The Instigator
Supernova9
Con (against)
Winning
1 Points
The Contender
pepin0203
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Should weapons of mass destruction (mainly nuclear weapons) be allowed to exist?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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...
Supernova9
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/10/2015 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 508 times Debate No: 79614
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

Supernova9

Con

I will be arguing that weapons of mass destruction should not be allowed to exist while my opponent will argue that they should be allowed to exist. Please note that we will be mainly discussing nuclear weapons of mass destruction.

May the best debater win
pepin0203

Pro

If weapons of mass destruction did not exist then how would world war 2 have ended ?. This could not have happened if they did not. Would america have won or lost ? . These are some questions you will have to answer to win and what other solution do you propose we take to stop such events
Debate Round No. 1
Supernova9

Con

The atomic bomb was not necessary for world war II to end. Japan would have surrendered to America even if they didn't drop the bomb on them.
http://www.salon.com...
http://www.theatlantic.com...
http://www.globalresearch.ca...
This debate is not about how to stop them from existing. It is about if they SHOULD be allowed to exist. Although I imagine it would be very easy to know where most of the nuclear weapons are in the world because most countries that do have it use it as a threat. If the UN made a pact with that all nuclear weapons should be seized and destroyed, that might solve the problem. At least for the countries that everyone knows has nuclear weapons.
pepin0203

Pro

pepin0203 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Supernova9

Con

Nuclear weapons are meant to destroy a civilization not an army. Also, their effects last for generations. Just look at Japan.
pepin0203

Pro

pepin0203 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 1 year ago
Midnight1131
Supernova9pepin0203Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: FF