The Instigator
innomen
Pro (for)
Winning
26 Points
The Contender
mrzdebatesawesome
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

The United States should withdraw from NATO

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 5 votes the winner is...
innomen
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/3/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,963 times Debate No: 15778
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (5)

 

innomen

Pro

"Beware of entangling allances" - George Washington

It is my position that the United States should withdraw from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization for reasons of original intent, need, effectiveness, and purpose.

By withdraw I simply mean that the membership of the United States be ended completely within that organization.

The first round is just for rules (standard), and clarifications.
NATO: http://en.wikipedia.org...

Good luck.
mrzdebatesawesome

Con

i believe that the us should stay in NATO for one strong purpose: PROTECTION. in the case that the us does withdraw from NATO, it will contradict and damage the U.S.'s hegemony. doing this, in turn, will lead other nations to believe America is weak and force us into near danger if other countries decide to attack. in turn, if these countries do attack and we have fled the NATO, we will have no allies that will consider to help us because we so readily abandoned them. so therefore i believe that the U.S. should stay in allignment with NATO.
Debate Round No. 1
innomen

Pro

The following will address your objections to this resolution and clearly argue for the withdrawal of the United States from NATO:

1.The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was created in 1949. Its purpose was clear in a post WWII Europe.[1]
-Western Europe in 1945 was depleted of its resources in defending itself from any hostile initiatives. [2]
-The USSR was a clear threat to the borders of Western Europe with its newly gained client states in Eastern Europe, and a new military presence. [3]
-Post WWII was the beginning of the nuclear era and the Cold War. [4]
-The Soviets were able to have medium to long range nuclear missiles throughout Eastern Europe and the USSR with a target of the major cities of Western Europe.[5]

2.The origins of NATO are really an extension of the Marshal plan which was to provide assistance to Western Europe at a time of military and economic devastation. It had nothing to do with protecting the borders of the United States, but rather providing a defense of Europe. There was a need for a "trip wire" and a follow up plan for all of the states of Europe. Soon after NATO the Warsaw Pact emerged which gave a further need for NATO. The needs of this sort of assistance to Europe is long since gone. During the cold war the United States spent more on the defense of Europe than Europe spent on their defense. More specifically the amount spent by each American citizen on the defense of Europe was greater than that of the average citizen of Europe.

3.Such a need for Europe no longer exists.

-The USSR has been dissolved along with its client states[6], so that the original threat that precipitated the creation of NATO no longer exists.
-There now exists a European Union[7]. Since the purpose of NATO was to provide a united front against the Soviet threat, and essentially the EU is a united front by its nature such a mechanism no longer is needed.
-The EU has a military contingency plan[8]. Since The EU has within its frame work a defense plan, NATO would be redundant.

The entire premise and need for NATO has been negated. It remains an unnecessary and redundant organization.

My opponent fears that the United States will have a diminished military as a result of a withdrawal from NATO, but there is no reason to believe that at all.

1.The United States still has the strongest military in the world without the support of the other members of NATO [9].

2.By withdrawing from NATO, it does not mean that the United States will cease to have allies, so that if there were a collective need, and a common purpose as we currently do with non NATO members we could still join forces, but the obligations will be balanced by cause and need.

3.It is important to know that NATO is not a branch of the United Nations, but rather a separate and burdensome contract that is anachronistic in its existence.

1.http://www.history.com...
2.http://www.worldology.com...
3.Expansion and Coexistence by Adam Ulam, pages 189 – 191 http://www.amazon.com...
4. http://en.wikipedia.org...
5.http://en.wikipedia.org...
6.hthttp://europa.eu....
7.htmtp://www.coldwar.org...
8.http://www.consilium.europa.eu...
9.http://www.globalfirepower.com...
mrzdebatesawesome

Con

mrzdebatesawesome forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
innomen

Pro

This is a big surprise. My arguments remain.

I'd like to further assert that there is a financial burden to NATO that the U.S. Cannot bear.

In the Serbian conflict where NATO was employed in this post Soviet era engagement, it cost the US $9B when all was said and done, for a European conflict which could have been handled completely by Europeans. [1]

http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil...
mrzdebatesawesome

Con

mrzdebatesawesome forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
innomen

Pro

See above.
mrzdebatesawesome

Con

mrzdebatesawesome forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by innomen 5 years ago
innomen
It's certainly not the first time. I think it best to challenge directly, rather than put the debate out as an open challenge.
Posted by Ore_Ele 5 years ago
Ore_Ele
Sorry man. If I held a strong opinion about NATO, I would have done this for you.
Posted by innomen 5 years ago
innomen
This is just so sad. I hate it when i put work into a debate and some moron comes by and accepts with no intention of responding.
Posted by innomen 5 years ago
innomen
Cool, we'll see what happens. I'm shocked it hasn't been taken yet.
Posted by BangBang-Coconut 5 years ago
BangBang-Coconut
If this is still up in a day or two, I'm totally going to accept it.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by twsurber 5 years ago
twsurber
innomenmrzdebatesawesomeTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: innomen wins wih a solid case plus forfeited rounds = apathy
Vote Placed by boredinclass 5 years ago
boredinclass
innomenmrzdebatesawesomeTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: con forfeit
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
innomenmrzdebatesawesomeTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Obvious win is obvious.
Vote Placed by LaissezFaire 5 years ago
LaissezFaire
innomenmrzdebatesawesomeTied
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: Forfeits.
Vote Placed by socialpinko 5 years ago
socialpinko
innomenmrzdebatesawesomeTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: innomen showed that while NATO was at one point necessary for the protection of war devastated Europe from the Soviet bloc, it is now unnecessary as the Soviet Union has dissolved and it is also reduntant as Europe already has the EU.