The Instigator
GlobalIssues
Pro (for)
Winning
11 Points
The Contender
Nordenkalt444
Con (against)
Losing
5 Points

Should the U.S. Government be able to sell weapons to other countries?

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 4 votes the winner is...
GlobalIssues
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/21/2013 Category: Economics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,428 times Debate No: 33985
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (0)
Votes (4)

 

GlobalIssues

Pro

I believe that we need to allow the gov. to sell weapons because if we dont sell them then other countries will just buy from someone else. Plus it helps our economy to gain that kind of money.
Nordenkalt444

Con

The United States shouldn't be concerned with the affairs of other nations, we have a lot of work to do here at home. Even if it helps the economy temporarily, the idea of globalizing your military wont be good in the long run, especially with public opinion. Same thing with Vietnam, the American people cant afford another war or even being involved in one. We should focus on ourselves, if the USA works to hard on "keeping world peace by invading or aiding other nations" then we'll suffer here at home.
Debate Round No. 1
No comments have been posted on this debate.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 4 years ago
Ragnar
GlobalIssuesNordenkalt444Tied
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: THIS DEBATE NEEDS MORE THAN ONE ROUND! Oh and pro got it, since con seemed to be talking about issues other than weapons, while stating "The United States shouldn't be concerned with the affairs of other nations, we have a lot of work to do here at home." which actually supports what pro said (you know, don't give a damn about them, but make some money to fund stuff back here). Now if con was defining people as weapons, this is a whole other thing, but I highly doubt that's the case.
Vote Placed by SaintMichael741 4 years ago
SaintMichael741
GlobalIssuesNordenkalt444Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:50 
Reasons for voting decision: This debate needs to be longer. I'm giving it to con because he was more in depth about his answer.
Vote Placed by GeekiTheGreat 4 years ago
GeekiTheGreat
GlobalIssuesNordenkalt444Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: The debate was to short, but at least Con ,made an argument with so little to work with, and had more information the Pro.
Vote Placed by wrichcirw 4 years ago
wrichcirw
GlobalIssuesNordenkalt444Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: PRO made one point, which CON did not refute. BoP established, arguments PRO. One round debates (although inexplicably allowed by this website) are not debates, so conduct to CON for setting up something as meaningless as this.