The Instigator
Jordan_Fletcher
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
KingdomOfCats
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Terrorism Cannot be Beat, so Control it

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/18/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 767 times Debate No: 82773
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (20)
Votes (0)

 

Jordan_Fletcher

Con

Ever since the emergence of Al Qaeda as a result of George Bush's military involvement in the Middle East for oil, terrorism has grown as rapid as a virus. 9/11 did not help at all, since that triggered George Bush to declare war on terrorism, saying these infamous words: "either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists". I believe that politicians around the world have it completely wrong. Terrorists are willing to die--even by committing suicide--for what they believe in. And for every terrorist that dies, another fills his place. How do you fight an enemy that does not fear death? The true answer--that U.S. politicians do not want to admit because it would hurt our ego as Americans--is that terrorism can NOT be defeated. As long as there are believers in terrorism, there will be terrorists (pretty straight forward). Plus, terrorists are everywhere--with an exception of Greenland, XP.

What I would propose is that political leaders world-wide must negotiate with leaders of Al Qaeda and ISIS. The politicians' objective would be to section off a small portion of land out of some countries in the Middle East to form a small oasis that terrorists could inhabit. There would be extremely strict rules regarding that land though: (1) terrorists cannot leave the country into other countries (if they want to visit family, the family will have to go to them), (2) foreign military cannot enter the land unless to aid the terrorists, (3) terrorists cannot attack any other country and other militaries cannot attack the terrorists, (4) the country will be divided into two portions: one with Al Qaeda and the other with ISIS militants (they can attack each other, but their wars must NOT leave their borders), and more to come through discussion. In addition to that "country", large offshore islands might be built to house more terrorists. Which might be appealing to them since it would be like living in the Bahamas while carrying out terrorist activities on other terrorist organizations on other islands. I know many of you are going to say, "Wait, that sounds like the world's largest set of concentration camps, that goes against human rights!" I will not argue against that in my thesis (I will later if someone is to bring that up), but just realize all of the savage and utterly inhumane things terrorists have done--especially ISIS. Though, the U.S. has done many, many, many bad things that I wish we could reverse. That topic though will have to wait for another debate, ^w^.

But please comment. I would love to hear your perspective on what I think. Oh course, this proposal that I have does need some refinement, which is a contributing reason why I posted this.
KingdomOfCats

Pro

Yes, I believe that terrorism is a very clear and dangerous force that we may not be able to overcome with brute force, but you're completely wrong about how we should handle it. I'm sorry if that sounds harsh, but you don't seem to know much about what is happening. First, terrorists might not fear death, so why the hell would they negotiate with the people that they want to kill in the first place. Second, who the hell is willing to give away their land to people that have been trying to kill them since forever. Third, terrorists don't want a place to stay or an 'oasis' as you stated, they want to cause harm to people around the world, as seen recently in France. Fourth, terrorists are NOT trying to war against each other for any reason, most of these terrorists that you speak of are Islamic Extremists who want to kill anyone who opposes their religious beliefs. Five, you literally are just saying that these terrorist groups are going to war against other terrorist groups that are fighting THE SAME BATTLE. Six, let's just go into the fact that you put in your statement "Foreign military cannot enter the land unless to aid the terrorists" WHO THE HELL WOULD BE HELPING THESE TERRORISTS????? THE TOOTH FAIRY??? Seven, can you give me literally one reason why a terrorist would accept living in a land with other terrorists, with no connection to the outside, when all he would want to do is cause harm to people outside the country like most people who are considered terrorists would do. I mean seriously, you are saying that you want to coop people up into a small country when that would benefit them in literally no way at all.
Debate Round No. 1
Jordan_Fletcher

Con

- I think (unless you have something better to offer that does not include war) that giving terrorists a portion of what they want is the best solution. What I presented was just one possible way of doing so, I never stated that it was the best way proven through trial and error, since this have never been done before. I have thought of a couple ways in the past, but what I thought of seems the best since not many people want to share academic responses and criticism with me on this topic, or on the other debate that I prompted in the society tab.
1. Terrorists might want to negotiate with the U.S. and other governments because we will offer them something that they want for once. After all, what is the purpose of continuing to fight for a cause that you have already won? Now they can live their lives how they see fit.
2. What you bring up in your second sentence is probably the biggest issue that the U.S. and other countries would run into. If no countries want to section off any bit of land, then countries participating and not participating in NATO can help pledge money to build large islands where terrorists can live in their own "paradise".
3. I am going to skip to the portion of your sentence that referred to the attack in Paris. The reason why terrorists attack Paris was in retaliation of President Obama"s ousting of the infamous Jihadi-John. Just like how ISIS blew up a Russian civilian airliner in retaliation for Russia"s bombing of ISIS strongholds, oil trucks, and more. Specifically speaking on ISIS, the reason why they do beheadings is because it is apparently a sacred ritual. And take notice of the fact that ISIS does not care who it is"with exceptions of their kin"they decapitate, just as long as they can carry on the ritual. As for killing and injuring people on a mass scale, also take notice that the over-whelming majority of mass terror attacks were in retaliation to a Western, European, or Russian strike or invasion or raping of natural resources.
4. You bring up a good point, terrorists may not want to fight each other. But what if governments secretly found ways to convince either Al Qaeda, ISIS, or another terrorist faction to fight against another terrorist group? That would work fairly well because another method of eliminating a threat without having to do too much is to manipulate the group from the inside, then let the terrorist groups weed out the unfaithful and destroy each other. But then again, that is a near hypothetical situation.
5. Your fifth point is mostly true, but incorrect. ISIS and Al Qaeda are not fighting the exact same battle. Al Qaeda primarily wants foreign nations" militaries to flee their land and stop consuming the overwhelming majority of the oil (the United States being one of primary offenders). While in addition to that, ISIS more importantly wants to convert a mass chunk of people over to an earlier version of Islam. So they are somewhat fighting the same battle, but they are not at the same time.
6. The reason why foreign militaries would be able to aid terrorists is because there could be times of starvation in which terrorists" families could be suffering. So, foreign aid would be specifically administrated to the kids in the family, possibly even the women, though there are a lot of female terrorists nowadays and this article (https://www.rt.com...) covers that issue very well.. And yes, the tooth fairy may help the terrorists because the tooth fairy does not discriminate, xD! Though it would be easy for terrorists to take the medic and food aid from their children, it is showing the world that the United States and other nations are willing to help those who suffer as a result of others' actions, even if they are our enemy.
7. Well, yes, I can give you a reason. A good reason, actually: the terrorists would be able to live out their lives how they want to. For ISIS, they could convert everyone on that land to an earlier version of Islam and carry out their "ritual beheadings" without the rest of the world knowing. ISIS" beheading subjects would probably people that they have captured within the terrorist lands and convicted criminals from around the world that were sentenced to death. And if the terrorists do not want war, then they now get to live nearly exactly how they want on their own land where no one will intervene. If terrorists do want war, then they can wage war against equally skilled terrorists groups and prisoners sent to death (so they are not getting slaughtered by NATO forces) that they have a better chance at beating.

P.S.: Lol, I did not forget to respond. This week I had two essays to type and quite a bit of homework, so my response ha d to wait a little while, :(. Sorry about that.
KingdomOfCats

Pro

KingdomOfCats forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Jordan_Fletcher

Con

Jordan_Fletcher forfeited this round.
KingdomOfCats

Pro

KingdomOfCats forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Jordan_Fletcher

Con

Jordan_Fletcher forfeited this round.
KingdomOfCats

Pro

KingdomOfCats forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Jordan_Fletcher

Con

Judging by how many rounds have been fortified, I do not think it would be hasty to assume this debate to be over.
KingdomOfCats

Pro

KingdomOfCats forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
20 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Jordan_Fletcher 1 year ago
Jordan_Fletcher
KingdomOfCats, are you still up to finish this debate?
Posted by Jordan_Fletcher 1 year ago
Jordan_Fletcher
I just thought of this: doesn't ISIS remind you a lot of early British colonists? I mean, seriously, think about it. There are too many similarities between the two.
Posted by Jordan_Fletcher 1 year ago
Jordan_Fletcher
Finamorebarbara, you bring up a good point. And if that is truly the case, then we have a problem. And this pretty much my entire plan will not really mean much, since it is based on the assumption that terrorists are fighting for lands and to spread their beliefs and religion to other people, :(. Do you have another alternative to my suggestion, but in a situation where terrorists are not fighting for land and to force their religion on others?
Posted by finamorebarbara 1 year ago
finamorebarbara
Call me stupid but I truly believe that after all these years I don't even think these extremists are fighting over religion anymore. They have been at war for years now and at this point I believe they don't even know why and what they are fighting for anymore. Yes, the media says it's all about religion but maybe revenge? Or even trying to make the world see they are not as weak as everyone think they are?
Posted by KingdomOfCats 1 year ago
KingdomOfCats
By the way I'm on a tight time budget so I will have to check it out at a later date.
Posted by KingdomOfCats 1 year ago
KingdomOfCats
It's not that they want to turn people into savages, they want the religion of Islam to be everyone's belief.

By the way, are you going to try and combat my argument on the actual debate or what.
Posted by Jordan_Fletcher 1 year ago
Jordan_Fletcher
KindomOfCats, I do understand want, but whether or not it is actually feasible is a whole other story. Seriously, can you really convince over seven billion people to turn into savages? Though read the articles that put in my last response to you, specifically the one with the title "ISIS cells in America & Europe ready to launch Third World War - terrorism expert". Dr. Anat Berko studies the mindset of terrorists. Specifically why people join and how does ISIS get people join. The interview is very, very good and goes even deeper into explaining so many things that would otherwise be nearly be oblivious or unthought of to me. You really should read it and tell me what you think about it, :3: https://www.rt.com...
Posted by KingdomOfCats 1 year ago
KingdomOfCats
Okay, you may be right that some terrorists want war, but really it goes beyond that. Terrorists want to push forth their ideals until everyone submits to them.
Posted by finamorebarbara 1 year ago
finamorebarbara
"a state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups within a nation or state."

So here is the definition of war. Indeed Islam Extremists are a group of people and not a nation or state BUT this group of people with different beliefs are engaging in violent acts against other group of people within their own country or outsiders, these terrorist attacks have been going on for years now. Anyway please don't tell me these people "do not want to engage or start a war" because it's seriously the most ignorant thing I've heard in awhile.
Posted by Jordan_Fletcher 1 year ago
Jordan_Fletcher
Okay KingdomOfCats, I understand that, but terrorist the terrorist mind-set will not rule the entire world. Hey, I read two absolutely amazing articles from RT Media on what the government might be hiding (do not believe wholeheartedly everything Sophie Shevardnadze says, she is kind of skeptical to me) and the mindset behind many female jihadists. You MUST get its extension on Mozilla Firefox! RT Media will feed you details on events going on around the world with real-time information the minute that they happen. Oh, here are the links to the articles, XP: https://www.rt.com... and https://www.rt.com....
No votes have been placed for this debate.