The Instigator
Salvador
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
ararmer1919
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

The United States should decrease its military spending

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
ararmer1919
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/31/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,018 times Debate No: 43173
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (2)

 

Salvador

Pro

Round 1- Acceptance

Round 2- Arguments

Round 3- Rebuttals
ararmer1919

Con

I accept. I assume Pro has BOP?
Debate Round No. 1
Salvador

Pro

Thanks for accepting to be part of this debate.
The United States should decrease military spending for the following reasons:

1. The United States doesn't need a stronger military, first of all it already is. Secondly, the United States is part of NATO. If the United States goes into war, NATO would come in and support us.

NATO in Afghanistan
http://www.nato.int...
NATO in Libya
http://www.foreignaffairs.com...

2. The United States has some of the strongest allies.
In the slideshow is shows that the United States has strong allies, which will join in case of war.
http://www.businessinsider.com...

3. It is not the United States job to go into other countries because it feels the need to protect that country. The United States isn't the only ally they have.

In conclusion the United states should decrease spending on military.
ararmer1919

Con

Ok here goes try number two lol.

"The United States doesn't need a stronger military, first of all it already is"

Yes, it is true that the United States has the worlds strongest military. However, just because you are already that strong does not mean you don't have to maintain it. First off the US needs a strong military. As the leading world superpower we have high interests in the going ons of the world and we can not hide in some isolationist ideal. This world is a dangerous and ever changing place and there are always threats in motion [1]. A nuclear armed North Korea. A rising Chinese influence in the eastern part of the world. A resurgence of Russian power. Never ending trouble from the Mid East and North Africa that constantly threaten the balance of the world [2]. The US needs to have not only a strong military but she needs the strongest. Not necessarily as a means to win wars and crush any enemy, that of course is just the basics. But as a deterrent for future conflicts as well. Its called show through force. Many wars in the past and even in present times have been held off or even prevented due solely to the United States flexing her arms so to speak. Some examples of this. The North/South Korean issue where NK is just sitting there waiting for a moment where the US looks we so that they can pounce on their southern neighbors. The Chine/Taiwan issue. The works that the US does in the Mid east helps bring security to much of the region which ensures that the main source of energy for much of the world keeps flowing. A well prepared and strong US military keeps conflicts such as these from erupting into full scale war. It also keep us ready in case of the unforeseen. Ever heard the phrase "better to have blank and not need it then need it and not have it"? Well lets look at history and see if this rings true. After WW1 America decided to do just what you are saying we should do now. Military cutbacks. Smaller budget, smaller force, ect.
Debate Round No. 2
Salvador

Pro

Salvador forfeited this round.
ararmer1919

Con

Everyone please ignore this debate
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by ararmer1919 3 years ago
ararmer1919
Just open a new debate and send me a challenge. Just make sure to increase the character limit lol.
Posted by Salvador 3 years ago
Salvador
How can I restart a debate?
Posted by ararmer1919 3 years ago
ararmer1919
yea this small debate jsut isnt working out im sorry between that and me losing the first argument i attempted to make im just not all that into this lol. sorry to you and everyone who sees this. Id really like it if we could start another one with a larger character limit. like 5,000 or something. if not thats cool i understand.
Posted by ararmer1919 3 years ago
ararmer1919
so just realized that there is only a 2000 character limit and that just destroyed so much of my argument lol. So im either going to just cut up one big argument amoungst the rounds or i was wondering if you would consider abandoning this one and restarting a new one with a larger character limit. either way works i guess.
Posted by Salvador 3 years ago
Salvador
Okay, no problem.
Posted by ararmer1919 3 years ago
ararmer1919
hey im sorry but i just got done making my first round argument and right when i finished my computer deleted it all. F*** MY LIFE. Im extremely peed off right now and so i cant retype it at the moment but i will try and get on later to do so. hope i dont miss this round.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
Salvadorararmer1919Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Hopefully pro comes back for a rematch. Forfeit.
Vote Placed by Josh_b 3 years ago
Josh_b
Salvadorararmer1919Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: I would love to ignore this debate, but Pro's argument against the US protecting other countries is frivolous and incorrect. The US is the Leader of the UN security Council and it is the responsibility to protect other countries. Con's voice for the beneficial effects of the US's world involvement lead me to vote for convincing arguments in his favor.