The Instigator
Crescendo
Pro (for)
Winning
2 Points
The Contender
packersarebad1
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

"The Bubba Scenario"

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...
Crescendo
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/9/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 975 times Debate No: 51988
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (13)
Votes (1)

 

Crescendo

Pro

Yesterday (as of the time when I am typing this) I saw "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" in a theater. The movie was just your average Marvel movie, until the movie brought up a very intriguing concept (or at least in my opinion).
The movie brought up the idea of a weapon which profiles and identifies potential threats in the blink of an eye and eliminates those threats with high-tech weaponry just as fast.
After seeing this, I wondered whether this had ever been discussed on Debate.org. So, I did some searching and I uncovered this:
http://www.debate.org...

The author dubbed it "The Bubba Scenario," obviously after himself. I would like to debate this "Bubba Scenario" with any debater who is willing to accept this challenge.

Rules:
First round is for acceptance. Burden of proof is shared. Conceding the improbability of one or more aspects of the Bubba Scenario will not result in an automatic loss for me, as I admit some parts of it may be far fetched.

I await a challenger who is willing to debate the Bubba Scenario.
packersarebad1

Con

This scenario seems feasible, except for 1 thing. To me, the idea of a so-called "super-weapon" appears "super-ficial". Our government already has the capability to do such a thing. As a bonus, they also have NDDs. When taken into consideration, I think that the so-dubbed "Bubba Scenario" is a fallacy in truth.
Debate Round No. 1
Crescendo

Pro

I thank my opponent for accepting this Debate. However, he mentioned something called a NDD. After a quick Google search I could not find out what a NDD was. Perhaps Con was referring to a WMD (Weapon of Mass Destruction)?
Anyhow, I shall begin.

1. Laser Weapons:
http://news.discovery.com...
According to this link, this new weapon, though short-ranged, can shoot down a target in less than five-millionths of a second.
Also, there's this link:
http://www.navy.mil...
According to this link, it is shockingly inexpensive to use the weapon repeatedly.
Conclusion: If the range of these weapons is increased exponentially, which is bound to happen, and many of these weapons are manufactured and deployed, these laser weapons will undoubtedly change the very face of warfare.

2. Our Government's Willingness to Violate the Constitution
Here's my proof:
http://rt.com...
http://www.globalresearch.ca...

3. The Federal Government's Ability to Track Us and What we Do
Well, for starters, our government already "mines" our online data.
http://www.theguardian.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...(surveillance_program)
Also, there is what is called "Facial Recognition Software"
http://www.cbs8.com...
http://time.com...

Conclusion: Our Government (and eventually other governments) has access to laser technology (even if it's currently in its earliest stages), our government can track us, and our government has greatly increased its "national security" programs since the September 11 Attacks.
I await my opponent's response.
packersarebad1

Con

1st:
An NDD is a nuclear detonation device, which obviously entails a lot of control over society.
As far, the government has not used them as threats.

2nd:
I concede every point mentioned, regarding weaponry technology.
However, this does not mean that the government will use these technologies for population control.
Many dystopian stories or fiction detail some variation of the aforementioned scenario.
Ergo, I believe that the Bubba Scenario was inspired by a far-fetched dystopian story that for whatever reason rooted itself in Bubba's brain.
Debate Round No. 2
Crescendo

Pro

"An NDD is a nuclear detonation device, which obviously entails a lot of control over society.
As far, the government has not used them as threats."

I thank my opponent for clearing this up.

"I concede every point mentioned, regarding weaponry technology."

Thank you.

"However, this does not mean that the government will use these technologies for population control."

The following article sums up the constitutional violations of the Patriot Act.
http://www.scn.org...
With the knowledge that our Government does not keep its own constitution, perhaps we should question our faith in the Federal Government's goodwill.

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn"t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed down for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children"s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free. -Ronald Reagan-
http://whowasronaldreagan.com...
packersarebad1

Con

By no means should we trust our government, or carry faith in it. After all, only a select few of our population control it. But, that does not mean that the "Bubba Scenario will happen. That is just as likely as the moon turning purple. It just doesn't happen. By all rational laws and ideas of human behavior, this is not possible.

I rest my case.
Debate Round No. 3
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Crescendo 2 years ago
Crescendo
Are you under the impression that I am the user Bubbatheclown?
Posted by Crescendo 2 years ago
Crescendo
I'm sorry?
Posted by thett3 2 years ago
thett3
Hi Bubba
Posted by packersarebad1 2 years ago
packersarebad1
Goodbye for tonight as I have to go now. A continuation tomorrow perhaps.
Posted by Crescendo 2 years ago
Crescendo
Will this suffice?
Posted by packersarebad1 2 years ago
packersarebad1
Sigh.
It doesn't have to be fancy.
Posted by Crescendo 2 years ago
Crescendo
I suppose I could right now (while the computer is still working), but right now I'm too bummed out to do any real research and find links.
Posted by packersarebad1 2 years ago
packersarebad1
I maintain.
If you can comment, why can't you debate?
Posted by Crescendo 2 years ago
Crescendo
My computer's display of extremely low quality this weekend has caused me much frustration in real life. To find a display of quality that low in a newly manufactured computer, one would have to go back to the computer models of the late 1990s. But honestly, I believe that a brand new Windows 98 would not have caused me as much trouble as my computer does now.
Posted by packersarebad1 2 years ago
packersarebad1
I Maintain
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by ESocialBookworm 2 years ago
ESocialBookworm
Crescendopackersarebad1Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:20 
Reasons for voting decision: Crescendo had sources.