The Instigator
AttackHelicopterGender
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Nd2400
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Should we get rid of North Korea?

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 2 votes the winner is...
Nd2400
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/25/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 656 times Debate No: 107090
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (24)
Votes (2)

 

AttackHelicopterGender

Pro

Since you are so confident.. Go ahead.
Nd2400

Con

Okay AttackHelicopterGender, since you were not very specific on what you mean on getting rid on North Korea. I will keep this round short.

First of all, what do you mean on "Should we get rid of North Korea?"
Do you mean have a war?
Do you mean there shouldn't be anymore North Korea, like what are you proposing?

If you are proposing a war to knock out North Korea. Then I'm against that position.... I think we shouldn't wipe out a whole country, without justification. North Korea could do some good. In the right settings. I could go more in that aspect later. A reunification for both the south and the North could be good, not just for them but for the world.

Anyways i will wait for you to clarified your stands.
Debate Round No. 1
AttackHelicopterGender

Pro

I want to use the millitary and fing get rid of north korea
Nd2400

Con

That's all you have. Just we need to go to war. And nothing else to support your justification.

Okay here is mine reason why we shouldn't go to war.
The North doesn't have some grant plan of destroying the US. But here the issue with trump, he doesn't want the North to have any kind of nuclear weapons, but it way to late for the North to disarm now. And trump is willing to go to war with the North to stop them from getting a nuclear bomb to hit the mainland. This is comparable you the Cuban missile crisis. China and Russia would might get in involved. I will tell you why this is so bad. One China could very well play the part of defending the North again. Again History is important to know why they are backing them.
"The Sino-North Korean Mutual Aid and Cooperation Friendship Treaty is a treaty signed on July 11, 1961 between North Korea and the People's Republic of China." (1.)https://en.wikipedia.org......... this is a treaty with the North Korea and China. Do you know why it's important? It because China would protect them if there were attack first. That's why China help them in the first Korean war. With the US helping the south. So history has a lot of importance, we need to understand it, so in the future, we don't do the same mistakes. The Chinese government has issued hundreds of warning to the US, not to attack the North. Why would they be so concern, if they weren't going to do anything?
"China won't come to North Koreans aid if it launches missiles threatening U.S. soil and there is retaliation, a state-owned newspaper warned Friday it would intervene if Washington strikes first". (2.)https://www.washingtonpost.com.........

I have a lot more on this issue. But as for now i will give you the floor and hopefully you can have actual arguments to support your position....
Debate Round No. 2
AttackHelicopterGender

Pro

First of all, nice grammar..... "Here is mine reason".

China is Not America and we have no part of it. Kim Jong will obviously just break that treaty like he did with america.

They threatened cuba which is part of the US.

Any way,,
Their country is a food deprived want to be nuclear country. They force everyone to be in their slave military and they fake almost everything.
Nd2400

Con

"China is Not America and we have no part of it"" what does this even means?" China will protect North Korea if the US strike first. So you want to be risking a global War by attacking the North. Just because they made some threats that they will not enforced. They will not attack first. By the way the US also made threats to the NK. And yet they haven't strike us nor will they. Plus another factor is Russia. Russia could very well help NK, if the US attack first. So again you are suggesting we strike first and risk an all-out nuclear war nit just with NK, but with China and Russia. Not very smart.

"U.S. WAR WITH NORTH KOREA WOULD BE 'REALLY TOUGH' TO WIN, SAYS TOP MARINE". (3.) http://www.newsweek.com...

"The rise of a more politically and militarily assertive Russia and an economically and institutionally ascendant China may be characterized as the two principal forces challenging the United States in global policymaking." (4.)http://thediplomat.com......... China and Russia will join together if the US attack 1st. One reason is that its next door to the north. And they do not want the US being anywhere there.You need to understand the history of geopolitics.

"Beijing intends to turn these artificial outposts into military footholds that will provide it with power projection capability right across the South China Sea. Each island has hangers for 24 fighter jets, as well as bombers and surveillance aircraft. Each island has bombers and surveillance aircraft. Anti-aircraft and antimissile systems can be seen on one of the artificial islands. In a crisis, these facilities would significantly complicate US war plans and access to the South China Sea at acceptable levels of cost and risk. There"s also a more important day-to-day implication: these new military outposts allow China to dramatically extend its strategic reach from its southern shores down to Indonesian waters, creating a new strategic status quo and a Chinese sphere of influence. Beijing, in other words, is seeking to become the dominant military power in this part of the world with a capacity to prevent, deny or veto other countries from accessing these waters."(5.) world/asia/south-china-sea-controversy-heats-up-as-manmade-islands-are-almost-complete/news-stor4aa8664ef1f147d704b8f1e78e62516
China is already trying to challenge the US in the pacific. "Top US general: China will be 'greatest threat' to US by 2025". (6.) http://www.cnn.com......
China will back North korea, if the US strike first. (China said this) "state-owned newspaper warned Friday it would intervene if Washington strikes first". (7.)https://www.washingtonpost.com......;

So are you sure you want to risk millions and millions of life's with a war with North Korea? Like i said the North is build their missiles for defenses purposes. They will not attack 1st. They are more afraid of us and war. So no point on attacking. Plus another factor is if the US strike first. South korea would be very upset at the US. Why because hundreds of thousands will die in matter of a few days if not millions. So again not a good idea on attacking....
You have show no good reason to go to war. You not thinking of what could happen. You just want to push a button without knowing what is the consequences.... This what i called bad judgement....
Debate Round No. 3
AttackHelicopterGender

Pro

You win. You convinced me. It took a while to read and docent, but I just can"t counter.
Nd2400

Con

Why thank you...
I'm glad i have shown you the light...
So what else do you wanna debate on ?
Debate Round No. 4
AttackHelicopterGender

Pro

Maybe Trump, or Clinton?
Nd2400

Con

I could do trump.... I could be for or against.... You pick.... And send it...

Now for the overview of this debate. We'll this is pretty easy my opponent couldn't argue back because he know i was right and he said this in his last round.... So please vote for CON....
Debate Round No. 5
24 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by whiteflame 5 months ago
whiteflame
@Seventh

Now that I'm reading it again, he did say that he perceived a concession, though I didn't notice that on the first read-through. My apologies to him.
Posted by Nd2400 5 months ago
Nd2400
@SeventhProfessor: AttackHelicopterGender 2 lost fair and square. He admitted he lost. So why does it matter to you?
Posted by SeventhProfessor 5 months ago
SeventhProfessor
@whiteflame, the same justification used to keep Ragnar"s vote applies to Kevin. Unfortunately for Kevin, he isn"t one of moderation"s favorites.
Posted by AttackHelicopterGender 5 months ago
AttackHelicopterGender
I reported the ****ing bad votes.
Posted by AttackHelicopterGender 5 months ago
AttackHelicopterGender
Once again, I dont have the time to make alt accounts and **** around.
Posted by Nd2400 5 months ago
Nd2400
I still don't know how you got all these accounts. But i think this debate was pretty straight forward...
Posted by whiteflame 5 months ago
whiteflame
How so, Seventh?
Posted by SeventhProfessor 5 months ago
SeventhProfessor
The Kevin and Ragnar decisions are inconsistent.
Posted by whiteflame 5 months ago
whiteflame
It's way more than this, I promise you.
Posted by dsjpk5 5 months ago
dsjpk5
I wonder what the record is for most votes reported. This is crazy!
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 5 months ago
Ragnar
AttackHelicopterGenderNd2400Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 5 months ago
dsjpk5
AttackHelicopterGenderNd2400Tied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession.