Should South Korea declare war on North Korea?
Debate Rounds (3)
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.
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.
9648daniel forfeited this round.
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.
9648daniel forfeited this round.
My points stand.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by JustCallMeTarzan 6 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
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.