The Instigator
WarMonger
Pro (for)
Winning
39 Points
The Contender
Labrat228
Con (against)
Losing
28 Points

The United States Must actively work towards diplomatic relations with Russia.

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: 8/5/2008 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,894 times Debate No: 4918
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (18)
Votes (13)

 

WarMonger

Pro

I would like to wish my Opponent the best of luck(Considering you will need it)
----------------------------------------
The United States must actively pursue a new and more effective foreign policy towards the Russian Federation.

1.a. Russia's Transformation into a growing economic power now threatens the effectiveness of traditional Post Cold war Policies.
b. Russia's large natural gas reserves and wealth of oil would serve the U.S greatly in this time of rising fuel prices

2.a. Russia's growing Regional influence is another reason why the U.S must advance it policy to ensure a lack of Hostilities
b. We must Move away from Missile defense systems in Europe to avoid further aggravation.
c. There have been recent encounters of Russian Long Range Bombers entering U.S airspace

For The Aforementioned reasons and many more we must make a drastic shift in Foreign Policy towards Russia.
Labrat228

Con

First of, my opponent didn't cite any sources, therefor i must simply assume that what he is saying is the truth.

My opponent said this:
1.a. Russia's Transformation into a growing economic power now threatens the effectiveness of traditional Post Cold war Policies.
My Response:
1.a. Russia Economy is nether strong nor weak, but i can assure you it isn't growing. But i can assure you it will fail soon. I'm a firm believer in the statement - those who don't learn from history are condemned to repeat it.
Russia until recently was working towards capitalism, Vladimir Putin undermined the efforts of the nation. Every communist nation has fallen or is getting ready to fall. Therefor i can conclude that Russia's economy is in a horrid condition and it isn't getting better.

My opponent then stated:
b. Russia's large natural gas reserves and wealth of oil would serve the U.S greatly in this time of rising fuel prices
My Response:
b. The goal no matter what party you are a part of in the USA is to reduce dependably on foreign oil. Plus the fact that the oil in Russia is under ice in which they have yet to obtain the technology that is required to get to it.

My Opponents next argument served as a message of no sense:
2.a. Russia's growing Regional influence is another reason why the U.S must advance it policy to ensure a lack of Hostilities
My Response: Russia's influences are deteriorating, they have made a near enemy out of the closest Economy as well as military support that they had (Ukraine).
To further the ignorance my opponent says:
b. We must Move away from Missile defense systems in Europe to avoid further aggravation.
My Response is simple:
A missile defense system is for DEFENSE, therefor it would only aggravate someone with bad intentions.
Then my opponent says:
c. There have been recent encounters of Russian Long Range Bombers entering U.S airspace
My response:
If this is the case I'm sure we would of all heard about it on fox news by now, cite your source.
Debate Round No. 1
WarMonger

Pro

My apologies for Lack of Sources
if You look Towards the Cato Institute Policy analysis of Febuary 2008,you can clearly see that
"Russia has undergone a genuine—if limited— recovery from the collapse of the 1990s;

Washington lacks sufficient leverage to compel Russian acquiescence to its policy preferences; and

On a number of critical foreign policy issues, there is no clear community of interests that allows for concepts of "selective partnership" to be effective"

1.a.If You look towards "the Economist" of Just today. there has been a 1.13% increase in overall crude oil prices, one of the pillar's of russia economy.
- Moreover, according to the economist of August 2nd, Russia has had an 8.5% increase increase in Gdp of just the 1st Quarter

b.Looking Towards Ros Buissness Consulting, RUssian gas production is expected to rise 25.3% through 2020
- This gives the perception that they may develop or purchase the technology needed to extract more oil.
b. while we do want to move away from foreign oil, the dream of alternative energy dependence is still Years Away.

2.a MOSCOW, March 9 (Xinhua) -- Russia's military organization requires steady improvement to meet current challenges, President Vladimir Putin said on Friday at a Kremlin ceremony appointing officers to higher positions.

"We can't help noticing that attempts to settle intentional disputes by force are continuing, or that the threat of conflicts between states, territories, the escalation of local conflicts and the spread of weapons of mass destruction remain problems," Putin was quoted by the Interfax news agency as saying.

"All this requires the steady improvement of the country's military organization, including the maintenance of high combat readiness for the nuclear deterrence forces," he said.

Supplying the army and navy with advanced weaponry is an indisputable priority, and 5 trillion rubles (190 billion U.S. dollars) are to be assigned for this purpose under the state program of armaments till 2015, he said.

http://news.xinhuanet.com...
-russia's growing military funding makes it apparent that its influence will follow suit and increase along with military and defensive power.

b.
Without a means of differentiating between "dummy" and "real" warheads, it would take a minimum of 10,000 defensive missiles to defeat a 1,000 missile launch where each missile contained 1 "real" and 9 "dummy" warheads - and that assumes a 100% successful interception rate. (Considering that there are about 6,000 "primary targets" in the US, any missile attack would almost certainly have to hit at least 1,000 of them in order to be effective - so considering a 1,000 missile attack isn't all that far fetched.)

Considering that a missile attack can (theoretically) come from any direction, the US would require 10,000 defensive missiles to defend in (to be generous) four different quadrants - bringing the number of 100% effective missiles up to 40,000.

Considering that no weapons system is 100% effective, that 40,000 should probably be boosted to 80,000 to ensure that 40,000 defensive missiles would be available 24/7/52.

Considering that the projected cost for fewer than 20 defensive missiles is $30,000,000,000+, the cost for 80,000 defensive missiles would run to roughly $120,000,000,000,000 (yep, that's 120 TRILLION dollars) - or roughly the entire budget of the United States of America for around 47.6 years, there is some justification for saying that the American people are being sold a pig in a poke (without the pig or the poke).
-The Military Times of april 17th clearly state that scientists have come to the conclusion that MDS cannot protect us
- showing it does more harm than good

c. Cnn.com Febuary 12 2008. American fighter jets intercepted two Russian bombers, one of which buzzed a U.S. aircraft carrier in the western Pacific on Saturday, U.S. military officials told CNN Monday.
- A nation that has the ability to enter the airspace of the most powerful nation on earth, clearly a sign of tension between both nations and a need for reforms of our current Foreign Policy

***btw, where are your sources?
Labrat228

Con

I negate all of my opponents oil talk with the following:
We do not need foreign oil! Russia's oil has nothing to do with thsi debate.
the truth is that we have more oil than russia, and ti is currently under our feet. Our newest discovery on how to use Oil Shale has allowed us to take a new stand on oil. While oil shale is found in many places worldwide, by far the largest deposits in the world are found in the United States in the Green River Formation, which covers portions of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. Estimates of the oil resource in place within the Green River Formation range from 1.2 to 1.8 trillion barrels. Not all resources in place are recoverable; however, even a moderate estimate of 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil from oil shale in the Green River Formation is three times greater than the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia. Present U.S. demand for petroleum products is about 20 million barrels per day. If oil shale could be used to meet a quarter of that demand, the estimated 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil from the Green River Formation would last for more than 400 years.

WASHINGTON — The United States has an oil reserve at least three times that of Saudi Arabia locked in oil-shale deposits beneath federal land in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming, according to a study released yesterday.

Oil is no reason to make a treaty with russia.

My opponent seems to argue that the Russians building an army is a reason to not build defence... where is the logic??
Debate Round No. 2
WarMonger

Pro

Buid a defence? a missile defence system is superflous considering the thousands of nuclear weapons in russia's possesion.
-Nytimes of just today russia invaded Georgia, showing how it is asserting its influence in the region,and moreso, another reason why we need to accomodate our foeriegn policy in europe to include russia as a viable ally and reduce residual cold war tensions.

- ok so your right about oil but if you look towards foreign affairs(the journal that published the strategy to winning the cold war in 1947), they state "Summary: The world has grown much more peaceful over the past 15 years -- except for oil-rich countries. Oil wealth often wreaks havoc on a country's economy and politics, helps fund insurgents, and aggravates ethnic grievances. And with oil ever more in demand, the problems it spawns are likely to spread further."
In their May/June 2008 issue

^- That demonstrates that despite our vast oil, we would not take the chance of it wreaking havoc on our enviroment and infrastructure, and while we should move towards alternative fuels, We must have oil in the meantime and we can only receive ful from russia by increasing/reforming diplomatic ties in Russia
Labrat228

Con

ok, back to the oil
You said and i quote:
"Looking Towards Ros Buissness Consulting, RUssian gas production is expected to rise 25.3% through 2020"

Shell oil Company is currently placing facility's in and around these shale fields. (Fox) (am i the only one who thinks that is ironic?). You cant simply say this is a bad idea because of our environment. Here is how they currently extract the oil. They put super heated rods in the ground, which liquidizes the rock and then they pump out the oil. To date it is the most environmentally safe way to pump oil. When you say Russia's gas production is expected to rise 25.3%, it doesn't make sense to go with that when we have it under our feet, and when we can pump it right now. You also said oil corrupts nations.. maybe a nation that is housing terror cells and is not demonstrating a free market.
Face it, Russia is a nation that is once again failing. Making allies with this nation would simply be hazardous to our Economy, Military, and would defeat the purpose of being in the middle east. Our top officials stated near a month ago that Russia is funding weapons production in Iran. Our officials then stated that Iran was funding insurgents in Iraq. Therefor wouldn't helping Russia's economy hurt our troops?
Thanks for reading my argument
And thanks for your debate WarMonger (which is also ironic that warmonger wouldn't want war...)
Debate Round No. 3
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by WarMonger 8 years ago
WarMonger
LOL i just saw your profile,0.00% win ratio lololololololol
Posted by Labrat228 8 years ago
Labrat228
yeah, i figured it would be.
Posted by WarMonger 8 years ago
WarMonger
coolits fun once uget into it,
Posted by Labrat228 8 years ago
Labrat228
my school cant afford debate, we are up here in the boondocks.
im gonna try and get on a team outside my county though.
Posted by WarMonger 8 years ago
WarMonger
im 15 years old, i take debate lol
Posted by Labrat228 8 years ago
Labrat228
Oh yes you are simply amazing for beating down a 14year old boy, excellent work.. just caution when you brag about it. :)
Posted by WarMonger 8 years ago
WarMonger
ha, u got one vote? owned. JUst goes to show who is the clear winner in this situation
Posted by Labrat228 8 years ago
Labrat228
my opponent says we need to actively work towards relations with Russia. Actively meaning nothing but that relation matters.
Posted by Derek.Gunn 8 years ago
Derek.Gunn
Why would the US not want diplomatic relations with Russia?
Surely it is standard policy to try to have diplomatic relations with as many countries as possible?
Posted by WarMonger 8 years ago
WarMonger
lol, my bad. thanks for the debate.
13 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
WarMongerLabrat228Tied
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:70 
Vote Placed by DiablosChaosBroker 8 years ago
DiablosChaosBroker
WarMongerLabrat228Tied
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 
Vote Placed by Labrat228 8 years ago
Labrat228
WarMongerLabrat228Tied
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 
Vote Placed by DrumBum1234 8 years ago
DrumBum1234
WarMongerLabrat228Tied
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:70 
Vote Placed by VoodooChild 8 years ago
VoodooChild
WarMongerLabrat228Tied
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:70 
Vote Placed by mastajake 8 years ago
mastajake
WarMongerLabrat228Tied
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 
Vote Placed by jess_ily 8 years ago
jess_ily
WarMongerLabrat228Tied
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 
Vote Placed by Karoz 8 years ago
Karoz
WarMongerLabrat228Tied
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 olivertheexpando 8 years ago
olivertheexpando
WarMongerLabrat228Tied
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 Derek.Gunn 8 years ago
Derek.Gunn
WarMongerLabrat228Tied
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