The Instigator
Marine_to_be
Pro (for)
Losing
69 Points
The Contender
Danielle
Con (against)
Winning
82 Points

Should we be involved in the war in Irag!

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/3/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,509 times Debate No: 3043
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (41)

 

Marine_to_be

Pro

I feel that we should be involved in the War. Now by looking at my name i am a part of the armed forces. I leave June 9th for Paris Island, so that has an influence on my opinon. I look back and my first question for anyone who is against the war is do you remember sept. 11 and watching people holding hands and jumping out of the 83 floor to escape the flames. because terrorist thought it necessary to attack us.

Now i know alot of people make the arguement that we shouldnt have gone to Iraq because we never found and wmd's. and you are right we didnt however we do have proof and i dont think anyone will argue that the Iraqi regeem if you will helped to fund terrorism. The media shows all of the negative factors in iraq and they never portray our service men and women giving food to children.

I dont have a problem with people that disagree with us being in Iraq. It is a free country (just remember you didnt get your freedom by sitting back) but i have a problem with people who dont support our troops. cause they fight for your right to protest
Danielle

Con

Marine_to_be: first off, congratulations on your decision to join the armed forces. I think that being a part of the military is an important and honorable career -- cheers!

Now I will attempt to address each of your individual points mentioned in your argument.

First, yes I do remember 9/11. But I don't remember Iraq being any more involved than the United States were. If I recall, it was members of the Taliban from Afghanistan that were responsible for the tragedy in my hometown of New York City -- not Iraq. In fact, Afghanistan (nor Muslims in general) was not responsible for what had happened. It was the result of one extreme religious group in particular - not every Muslim nation. Not every Iraqi is a terrorist; to think so is completely ignorant.

So what exactly does 9/11 have to do with the war in Iraq? If you're claim is that the Iraqi regime has helped to fund terrorism, then obviously my rebuttal would be SO HAVE WE. It is common knowledge by now that the United States has helped supply Osama bin Laden himself with weapons, money and technology to help fight wars in the Middle East. So we are just as guilty ~ what's your point?

You've mentioned that the media only portrays the bad things happening in Iraq and fails to show servicemen providing aid and supplies to the Iraqi people. My argument is that we don't need a war to provide relief to people in need.

You concluded with the fact that your biggest gripe is not with people who disagree with the war specifically, but with people who do not support the troops. My statement back to you is that perhaps people DO in fact support the troops, and that's why they want them back home instead of off to die unnecessarily.

People can support the fact that American soldiers are over in Iraq doing the job that their superiors have assigned unto them. However, supporting the troops while they do their best to survive their noble career is much different than agreeing that America should be involved in a war that is catastrophically expensive and detrimental to the economy, alienates our allies, and puts our soldiers at risk.

Plus, how can you expect the American people to trust the government after we were lied to repeatedly about the imaginary WMDs?

Bottom line: There are both pros and cons to the war in Iraq, but the cons far outweigh the good. And being against the war is completely different than being against the troops.
Debate Round No. 1
Marine_to_be

Pro

OK i understand what you are saying but first off i would like to clear up something. you said Afghanistan attacked us which is completely wrong. In fact most of the high jackers that drove the planes into the trade centers were from saudi arabia not from Afghan.

My next argument is take a country like Israel. They have terrorist attacks regularly. from car bombings to suicide bombers to riots and anything else you can pretty much think of. Israel has a very large powerful army, however they mainly stay defensive. they next to never do anything offensive. Now take a look at the United States who got attacked then turned around and attacked back and went on the offensive we have not been attacked since 9-11.

So my point is that if we would stand back then it will just happen again

and if your saying we should have only gone into Afghan because thats where the Taliban was PRIMARILY at at that time then should we have not gone into saudi cause thats where most of the terrorist that hijacked the planes came from. People also dont realize that we train Iraq's police force and are doing a load of good that we wouldn't have been able to do had we not gone into iraq.
Danielle

Con

First off, you must have completely misread what I said. I never said that Afghanistan was responsible for the war. In fact, I actually specified the complete opposite. Take a look: "In fact, Afghanistan (nor Muslims in general) was not responsible for what had happened. It was the result of one extreme religious group in particular - not every Muslim nation." So with all due resopect, what the Hell are you talking about?

Second, it is wrong to compare the frequent terrorist attacks on Israel with the infrequent attacks on the United States. This is because your stance is that Israel gets attacked because it is typically on the military defense. My argument is that Israel gets attacked not because of its military, but because of it's location and religion. If it was a country not so easily accessible to its enemies then it would be less frequently attacked. Likewise if Israel was a country specifically affiliated with Islam then it would also not be attacked the way it is today. Thus your argument comparing the U.S. to Israel in terms of military offense vs. defense is completely null and void.

Again, I don't accuse Afghanistan with having anything to do with 9/11, and would not suggest that the U.S. military go to war with ANY middle eastern nation because again it was the TALIBAN - not individual countries - that was responsible for the attacks.

And finally it is completely pointless to say, "People also dont realize that we train Iraq's police force and are doing a load of good that we wouldn't have been able to do had we not gone into iraq" because it WAS/IS in fact possible to do good and help people in need in terms of food and supplies in Iraq without being at war with them. How can we bomb their villages and kill their civilians, and then try to make it better with a few loaves of bread?

Also, we are only training Iraqi police because we're training them to be the type of government officials that WE want them to be according to OUR agenda... we're not doing it for the good of Iraq. Would we have trained their cops under the old regime? No. This is about the United States and how a select few can benefit while causing nothing but harm/death to millions of others.
Debate Round No. 2
Marine_to_be

Pro

ok first off it isnt your place to say what is valid and invalid that is for the voters to determine.

However you are right Isreal is attacked because of there religous beliefs primarily, but that was the same reason we were attacked. right afterwards we responded. They could easily do suicide bombings here like they do overthere, however there is a fear of punishment here unlike there. but i think Isreal is the only country we can compair it to.

Another issue for why we should be over there is that internationally America is veiwed as the police force of the world. (wether you agree or not that is a diff debate) and in my opinion we injoy our freedoms in fact we even take them for granted. but people in other countries dont have those freedoms. so shouldnt we provide them a way to establish that. clearly under sadam they werent getting that. hell people from Iraq who lost in the olympics were placed in giant paper shreders feet first by him just so they could be heard screamingr. along with dropping them in hot tar. Sadam used many forms of torture among his people. he even tested military weapons on his own people so if that was you wouldnt you want someone to step in. (this is another stand point)

I do appologize i did misinturprate what you wrote with the Afgan thing.

but then again places that knowingly harbor terrorist such as Iraq, Afgan, Saudi, Iran they should all be held equally responsable.

History will always repeat itself unless you do something to stop it. if we would have sat back it would have happened again.
Danielle

Con

To conclude this debate I will respond to the individual points that you have mentioned, as well as supply a final recount of various reasons why the United States should not be involved with a war in Iraq.

First, I disagree that the United States was attacked because of our supposed religion. I do believe that many middle eastern counties see us as immoral (due to our separation of Church and State, our "liberal" politics and laws, American policies of expansion and severe interest in our power/economic gains, etc etc etc). However our involvement in the war only increases their negative image of us. Plus, I'm not even entirely sure that the American government didn't have anything to do with 9/11, although that's another debate entirely. The point is that terrorists attack Israel more frequently than the U.S. not because they're afraid of us... I mean, suicide bombings mean that they're going to die anyway, so what the Hell are they afraid of?! Instead, I argue that attacks on Israel occur more frequently because 1) the proximity of middle eastern countries (and the terrorists within them) to Israel and, 2) the long-standing conflict with Israel since its inception (because of it's Holy Land).

You mentioned that America is seen as the police force of the world. My rebuttal is that being considered a police force of the world may not be a good thing at all. First, perhaps our policing has helped contribute to the perception of the United States as the Evil Empire, and one reason why many terrorists groups hate us in the first place. Second, there is an extremely limited number of countries in the world (especially the United Nations) that agree with us embarking on this war. Thus, we are not seen as do-gooders helping to SAVE people, but rather "bad cops" (since you used the analogy of policing) who are using our powers for evil or for our own selfish agendas. We are alienating our allies one by one, including powerful ones in the middle east -- how is that benefitting our country at all?

And in response to our so-called "responsibility" to countries with people who don't have our exact freedoms, my question is: Is war really the answer? There wasn't a better way? As a result of this war, countless soldiers and civilians have died, not to mention the entire American economy is in shambles. We have so many debts to foreign nations; again this is a HORRIBLE move politics wise. But in terms of moral obligation, I pose the question- Who are we to determine what rights and freedoms other countries should have? After all, Holland has had marijuana legalized for years, whereas it is not legal in the United States. Is Holland giving us a hard time about it? No. Countries in Europe have also legalized gay marriage YEARS before the United States even considered it. Are they telling us what to do and how to run our country? No.

Granted these things may all seem trivial to the torture imposed upon Iraqi civilians under Saddam Hussein. However are we forgetting the torture that America has imposed upon its own citizens in the past? Slavery anyone? The Civil Rights Movement? Being attacked by German Shepards and bludgeoned to death by police officers for fighting to sit at the front of the bus hardly seems humane to me. Yet other countries did not impose upon our affairs. Likewise there are countless instances in American society where as a nation we have acted cruel and unfairly (I won't get into that). The point is that most countries see international war as a last resort, and is considered just only in dire circumstances, such as if your country is put in severe danger.

Our country was attacked, yes. But not by Iraq. By the Taliban; al Queda. Fight THEM. Continue the war against TERRORISM. But no, you cannot just go to war with known countries that house terrorists. Because guess what - the U.S. houses them too. And while certain countries may come off as 'potential threats' due to that fact, just imagine about how much of a threat the United States appears to be since we 1) apparently find it within our right to police the world and go to war despite the support of the United Nations, and 2) we proudly boast about our WMDs even though we are hypocritical enough to invade countries because of the possibility that other nations may have them. Even if Iraq DID have WMDs (which they did not... and we were lied to about it repeatedly), why are they more of a threat then the United States who has proven that we will attack a country randomly for whatever reason?

Bottom line: Other countries (even enemies) have WMDs. We do not attack them because they pose more of a threat to the U.S. than Iraq did. Iraq was a relatively easy target; it's not right of the U.S. to use its military prowess to infringe upon the rights of an inferior country. We wouldn't want people telling us how to run our country, yet we are that egotistical that we have that right over others? I'm sure that many people in other nations would feel that the Death Penalty and killing someone via electric chair is inhumane. But that is for the American people and the American government to decide. Imagine war being declared upon us, and American civilians dying in the streets because people of other cultures disagreed with our laws and way of life.

Middle-eastern culture is completely different from ours; cultures change and evolve at their own pace over time constantly. Why don't you look up ancient Roman practices and other cultural behavioral patterns from the past and then come talk to me about history.

And finally, I'll recount my reasons + add some new ones on why this war is wrong: the number of casualties (from all sides); the cost of this war and its effect on the American economy and policy + way of life; the negative repercussion regarding how the world views America, i.e. al Qaeda and other terrorist groups can cite this as an example of the U.S. taking over the world and our need to be stopped/punished... plus other world powers seeing America as a bully who will stop at nothing to get our way; fighting in Iraq has slowed the production of oil, causing gas prices all over the world to sky rocket and cause more economic problems for us Americans at home, etc. The list goes on and on.

Like I said, there are (a FEW) legitimate reasons for the United States to be at war with Iraq. However like I have mentioned in a previous round, the cons far outweigh the pros.

So, I would like to thank everybody for reading, Marine_to_be for debating, and would like to ask everyone to keep in mind that regardless of your position on this issue, to please vote based on who has given the best arguments and performed better in this particular debate. Thanks!
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Rezzealaux 7 years ago
Rezzealaux
Irag? Is that a new apple product?
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
Needz mor votez.
Posted by Mangani 9 years ago
Mangani
Marine-to-be, I was a soldier in the US Army during 9/11 and I think your arguments are foolish.
Posted by blond_guy 9 years ago
blond_guy
The main problem with this guy is that he thinks going to Iraq helps Iraqis and give us freedom.

<<The media shows all of the negative factors in iraq and they never portray our service men and women giving food to children.>>

Thank you for feeding children, but don't tell me that those Mavericks and pistols you guys carry shoot t-shirts. You've definitely helped some, but you killed many (hundreds of thousands).

Fuk Wmd's, they weren't gonna use it on us (if they had any). They won't "follow us home" like Republicans say, for a simple reason. THEY CAN'T!
Have you seen any Iraqi terrorists with helicopters, airplanes and ships to follow us home fellow soldier?

Although I disagree with you, I respect you because unlike many Republicans you're not talking out of you asz and you're actually there seeing what's going on.
Posted by polka-dots323 9 years ago
polka-dots323
Uhmm....Iraq is spelled like Iraq, not Irag.
41 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Cody_Franklin 7 years ago
Cody_Franklin
Marine_to_beDanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by Rezzealaux 7 years ago
Rezzealaux
Marine_to_beDanielleTied
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 
Vote Placed by LaSalle 7 years ago
LaSalle
Marine_to_beDanielleTied
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 
Vote Placed by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
Marine_to_beDanielleTied
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 
Vote Placed by Vi_Veri 7 years ago
Vi_Veri
Marine_to_beDanielleTied
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 
Vote Placed by SaintNick 7 years ago
SaintNick
Marine_to_beDanielleTied
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 
Vote Placed by numa 8 years ago
numa
Marine_to_beDanielleTied
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 
Vote Placed by Cro-magnon 8 years ago
Cro-magnon
Marine_to_beDanielleTied
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 
Vote Placed by Jamic 8 years ago
Jamic
Marine_to_beDanielleTied
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 
Vote Placed by DorothyDorothy 8 years ago
DorothyDorothy
Marine_to_beDanielleTied
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