 1953 by an armistice, not a peace treaty.

South Korea is already (still) at war with North Korea.

Debate Round No. 1


9648daniel forfeited this round.


Furthermore, the historically unsettled nature of the Korean peninsula makes it highly likely that an armed conflict in the region would be particularly violent and come with a terrible cost of human life.

Also, the possibility that North Korea has nuclear weapons and a somewhat.... eccentric... head of state makes the likelihood of a nuclear strike fairly high. If North Korea strikes with nuclear weapons, I doubt it will be against ONLY South Korea - the west coast of the United States would be in significant danger if Kim Jong Il decides that the US is to blame for standing by South Korea in this conflict.

My opponent makes two contentions - firstly, that one should declare war because they have been provoked, and second, because the enemy is a great international threat. This would seem to be an illogical position, akin to saying the underdog should declare war on the bully because the bully is big and powerful - a recipe for being turned into mush on the playground. If North Korea is as threatening as my opponent claims, purposely drawing it into conflict negates the entire basis of his claim.

Without arguments to rebut, and a state of war still effect, I rest my case for now.

Debate Round No. 2


9648daniel forfeited this round.


... and again.

My points stand.

Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by whatledge 6 years ago
Not to mention that North Korea has one of the largest militaries...
Posted by JustCallMeTarzan 6 years ago
He challenged me to the debate... perhaps it was mean, but for God's sake, he lives in Korea - he should know the history of the war. If he comes back with a good argument, I'll make one about renewing conflicts, possibility of starting WW3, etc...
Posted by brian_eggleston 6 years ago
I agree. Daniel is a new guy, the point could have been made that they are still technically at war but then the argument could have been made regarding the advisability of renewing armed conflict.
Posted by Kinesis 6 years ago
Posted by Kinesis 6 years ago
That as quite mean. :)
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by JustCallMeTarzan 6 years ago
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03