The Instigator
greenbiker12
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
socialpinko
Pro (for)
Winning
16 Points

The United States cannot remain silent on North Korea's current policies

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 3 votes the winner is...
socialpinko
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/29/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,440 times Debate No: 27628
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (4)
Votes (3)

 

greenbiker12

Con

At the leisure of my opponents and the audience...I firmly stand in negation of the resolution that states: Resolved: The United States cannot remain silent on North Korean"s current policies. John Bruton (Politician) once said that "Proliferation of nuclear weapons to terrorist organisations is far more dangerous than proliferation of nuclear weapons to states like North Korea." North Korea does not pose a threat as most people believe; more notoriety should be pointed towards direct, clear threats from terrorist organizations rather than countries like North Korea.

Just list your contentions or speech or argument(s) and let the people decide. (No rebuttals)
socialpinko

Pro

First I'd like to summarize Con's position. Con basically argues that there are more pressing and important issues for the U.S. and that NK isn't much of a threat towards the U.S.


(1) My first criticism stems from the fact that Con ignores the unique position the U.S. holds as the most powerful and influential of the world's liberal democracies. As such, the U.S. has taken on the responsibility to speak out in the face of tragedies going on around the world (ignoring the at-times hypocrisy of the U.S.' own human rights abuses for the moment). To ignore the human rights abuses going on in NK would be for the U.S. to fail to fulfill its role as a superpower.


(2) The U.S. was founded on certain liberal democratic principles, among them the inherent and inalienable rights of the individual. Therefore it would be hypocritical for the U.S. to support human rights within its borders, but to wholesale ignore those abuses going on outside.


(3) Even if the U.S. has more pressing interests at hand, that doesn't mean it only has the resources to deal with one issue at once. It's perfectly reasonable to expect that the U.S. has the resources to at once deal with the threats of terrorist organizations while simultaneously taking a stand against the inhuman practices engaged in by the government of North Korea.


Back over to Con now.
Debate Round No. 1
greenbiker12

Con

First, i would like to thank my opponent for accepting my debate.

Number 1: Threats and Nuclear Weapons
My first contention is that North Korea"s nuclear weapons may not exist or be powerful enough to pose as a threat. There has been no concrete report of North Korea"s nuclear ties with Iran and the U.N. Security Council and the U.S." Proliferation Security Initiative have restricted weapon transport in and out of North Korea. Vienna University even stated that North Korea has moved from weapon transports to selling raw minerals. Slate.com stated that North Korea could probably build a very limited amount of nuclear weapons using plutonium. Research on North Korea"s underground tests in 2006 and 2009 said that these bombs do not have enough explosive power to pose as a threat to other countries. CBSNews believes that North Korea does not even have the technology to build long-range missiles. The failed missile launch that could "potentially" spin a satellite in orbit is proof of North Korea"s inaccurate "military superiority" over other countries. Meanwhile in South Korea, CNN states that South Korea announced it has developed new kinds of missiles that could strike the North. Nuclear weapons in North Korea cannot even be verified by South Korean officials concerning the recent claims about North Korea. All allegations about North Korea have a large probability of ending up as a fictional, made-up, hollow threat made up by the media to give the people a bad perspective of North Korea. South Korean officials even stated that "There is no such thing as a North Korea expert."
Number 2: Citizen"s Life
My second contention is that North Korean residents enjoy life in DPRK evidence of this is that they show high loyalty to their leader (Kim Jong UN). North Korea should be left alone because its residents are safe and content. Jae-young (North Korean Resident) said that "Although media and news only show negative aspects to life in North Korea, there are actually positive and good aspects about life in the Democratic People"s Republic of Korea." North Korea has an amazing natural environment making a resident"s life much more enjoyable. Jae-Young said that "Benefits that common people get in North Korea include free health care and education, unlike in South Korea. Operations, checkups and medicines were free as well." Thanks to the free education, the CIA believes that North Korea"s literacy rate is equal to that of United State"s 99%.
The Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nation ranked North Korea as one of the largest producers of healthy and fresh foods in the world. With about 1,400 different species of animals and about 12,000 species of plants along with a majority of rainfall as its climate, North Koreans should have no problem prospering in this fruity, fresh land. A reason to believe this is the average life expectancy of North Koreans is about 64 years old. Since there has been no formal peace treaty with South Korea, North Korea"s continuing technical war made them focus on the defense of its North Korean residents. This is why the North Korean Government decided to spend the $14.5 million given to them by the European Commission for the defense of North Koreans.
Number 3: Leader (Kim Jung Un/ Il)
My third contention is that Kim Jong-Il was a great leader for North Korea because he advanced his country"s technology to even surpass South Korea in 2003. He gave North Koreans a sense of hope that their hardships and poverty would end. He convinced his people to have faith in the government and abolished disloyal rebels to keep the prosperity and security of North Koreans. He sought for advancement and growth, which is why he educated his son with his foresight and good judgment to make certain that North Korea and its citizens would not only live on, but to improve. His diplomatic ways assured success for his country by depending on foreign aid and increased the safety of the citizens and his legacy. His honest and sincere actions only wanted success for his country"s future generations, but his concern for the general public was seen as corrupt and hasty and he was loathed by other countries and the media. Because they disliked his procedures, the media gave everyone a biased point of view about North Korea.
socialpinko

Pro

First, I'd like to point out that none of Con's case actually deals with the points I brought up in R1. My arguments were the following: that the U.S. has a responsibility to speak out against human rights abuses and that the U.S. has the capability to manage legitimate terrorist threats *and* speak out against foreign human rights abuses.


Most of Con's argument is thus irrelevant to my contentions as they relate only to the gross human right abuses going on in NK, not their possession of nuclear weapons or debatable agricultural improvements under Communist rule. I will speak of the human rights abuses going on in NK as they're the crux of my argument. I had assumed that the long train of horrific treatment within the confines of NK would be accepted by my opponent, however he seems to deny this.


The evidence for a systematic chain of human rights abuses in NK is overwhelming. Human Rights Watch states:


"The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) systematically violates the basic rights of its population. Although it has signed four key international human rights treaties and includes rights protections in its constitution, it allows no organized political opposition, free media, functioning civil society, or religious freedom. Arbitrary arrest, detention, lack of due process, and torture and ill-treatment of detainees remain serious and endemic problems. North Korea also practices collective punishment for various anti-state offenses, for which it enslaves hundreds of thousands of citizens in prison camps, including children. The government periodically publicly executes citizens for stealing state property, hoarding food, and other “anti-socialist” crimes."[1]


This general attitude concerning the human rights situation in NK has also been expressed by the U.N. on numerous occasions. Recently in March, a resolution condemning systematic human rights violations in NK passed by consensus, meaning that there was no opposition to call for a vote[2]. Things like freedom of religion, thought, and expression are also basically nonexistent even as the North Korea constitution recognizes these things[3]. Citizens have countless times been subject to imprisonment and even death for voicing their thoughts or dissident views[4][5]. The human rights situation in NK is clearly something to be condemned.


===Sources===


[1] http://www.hrw.org...
[2] http://www.hrw.org...
[3] http://countrystudies.us... ("According to Article 67, citizens have freedom of speech, publication, assembly, demonstration, and association.")
[4] http://www.state.gov...
[5] http://www.opendoorsusa.org...
Debate Round No. 2
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by wrichcirw 4 years ago
wrichcirw
My goodness, please source/cite this info:

"North Korean residents enjoy life in DPRK evidence of this is that they show high loyalty to their leader (Kim Jong UN). North Korea should be left alone because its residents are safe and content. Jae-young (North Korean Resident) said that "Although media and news only show negative aspects to life in North Korea, there are actually positive and good aspects about life in the Democratic People"s Republic of Korea." North Korea has an amazing natural environment making a resident"s life much more enjoyable. Jae-Young said that "Benefits that common people get in North Korea include free health care and education, unlike in South Korea. Operations, checkups and medicines were free as well." Thanks to the free education, the CIA believes that North Korea"s literacy rate is equal to that of United State"s 99%."

I would have trouble believing any of this even if you cited credible sources. This is almost complete and utter balderdash taken at face value.
Posted by iuweiiodjnkl 4 years ago
iuweiiodjnkl
Hi buddy :

HOT SELL Product Brand is below: ==== ( http://www.fullmalls.com... ) =====
,nike shoes,air jordan shoes,nike s h o x shoes,gucci shoes ,true religion jeans, ed hardy jeans,coogi jeans,affliction
jeans, Laguna Beach Jeans,ed hardy T-shirts,Coogi T-shirts,Christian Audigier T-shirts,Gucci T-shirts,Polo T-shirts,coach
handbag,gucci handbag,prada handbag,chanel handbag .
free shipping
New to Hong Kong : Winter Dress
New era cap $9
Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33
Nike s h o x(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $33
Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&g) $33
Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16
Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30
Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,Armaini) $12
Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $18
Come back tomorrow for another Daily Dose of Style! Bookmark this page >>
give you the unexpected harvest

==== ( http://www.fullmalls.com... ) =====

==== ( http://www.fullmalls.com... ) =====

==== ( http://www.fullmalls.com... ) =====

==== ( http://www.fullmalls.com... ) =====

==== ( http://www.fullmalls.com... ) =====

==== ( http://www.fullmalls.com... ) =====

==== ( http://www.scnshop.com... ) =====

Recommended today Nike:

Name: LeBron 9.5-2

http://www.fullmalls.com...
Posted by greenbiker12 4 years ago
greenbiker12
How are my debating skills? North Korea is a hard subject to debate on, i thank socialpinko for challenging me in debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by GorefordMaximillion 4 years ago
GorefordMaximillion
greenbiker12socialpinkoTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con argued more about NK not being what the media, and most of the world, depicts it as. Not enough about the nuclear weapons. Even a non powerful one is still radioactive unfortunately. That makes Cons major point about the weapons moot.
Vote Placed by wrichcirw 4 years ago
wrichcirw
greenbiker12socialpinkoTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: No contest. PRO had sources and a convincing argument. I know enough about North Korea to know when I am looking at dubious information, and all of CON's points made me cringe. CON's argument was completely and utterly irresponsible, especially since he didn't cite sources for what is certainly a rather unique perspective on North Korea. In fact, I thought his comments were so far off the mark that I am awarding PRO a point for conduct as well. Well done PRO in this short debate.
Vote Placed by ax123man 4 years ago
ax123man
greenbiker12socialpinkoTied
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 Checkmark-1 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: This debate was a bit odd in that Con sort of half started in round 1, giving Pro a huge advantage, especially with only 2 rounds. I'm not sure Con expected arguments in round 1. Con's argument was basically more like a propaganda paper for how great communism is while Pro had a couple of reasonable points. But, as Con requested, let the people decide. This wasn't really a debate .... good thing we all have 180 days to vote on it :0