The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

Should we take out Iran

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/17/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 735 times Debate No: 37820
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)




As we know, we are $20 trillion in debt, and that debt will only climbhigher. Our systematic deficit spending has dropped our credit rating, and monetizing the debt has ruined our currency.

Also, Iran has proven itself to be a major threat to global security, through its funding of Hezbollah and Hamas.

The past and present Administrations believe there is no way we can get ourselves out of this financial mess without taxing our citizens and companies into the ground, damaging our economy even further. There is another way, one that will preserve our position as the world's first and only hyperpower, stimulatetheeconomy in a profound way, and remove the threat of Iran to global security.

We must wage war on Iran.

Why has nobody ever thought of this before? Our military IS NOT a global police force, despite what our recent Administrations have believed. It is an armed force to protect our liberty and interests, and to project our power throughout the globe.

If the operation is successful,we get at least $15 trillion in income from selling the captured oil. This can put a major dent in our national debt.

We could first institute a blockade of the Gulf of Oman, and take oil tankers sailing from or to it as prizes. This will a) increase morale of our Sailors, as they stand to personally benefit from successful completion of their mission, b) boost our economy as the Sailors will spend their prize money when they return home, and c) weaken Iran's economy.

We can aim our nukes at Russia to prevent them from interfering.

Once Iran's economy has been sufficiently weakened, we can blitzkrieg them using our Marines, and send in the Army to occupy their oil fieldswhileour oil companies take over extraction.

We have the largest and most capable armed forces in the world. We can do this easily. The money spent on this operation will easily pay for itself more than a thousand times over.

We can count on Israel to assist us, as with Iran firmly underUS control, Palestinian terrorists will have no more support. Then proper peacemaking efforts between them can take place.


no we should not because then we will be in a war and if we are in war more Americans will be killed. Besides who wants a draft if we don't have enough solders. who wants another mother or fatherless child. That would mean more faster care.
Debate Round No. 1


Well, I guess we shouldn't have had the Revolution then, because that cost lives.

Iran is a terrorist-supporting dictatorship with no respect for human must be stopped. With Iran out of the picture, global terrorists will have a much more difficult time acquiring funding.

Sometimes, peace requires war.


yes but this is 2013 we need to make a difference. stop with the wars and the losses of family members and loved ones.
take a chance make a change. sign a peace treaty and stop fighting.
Debate Round No. 2


A peace treaty?! Iran isn't at war with us (yet)!

Iran's funding of terrorism is costing far more lives than a war would.

Assassinating the Ayatollah will throw Iran into chaos, and a US invasion would be welcomed to restore order.


I mean if they declare war on us. we should not stick our noses in other peoples business. going to war would just be a waste of life's.
Debate Round No. 3


It's too late for us to stop sticking our nose in other states' businesses. We entered WW2, and that set off a chain reaction of us being involved in things that are of no concern to us.

As it stands, Iran is seeking the destruction of our major ally in the Middle East, Israel, and is funding the Palestinian terror cells. Whatever your view on the Palestinian Question is, terrorism is not the solution.

If Iran is removed from the world stage, actual peacemaking can be done between the Israelis and the Palestinians, instead of their current war of attrition.


I mean if they declare war on us. we should not stick our noses in other peoples business. going to war would just be a waste of life's.
Debate Round No. 4


We shouldn't, but we have too much to lose by not. Unfortunately, global security now depends on us.


no war is bad it will lead to children having no parents. and missing fathers or mothers and now we need to stop
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by WillRiley 1 year ago
Pro- Starts World War III
Posted by leandro.sanchez 3 years ago
The US thinks itself an empire deciding what countries should be allowed to life whats next deciding what parties are acceptebel to run for power.Pff..
Posted by TSLexi 3 years ago
So, let's just wage a purely economic war.

Research alternative energy sources and more efficient energy conversion methods. We have some of the largest deposits of oil shale, and we need to research efficient ways of turning it into usable petroleum products.

We need to stop using gasoline engines. Diesels are a) more efficient, b) last longer, and c) can run on biodiesel, a renewable source of diesel. Also, the six stroke cycle developed by Crower increases the power of the engine by injecting water after the 4th stroke. This a) produces an incredible amount of power from the expansion of steam, b) eliminates the need for a heavy cooling system, and c) reduces the amount of fuel needed, which will reduce emissions.

Using CVT transmissions will also increase fuel efficiency, as the engine can always operate at its most-efficient rpm.

If we sell all un-used federal land west of the Mississippi river, and allow drilling, mining, farming and logging, we can increase tax revenue from the increase of jobs and corporate income, the revenue from the actual sale of the land, and reduce our demand for foreign oil.

When we reduce our demand for oil, the price will drop, leading to Iran receiving less money from oil exports. This will cripple their economy.
Posted by 0Vector 3 years ago
Waging war on Iran for purely economic reasons would simply not be accepted by the global communities.

First of all lets think of the pure geographical reasons. A war justified only by economic motives will definitely put the US at odds with its allies.
Such Allies / many of them might see it fit to disallow American Military on their soil.
This leads to the question How would America actually fight Iran?

They would not have any actual/few military bases to operate from.
Israel's furthest jet could barely reach Iran, and this is only if it flew through Saudi Air Space (Something I don't think they would allow if the war was based purely on economic motives). Also notice that Iran only has to attack American Military
bases (and could focus on defense of its lands).

You also risk Arab countries Declaring War on Israel with such a foolish move. Since America must militarily support Israel, it would just cost us more. This would not lead to a peace treaty as you foolishly state. If anything it will cause more hatred towards Israel, and maybe even military actions by other Arab States.

Say America manages to actually attack/invade Iran well enough to actually take over its government. Aside from civil unrest, you would basically be fighting the largest most well funded insurgency ever fought. Such a war would not produce economic gain.

Further still, such an aggressive move by the American Military will not help the american economy as you so foolishly expect.
What America could expect from such a declaration of war would be crippling economic sanctions imposed on it by basically the rest of the world.

I don't think you understand how war really works. When you capture an oil tanker it isn't converted to money, and the sailors don't get any money.
Your warmongering and totally simplistic view of war hints at either immaturity or ignorance.

Also source needed for your numbers?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by DeFool 3 years ago
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: "We should wage war on Iran because the US is in debt," -vs- We should not wage war on Iran due to the potential for loss of lives. Arguments: CON