The Instigator
chrisjachimiak
Pro (for)
Winning
24 Points
The Contender
JKL
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

The United States Should initiate a war against ISIS

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 4 votes the winner is...
chrisjachimiak
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/3/2015 Category: News
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,721 times Debate No: 69396
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (4)

 

chrisjachimiak

Pro

First Round is Acceptance and Definitions
Second Round is Constructive
Third Round is Rebuttals.

Please only accept if you're going to debate without any forfeits.
Forfeit by either side results in automatic loss.

Definitions

ISIS- Refers to the terrorist group that rose to prominence this summer, taking over parts of Iraq and Syria, declaring a new caliphate and killing hundreds of people.

War- a state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups within a nation or state.

Provide any other definitions you see fitting and enjoy the debate.
JKL

Con

Lol don't be silly now we aint need nother war :) vote 4 me peace
Debate Round No. 1
chrisjachimiak

Pro

Thanks for accepting.

Constructive
The United States should engage in a war against ISIS for two major reasons,

Contention 1: ISIS is killing not only United States Citizens but Citizens world wide.
Enough is enough. The fact that US citizens are being killed, more like slaughtered in Syria. ISIS has become a threat to United States National Security. The fact of the matter is, we as a country have the ability to take out ISIS and end the war, so why don't we? My opponent may argue something along the lines of "world peace." The fact of the matter is that world peace will never be achieved as long as ISIS is around. We need to end the threat in order to achieve world peace.

Contention 2: ISIS is a National Security Threat.
According to [1] ISIS is the biggest National Security threat since 911. This is completely true. Have you seen the news lately? ISIS shot down a Jordanian fighter craft, in December 2014 (video [2], article [3]). They just recently burned the Jordanian man alive, In a cage. The United States need's to engage in a war, because obviously they have the ability to fight down fighter planes. We need to neutralize the threat and end. A man was burned alive yesterday, and a few days ago a man had his head cut off. WE as a country need to blow up Syria, and go on with our day. How many more lives are we going to let die.

[1] http://rt.com...
[2] http://video.foxnews.com...
[3] http://www.foxnews.com...
JKL

Con

War us for sissies
Debate Round No. 2
chrisjachimiak

Pro

I'll reiterate my two contentions in short form.
Contention 1: ISIS is killing not only United States Citizens but Citizens world wide. Not been touched
Contention 2: ISIS is a National Security Threat. Not been touched

Now onto my opponents one sentence for a case.
"War us for sissies." I think you meant *is. The funny thing is that most of the people in our military could fight you or I or anyone for that matter and kill us in a matter of seconds. The fact that you call the military, the people who keep us safe, sissies for protecting us is a fault on your part.

One key point of advice..
Don't take debates if you aren't going to post an actual debate. This not only makes you look bad, but it makes people want to block people like you. I think I'm saying something that everyone wants to say, "GET OFF OF THIS WEBSITE." Thanks.

Voters-
My opponent failed to post any real arguments, whereas, up to this point, none of my contentions have been touched. I've refuted his one 'point.' I think it's clear that I have won this debate.
JKL

Con

war sis for issies.

Don't war againtst people thank

Sorr
But
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Bullveigh25 2 years ago
Bullveigh25
the US cannot officially engage in a "war" because isis doesnt have an offical stae. declaring war on isis would mean an ivasion of syria(ally to the Russians) , or again putting american forces on iraqi soil. we are already performing a covert war against them. last week canadian soldiers wer the first coalition ground troops to engage isis. when they announce that military advisers are being deployed, it actually means special ops troops. following the news im guessing there is 30,000 coaliton "advisors" on the ground
Posted by TBR 2 years ago
TBR
Hell fu__ing no!

If no one else picks this up, I will.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by TBR 2 years ago
TBR
chrisjachimiakJKLTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Too bad you got that looser JKL (account deleted) for this debate. Should have been better.
Vote Placed by RepublitariansUnite 2 years ago
RepublitariansUnite
chrisjachimiakJKLTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Really, Con? Really?
Vote Placed by Valkrin 2 years ago
Valkrin
chrisjachimiakJKLTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con didn't even put up a fight.
Vote Placed by syracuse100 2 years ago
syracuse100
chrisjachimiakJKLTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro was the only one in the debate basically.