The Instigator
Exstosator
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Con (against)
Winning
22 Points

States ought not possess nuclear weapons.

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 4 votes the winner is...
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/28/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 851 times Debate No: 18075
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (4)

 

Exstosator

Pro

This will be my first debate on this website.
This topic is an LD topic from last year, that being said LD debate experience is preffered but not required of my opponent. I am a highschool debater although I have three years of experience so I would also prefer an experienced debater.
This debate involves four rounds with 72 Hours of argue time, 8k characters per argument and one week voting period.
Please use LD format in this debate ie: a value, criterion, and contentions.
Also as a courtesy please do not present new evidence beyond round 2, just expand on arguments already presented.
Format:
R1: Acceptance
R2: Present Case
R3 Rebuttals and CX (Con will ask questions in R2 that will be answered in R3)
R4 Conclusion and Voters
F-16_Fighting_Falcon

Con

I thank my opponent for instigating this debate. To clarify, my opponent is arguing that no state should possess any nuclear weapons where as I am arguing that some or all states should possesss nuclear weapons.

Good luck to my opponent. This is going to be an interesting debate.
Debate Round No. 1
Exstosator

Pro

Exstosator forfeited this round.
F-16_Fighting_Falcon

Con

I won't spend too much of my time since my opponent has posted nothing. I will give a brief overview and if my opponent returns, expand on those arguments. Since my opponent forfeited, he will need to present his case as well as rebut mine in the third round. I will then provide rebuttals ask questions which he will answer in the fourth round.

My opponent asks that this be an LD style debate. I don't know how to do LD but I will try to do the best I can to define value, criterion and contentions. My opponent and the voters are free to comment on whether I made any mistakes.

Resolved: States ought not possess nuclear weapons

Value Criteria: Practical purposes amd freedom

Contentions: I have two contentions but might add more if my opponent returns since he hasn't really provided any arguments so far.

1) Freedom to choose

States should have the freedom to choose whether or not nuclear weapons are beneficial for them. Pro has not elaborated on whether he wants a treaty where states without Nuclear Weapons can join or initiate a world wide ban on Nuclear Weapons. The second option prevents a state from having a choice to control the strength of its own military hence infringes on the rights of the state.

2) Practicality

States which retain second strike capability can effectively deter other states from attacking it thereby protecting itself with no cost to life and property.

Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) prevented the Cold War from escalating into direct warfare between the US and the Soviet Union.

That's it for now but if my opponent returns, we will expand on those arguments as well as my opponent's.
Debate Round No. 2
Exstosator

Pro

Exstosator forfeited this round.
F-16_Fighting_Falcon

Con

Extend arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
Exstosator

Pro

Exstosator forfeited this round.
F-16_Fighting_Falcon

Con

Like I expected, no arguments. So much for Pro wanting an "experienced LD opponent".

If anyone who is a legitimate member of DDO and is interested in debating this topic, please PM me, or write on my profile.

Thank You

By the way, Vote Con!
Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by 000ike 5 years ago
000ike
Kohai, you don't need to votebomb just because it was a forfeit. Stop voting irrationally. Neither side used sources, nor was the spelling unequal.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 5 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
My opponent never gave a value in this case. Do I choose a value each for both me and my opponent and then show how both values support my argument?
Posted by YYW 5 years ago
YYW
LD is essentially a debate of values. What you are aiming for in LD debate is to demonstrate how the value your opponent is trying to achieve (assuming that you and he agree on what value ought to be pursued) is either not in conflict with your value or supports your argument. The hallmark of a "checkmate" in LD is to do both, in a sort of "heads I win, tales you loose" style approach. What this means is that wether you are are trying to achieve your value or your opponent's value your logic is still superior.

The VP and VC (value premise and value criterion, respectively) are essentially what you want to achieve (VP) and the means to recognize that achievement (VC). Collectively these make up a framework for the debate. Your framework is basically how you are going to debate the debate.

There are a couple of articles available online that you should consider reading, especially before judging other LD-like rounds. However, this experience may make you better qualified to make that call. As an aside, LD is not a debate of policy (how we do what we ought to do) but rather one of philosophy (what we ought to do).

Happy debating! I shall look foreword to the outcome of this debate.
Posted by bluesteel 5 years ago
bluesteel
change the voting period to infinite and i'll accept
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 5 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
I'd love to take this if you clarify whether Con is allowed to argue that all states should have nuclear weapons and if the argument of discrimination is on the table at all, i.e. are you going to say that the current treaty is unfair at all because I would agree with that contention (that the NPT is unfair). However, I am willing to argue the positives of nuclear weapons.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by thett3 5 years ago
thett3
ExstosatorF-16_Fighting_FalconTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: F
Vote Placed by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
ExstosatorF-16_Fighting_FalconTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Neither Exstosator nor F-16 used sources, though Pro forfeited and never argued. Points for conduct and argument, by default, obviously go to Con as a result of Exstosator's forfeits.
Vote Placed by 000ike 5 years ago
000ike
ExstosatorF-16_Fighting_FalconTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by kohai 5 years ago
kohai
ExstosatorF-16_Fighting_FalconTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit