The Instigator
DebaterAgent
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points
The Contender
TheBoss
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points

Should USA ban military drones?

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 4 votes the winner is...
DebaterAgent
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/5/2012 Category: Technology
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,909 times Debate No: 27877
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (2)
Votes (4)

 

DebaterAgent

Con

    1. Drones can save troops lives.
        1. Troops’ life is not at risk.

        1. It is unnecessary to put the lives of about 1,500,000 soldiers at risk

        1. Cheaper and saves life
    1. Drones intend no harm toward
      innocent civilians

        1. Nobody (even drones) won’t try to kill innocent civilians.

        1. Soldiers kill innocent civilians too.

        1. In 2010, a report shows that there was 1462 Afghan civilians killed by U.S
          soldiers compared to less than 500 civilians killed by Armed drones
    1. Drones are more effective than
      soldiers

        1. Has an efficient target

        1. Drones won’t miss a target, while a human can

        1. Guilt can influence soldier’s actions or mental problems.
    1. Drones are very effective
        1. United States officials say that drones were more effective against the Al Qaeda

        1. Can record videos of Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc.

        1. Drone was able to lead to death of Osama Bin Laden
    1. Developed countries like America
      have the technology to build drones.

        1. They have an advantage because they have the technology

        1. Other countries who don’t have the technology to build drones can think of other ways to protect themselves
TheBoss

Pro

  1. In Pakistan (alone) America launched 297 drones
    1. There was more than 1800 people killed
    2. Three of four people were not actually combatants.
  2. Very few of the drone attacks kill “high-level” leaders
    1. Estimated about only one in seven drone attacks killed leaders.
    2. Majority killed were innocent civilians or “low-level” fighters
      3. Everything (even humans) are going to kill people
Debate Round No. 1
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by yweuiuyywe 4 years ago
yweuiuyywe
Hi buddy :

HOT SELL Product Brand is below: ==== ( http://www.fullmalls.com... ) =====
,nike shoes,air jordan shoes,nike s h o x shoes,gucci shoes ,true religion jeans, ed hardy jeans,coogi jeans,affliction
jeans, Laguna Beach Jeans,ed hardy T-shirts,Coogi T-shirts,Christian Audigier T-shirts,Gucci T-shirts,Polo T-shirts,coach
handbag,gucci handbag,prada handbag,chanel handbag .
free shipping
New to Hong Kong : Winter Dress
New era cap $9
Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33
Nike s h o x(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $33
Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&g) $33
Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16
Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30
Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,Armaini) $12
Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $18
Come back tomorrow for another Daily Dose of Style! Bookmark this page >>
give you the unexpected harvest

==== ( http://www.fullmalls.com... ) =====

==== ( http://www.fullmalls.com... ) =====

==== ( http://www.fullmalls.com... ) =====

==== ( http://www.fullmalls.com... ) =====

==== ( http://www.fullmalls.com... ) =====

==== ( http://www.fullmalls.com... ) =====

==== ( http://www.scnshop.com... ) =====
Posted by jchung1029 4 years ago
jchung1029
This debate makes me angry because it's been so poorly done. There's so much literature out there on this specific topic and it makes me angry that neither side was able to debate the resolution with compelling arguments.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by emospongebob527 4 years ago
emospongebob527
DebaterAgentTheBossTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Countering TMR's unexplained Argument, S/G and Source points.
Vote Placed by The_Master_Riddler 4 years ago
The_Master_Riddler
DebaterAgentTheBossTied
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: Con made debate too short!
Vote Placed by iamnotwhoiam 4 years ago
iamnotwhoiam
DebaterAgentTheBossTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Barely a debate. No points to anyone.
Vote Placed by htennis 4 years ago
htennis
DebaterAgentTheBossTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Very poor from PRO. We use drone strikes to kill people. A trial, anyone? PRO didn't respond to CON.