Should the U.S. continue to take military action in the War on Terror?
Leave the other opponents personal profile info out of this. Round 1 pro rules and con intro, round 2 pro intro con argument, last round pro argument and rebutle round 2 from con argument and then conclude, con rebuttle conclude
(Hope this works, only had an hour to work)
Premise II: The War on Terror has yielded unseemly events.
fonzi22201 forfeited this round.
My opponent has forfeited. Extend arguments.
Rebuttle: While my opponent may state that if we were even remotley close to having the fight for war of terror work that those headlines he stated eould not be a big deal. Whike some may look bad like Isis killing 26 people that is a reason to continue to fight. If my opponent can say that it is not working because Isis is not stoping to kill people the truth is that if we keep fighting Isis can and will be eliminateds. If we leave Isis alone they will only get bigger. The other head lines are headlines because the war on terror is working.
Aregument while my opponent states that the war on terror is bad according to http://sks.sirs.com... Obama said in a press confrence "Our systematic effort to dismantle terrorist organizations must continue," he said. "But this war, like all wars, must end. That's what history advises. That's what our democracy demands." This is how we will end the war we must fight to end it. "But this war, like all other wars, must end." This is saying that this must end that we must ensure Americans future. This is showing that most of the world that we live in today is not how it was an hour ago. Slowly Isis is advancing. Alos according to http://sks.sirs.com...; Al Qaeda is almost gone. http://sks.sirs.com... says The latest surge of triumphalism came after bin Laden's killing a year ago. U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta asserted that the United States was "within reach of strategically defeating al Qaeda," while President Barack Obama proclaimed, "We have put al Qaeda on a path to defeat," We will win we must for the sake of America.
Conclusion In conclonclusion we will win this war we must for the future Americans and as Barak Obama said "But this war, like all other wars, must end."
My opponent fails to understand the concept I was referring to. The War on Terror has not been effective, as proven by multiple headlines mentioned in my first speech. Moreover, he has not provided any headlines that show the war on terror is successful. On the other hand, I have provided multiple sources showing the relative ineffectiveness of the War on Terror.
It could be argued that Obama is also advocating for the ending of the War on Terror. If he is saying the war must end, this can be used in support of the Con position. This military action should be suspended.
In regards to al Qaeda, the death of bin Laden was a great success, but this has not been accompanied with the total removal of al Qaeda threats. Furthermore, new threats have come into portrayal. For example, ISIS and Boko Haram are more modern displays of insecurity. Therefore, instead of routing al Qaeda completely, the US has only weakened one group and arguably facilitated two new threats in the process.
Conclusively, my opponent has assisted my side by quoting our president, and dropped the following arguments:
The War on Terror is empirically ineffective
The War on Terror has yielded unseemly events
The Enemies are not adequately defined
The War on Terror Lacks US support to continue
Alternatives Would be more pragmatic solutions to the problems.
|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||6|