The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
4 Points

The USFG should give military aid to the Nigerian government to fight Boko Haram

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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/18/2014 Category: News
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,674 times Debate No: 65423
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




Hello! First round is for acceptance, 2nd new arguments (no rebuttals), 3rd is for arguments and rebuttals, and 4th is for conclusion (no new arguments). Thank you!


I accept the debate and the rules of the debate and will be arguing against American support for fighting Boko Haram in Nigeria.
Debate Round No. 1


First I'd like to start off by thanking you for your acceptance!

Obs 1. Resolution Analysis
The USFG should give military aid to the Nigerian government to fight Boko Haram

Military Aid- any aid given by the US military
Boko Haram- Terrorist group located in Nigeria known as Boko Haram

Obs 2. Criterion
I would like to define should as ought to, therefore making this a policy round. The criterion for this debate should then be net benefits for the citizens of both the US and Nigeria.

Obs 3. Background
Boko Haram is most commonly known as the terrorist group that abducted over 200 girls from a small village last spring. They are an Islamic sect that began in 2009 and has attacked the police, military, schools, civilians, and more. The US Dept. of State designated Boko Haram as a terrorist group in 2013.

Obs 4. Plantext
Mandate: We will send military aid to the Nigerian Gov in the form of spy planes which will relay intel about the group and it's actions, movements, and members to the Nigerian Gov.
Agent of Action: USFG
Agent of Enforcement: US Military
Funding: Normal Means
Time Span: As soon as possible

Obs 5. Advantages

Adv 1. Saving Nigerian Lives
Uniqueness: As of today Boko Haram has killed over 5000 people, and has displaced over 3000
-Suicide attack on UN Building
-Killing students
-Burning villages
-April 2014 abducted 200+ girls
-Last thursday seized the town the girls were from
Link: With our plan we will be giving the Nigerian government valuable information that will help them combat BH.

Adv. 2 Won't endanger US citizens
Uniqueness: As I stated above BH is extremely dangerous and has killed thousands of innocent people.
Link: With our plan, since we will not be sending any ground troops that can be harmed by BH we are preserving US lives while still helping the Nigerian people
Impact: We are saving our lives in the future, as if BH is not controlled now when they aren't as strong they will be able to grow larger and more powerful until we won't be able to stop them. That will put the lives of the US citizens at risk.

Adv 3. More stem jobs
Uniqueness: Our world is powered by technology- it is the basis of our society. This is why we need more STEM jobs to create a larger interest in them at a young age (elementary and middle school) so we create a strong foundation for future generations.
Link: With our plan, as we will be using spy planes, it will create up to 10,000 more jobs in STEM fields.
Impact: More interest in STEM field jobs at an early age will keep our country moving forward (it leads to human progress) and to new innovations that will aid our daily lives.

Our plan has been proven to work, as we killed Osama bin Laden with the use of spy planes, and we stopped a major threat in Al Qaeda. We will be helping the Nigerian people while keeping our own citizens safe. Thank you, and this is why I urge a strong vote for the affirmation.


I accept your observations 1-4, as well as your definition. I will prove my stance through the following 3 contentions:

1. Military aid in the form of surveillance will not help.

2. Boko Haram is not a global threat.

3. Military intervention will further provoke Boko Haram.

Back to my first point, surveillance will not help. The Nigerian military is an ill-equipped one with soldiers that lack loyalty and integrity. For example, when a local militia was preparing for combat against Boko Haram, the military promised aircraft for backup. The military never delivered on this promise, and the militia was unable to go on the offensive. Locals have reported front line troops running away from confrontations with Boko Haram. In September, nearly 500 Nigerian soldiers fled Boko Haram, retreating all the way across the border into neighboring Cameroon. Giving surveillance equipment to a military that wouldn't make use of it would be a waste of taxpayer dollars. Ultimately, surveillance help would do nothing to strengthen this incapable military.

Now to my second contention, Boko Haram is not a global threat. Boko Haram is a relatively primitive group, without the technology and support of other terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or ISIS. Without adequate technology, they pose little threat outside of Nigeria, and virtually no threat to the world as a whole. On top of this, they have a relatively weak leadership structure, another reason they will not reach the level needed to be deemed a global threat.

Finally the third contention, military intervention will further provoke Boko Haram. Boko Haram's primary reason for rebellion is due to the fact that the Nigerian government neglects the northeast. Supporting this government would only further anger the radicals, and make them attack with a renewed vengeance. According to the Economist, "The only way to defeat the insurgents is for Nigeria to do what it should have done long ago for other reasons: sort out its governance. Politicians should concentrate on building institutions, such as a fair-minded police force and a competent health care system..." There are better ways to undermine the support of Boko Haram than through giving military aid to a corrupt and inefficient government.
Debate Round No. 2


LiliaC forfeited this round.


First I'd like to ask the voters that, if my opponent posts their Round 3 arguments in the comments before the voting period begins, if you would take this into consideration and not penalize them, because I think this is a very interesting topic and would hate to see the debate go to waste. Thank you!

Now in response to my opponent's case:

Point One:
To this point I will have one major response, which is that our military aid will not save Nigerian lives. Refer back to my case, and we can see that without our help, the Nigerian military force is doing nothing in terms of protecting their people, and are even running away from conflicts with Boko Haram (BH). By only giving them surveillance drones as aid, we are not doing anything that will strengthen their ground forces to the point where they will be a capable fighting force. They will still not be able to protect their own people and will not save lives.

Point Two:
Their second point revolves around the fact that they will not be putting boots on the ground, which is apparent in an earlier observation. To this point I will have two main responses.
1. They say that in the future BH will be a big threat, yet as I proved in my case, this is not going to happen. This is not an organization bent on global conquest or destroying Western society, but rather a group of fed-up underpaid individuals from a region the government is neglecting. Their grudge is with the Nigerian government, not the world as a whole.
2. Although American lives will not be put at risk, our taxpayer dollars will be funneled toward this useless project. By saying this plan will be funded through "normal means" my opponent is attempting to use a euphemism in hopes that the voters don't realize that "normal means" is taxes. So we'd be spending our tax dollars on useless projects that won't work.

Point 3:
I will have one main response to Advantage 3. My opponent had no evidence nor logic as to how exactly the 10,000 jobs would be created, so we can't just accept my opponent's assertion.

Now I'm going to do something a little different and attack their conclusion.
1. bin Laden was killed by Seal Team 6, not drones. We had to have capable boots on the ground to supplement the drones. As I've repeatedly shown, these Nigerian troops aren't capable.
2. al Qaeda is still a threat.

For these reasons, I urge a negative ballot. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3


LiliaC forfeited this round.


As my opponent has unfortunately forfeited, I can only see votes for CON. I feel that I effectively refuted all my opponent's claims and they were unable to respond to mine. Thank you!
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by warren42 2 years ago
My sources for my constructive are as follows, sorry I forgot to include them.
Posted by Harold_Lloyd 2 years ago
Arguments overlook the fact that the Nigerian military establishment is mainly a corrupt kleptocracy.

That's why they haven't been able to corral Boko Haram.

We haven't sent aid because anything we sent would be sold immediately to the highest bidder, even if it happened to be Boko Haram.

Details matter.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture