The Instigator
cheekyhobo
Pro (for)
Winning
33 Points
The Contender
quickrob
Con (against)
Losing
6 Points

The US should stop intervening in every little crisis and let countries do for themselves

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/24/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,504 times Debate No: 2900
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (3)
Votes (13)

 

cheekyhobo

Pro

It has been empirically proven that countries that can take care of their own domestic problems show greater signs of stability and prosperity in the future. The United States' intervention in Kenya, Pakistan, and the Israeli/Palestinian war is going to cause more problems in the future than the present situations. I believe that minimum intervention is OK as long as it is restricted to only humanitarian aid or minimal diplomacy. We should not be going into other countries and tell them how to run their government. That is not democracy because the people lose all say in how they want their country to be run. Our form of government can't work in all countries and we should therefore allow countries to solve and iron out their own political issues. If a crisis such as the one found in Darfur breaks out and spreads to another country, that is when intervention is necessary, but if the violence had stayed in Sudan's borders, then we should never have intervened. It is pure logic that we wouldn't want someone coming into our homes and telling us that because we have a dirty kitchen, we should completely alter the way we live.
quickrob

Con

Your logic is not sound and is in fact immoral.

Your suggestion that it is not OK to interfere unless the situation crosses borders is also nonsense.

You use Darfur as an example, so I will also use it.

There is a slow-motion genocide going on in Darfur. It has already caused cross-border problems (the border with Chad), but that will be put aside. Let's assume it never crossed borders, and that the genocide was geographically restricted. You are saying, with a straight fact I suppose, that it is wrong of the US to intervene even if it is to stop a genocide.

I refuse to accept such a morally blind view of reality and the world, and I likewise cringe at the thought of being so callous and undisturbed by the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of people...you might say it's not any of our business, but I completely reject such a notion of not only despicable, but tantamount to complicity. The US is the only power on Earth capable of intervening in such situations. We have no legal requirement to intervene, but a moral right exists.

Secondly, your implicit assertion that US "interference" begets disaster is not actually clearly exemplified with an examination of history. Compare South Korea (successful, wealthy, democratic) with North Korea (starving, dictatorship) and you can clearly see the results of US "interference". Compare East and West Germany during the 1970's and you can see the results of US "interference".

I agree that the US should be cautious in it's actions overseas, and careful to avoid unwelcome results, but your pie-in-the-sky, naive view of the situation is a foolish invitation to disaster.
Debate Round No. 1
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Kals 9 years ago
Kals
Quickrob, all I have to say to you is what you just said was idiotic. Whether or not you find things immoral is your business but you need to leave your beliefs of that out of the debate. Your morals are your own, do not impress them on others.
Posted by kingd12 9 years ago
kingd12
I agree with quickrob soundly. Quickrob doesn't state that we should be involved in every little episode in the world. However, big episodes like Darfur, how could we not? Bad things happen when good men fail to act. Now I will agree that not every involvement has led to success; however, America cannot use the Monroe Doctrine or any other policy which keeps America from involvement in world affairs in current times. It is becoming a smaller world everyday and what happens overseas is now directly affecting the United States. I will use the cliche oil example. What happens in the middle east drives the price of oil. China taking over Tiawan will affect 95% of the worlds microchip industry. I could go on and on. I would love to believe that cheekyhobo is correct. But his view is unfortunately a mere hope of a utopia that could only exist with the technology of about 1000 years ago.
Posted by cheekyhobo 9 years ago
cheekyhobo
We have caused more deaths from our idiotic intervention in the short and long term than would have happened if we just left our noses out of other peoples' problems!!!
13 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Kmille11014 9 years ago
Kmille11014
cheekyhoboquickrobTied
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 
Vote Placed by education4earth 9 years ago
education4earth
cheekyhoboquickrobTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by blond_guy 9 years ago
blond_guy
cheekyhoboquickrobTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by HandsOff 9 years ago
HandsOff
cheekyhoboquickrobTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Kals 9 years ago
Kals
cheekyhoboquickrobTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by clsmooth 9 years ago
clsmooth
cheekyhoboquickrobTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by sccrplyr40 9 years ago
sccrplyr40
cheekyhoboquickrobTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by kingd12 9 years ago
kingd12
cheekyhoboquickrobTied
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 
Vote Placed by Satanclaus 9 years ago
Satanclaus
cheekyhoboquickrobTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by MitsyPoodle 9 years ago
MitsyPoodle
cheekyhoboquickrobTied
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:30