The Instigator
Monster
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
The_Devils_Advocate
Pro (for)
Winning
16 Points

The war in Georgia

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
Con Tied Pro
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: 8/21/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,349 times Debate No: 5108
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (13)
Votes (5)

 

Monster

Con

I don't have much time to write this (sleeping pill is starting), so I'll start off--

I am completely against interfering in the war in Georgia. I believe that they should pay for what they did. To my knowledge, they attacked South Ossetia, who is somehow tied to Russia. Russia attacks Georgia, for the combo of Russia pretty much being bombarded with extreme western influence. They did go a bit overboard with it, and I think its justified. they are telling the west that we needn't mess with them. I, for one, completely agree. I don't want another WW on our hands. Besides, if America DID interfere, and send troops, we'd be completely screwed with the combo of all the peace keepers in the U.S., the war in the middle east (and I know you will challenge me on this, but I would say that having troops all over and in ever country of the middle east pretty much, even if its not an official war, is war and war peacekeeping.) and then Russia would be a wakeup call, they have nukes, they have cruise missiles, they have the technology to destroy us. the middle east can't hurt us. RUSSIA CAN. We don't have to interfere to keep an eye on them, so George Bush, there are these new things called Satellites. If you want to use the upkeep cost, then use them.
The_Devils_Advocate

Pro

Greetings my esteemed opponent. I wish you the best of luck and look forward to an exciting and inviting round.

There are three main premises that i would like to present today.
1. Georgia cannot defend itself
2. Russia knows this and was already planning to invade
3. Western influence is the only way to stop the war.

First let's take a look at exactly what happened. South Ossetia is primarily russian. This happened a while ago while it was under russian control. South Ossetia didn't want to be Georgian so it seceeded to russia. Georgia didn't like this so it invaded South Ossetia to regain control. Russia hurried to "help" the South Ossetians fend off the Georgian army and went a step further by invading Georgia. This is what the western powers that be have a problem with. I understand that you are specifically talking about America, so I shall limit myself to America as well.

Let's go to my first premise. This one is pretty easy to understand and believe. Georgia is a minor state that cannot defend against a major power like russia. Hopefully there are no arguments here.

The second premise is where I imagine a lot of the argumentation will happen. Russia was already planning on invading Georgia before the aid was sent to South Ossetia. Before helping South Ossetia fend off the Georgians, the russian military was found exercising just inside their borders (it's amazing what can happen when we use the satellites you were talking about.) After they invaded Georgia, we realized that it was the exact same thing they were practicing before they were involved. This means that russia had no intention of ever just helping South Ossetia. They were practicing their invasion into Georgia. This is all over the news and articles about this war so if you haven't heard this then I suggest you start to do a little research. It shouldn't take long to find it. Go to BBC or FOX News or CNN even wikipedia if you want.

Now you say that we should stay out of it because Russia could kick our A**. What you don't realize is that Russia is not in good standing with the world community. Most of the western powers like france, england, usa, etc... don't like it when a big power is picking on a little power. Take the example of Iraq and Kuwait. The same applies here. So the international community is going to put pressure on Russia to withdraw it's troops. They are already doing so. In fact, Russia has said that their troops were going to have been withdrawn already. But as it turns out, they keep saying that they will withdraw them later and later. So without any forces of the U.S.A. or another western power in their, they are already making progress. If the USA should send troops in, this would show the russians the seriousness with which we are taking the situation. This would speed along the withdrawal of troops and stop the war. Without that though, the russians will continue to stall like they are already doing.

Now you say that we don't have the manpower to do this. While we may have troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, we still have troops back home. In fact, both presidential candidates are promising an influx of troops into Iraq. This means that we could use those troops to go to Georgia. If America does this, we will have the backing of the international community which will more than likely result in some UN peacekeepers and other multinational forces.

So this shows how my third premise is true. The only way for Russia to back away is to have a physical presence in Georgia.
Debate Round No. 1
Monster

Con

Greetings! Thank you for taking my debate.

Okay, first off, I want to correct you. I would like to say that Russia can not beat the US at its own game (and by that I mean bullying people around.) I know we have more nukes. I know we have more everything. I know we could beat them. That does NOT in ANY way mean that they can't do damage to us. imagine if they got a nuke to Chicago, san fran, la, new york, or something. just ONE of these cities would SERIOUSLY damage the U.S.s already bad economy, and also halt a good part of our military production, if they were tactical and precise. I know we could beat them. We could beat there damn a**, but it doesn't mean they can't hurt us. Even so, if I were the prime minister or president or whatever the heck they have over there, I would do as much damage to the USA as I could for the exact reason that you and I can both agree on... They'd beat Russia into an alternate dimension! Might as well go out with a bang, eh (pun intended :P)?

Now, bringing up your training statement

Yes, the Russians were training there military. They were training for modern warfare. So were the georgians, so are the insurgents in Iraq, and so is almost every country on planet earth. its the new thing, and with this war, with the war in the middle east, and with tensions and nuclear bombs, you'd be an idiot not to.

Now--
By interfering I mean sending a military presence. Why can't we do something else? Its only been a couple weeks. Honestly, to me its similar to my situation, which is-- I am severely ADHD..... People think that i can go 2 months of free, no pill, then go back to school and SNAP I am going to behave perfectly, and cause no trouble. Same with Russia. They haven't had this kind of action for a LONG time. They can't be expected to play by the rules right off the bat, now can you? I say, we be persistent, send WEAPONS like we did in Afghanistan (which brings up my next point) and push them harder and harder, and also meet face to face with the russian government and military leaders.

My next point
we didn't stop the Soviet Union from taking Afghanistan. we didn't stop them from taking any other country either! If it gets out of hand, like over expansion and a repeat of the cold war, then by hell send military units. But I just don't think we can afford to send them just yet.

I feel like I missed a couple of my points, but I'm not sure... Good luck!
The_Devils_Advocate

Pro

Greetings my esteemed Monster, and thank you for your timely response. I apologize for my tardiness as I am rather busy. But I hope to do better in the future. Let us begin shall we?

In your first argument, you say that Russia would be willing to "go out with a bang." My first argument here is that this is unwaranted. My second argument here is...WHY THE H*** WOULD RUSSIA GO TO WAR KNOWING THEY WOULD LOSE? Simple answer...THEY WOULDN"T. Russia knows that they would lose and they wouldn't go to war to lose. There are two warrants to this argument:
1. Everyone likes to live.
2. History proves. During the Cold War, Russia never attacked us because they knew that we had more nukes, they knew they would lose. If they didn't do it twenty years ago, there's no reason they would do it now.
Not only that, but the international community would immediately side with us as I've already talked about. You forget to talk about how the international community would side with us, and that's pretty crucial.

Now, bringing up my training statement. You missed what I was talking about. It's not that they were just training. They were training for an invasion. The exact invasion that they made into Georgian territory. It was quite literally a rehearsal for invasion. They went over the strategy they would need to do the invasion into Georgia. This is BEFORE they were involved. That means that was their intention before helping South Ossetia out.

You say that they can't be expected to play by the rules right off the bat. I'm saying that when someone doesn't play by the rules, they should get punished for it. The analogy that you gave doesn't really apply here. Russia isn't an ADHD country that accidentally invaded Georgia because they weren't on their pill. They thought it out, practiced it, and performed it. A better analogy would be of a murderer that has blueprints on how to blow up a house, practices with explosives, and then demolishes a house while the family inside is sleeping. To just say "bad boy, don't do it again." is absurd. That man needs to be punished just like Russia needs to as well. They need to know that kind of attitude will not be allowed mr. Without troops this won't happen. I've already told you how this is true, and you haven't argued that as well.

Next you say that we didn't stop Russia from taking afghanistan or any other countries. Well, we did help afghanistan beat Russia out. So that is just as good in my opinion. As for the other countries, they were communist to begin with, they just kind of absolved into russia and formed the USSR. Now let me bring up another scenario from the past. After Hitler comes into power, he quickly invades this little no name country outside of France. Britain, France and the other world powers give him nothing but a slap on the wrist. Hitler then uses this and invades france and quickly takes it. The result...the largest war this world has ever known. Russia has just invaded the small no name country. You said you don't want another world war...then send troops into Russia before it escalates.
Debate Round No. 2
Monster

Con

Greetings! Don't worry about it, I have time :)
Thank you for not bringing up the reasons George Bush would go out there in 5 seconds after seeing there oil supplies, etc :D

(if you saw my latest comment, you probably know whos side I took)

Also--

Russia has allies. One of them is China. In man power, china>USA.
Hitler was crazy. You can't compare a bipolar, insane, mad with power man with Putin. Putin isn't a very bad guy. He makes bad decisions, but he definately is NOT insane. Hitler was also suicidal. Research it, he was a depressed guy. Not to mention a complete idiotic JERK, that wanted a war. Putin does not. My anaology was a bad one, but Hitler and Putin are completely different.

My next arguement--
Why is it any of our buisness? Excuse me on this one, I am truly sorry, my news program provided NO information about the U.S.s relations to Georgia, except that Georgia liked us and they tried to get into NATO. As well as the west, at that..... But why do we have to interrfere? We are thousands of miles away. Russia can invade them if they want, we are no one to tell the Russians to stop if we have no relations beyond friendlienss.... That would be like a gang going to war with another gang that was using ANOTHER gangs turf, because one or two of the guys have friend in the gang that is uninvloved. Its just stupid. I can't see why you would want to, except for the gas prices, which I already stated I couldn't care less about. I also don't see what Russias oil has to do with ours. Europe sells oil to them in the winter, and Russia sells it back. With europe losing a source if the Russians get the pipeline, then they are probably going to try and sell us more for cheaper.... Which willa actually lower our prices, or make them stay the same (depending on what the speculators do)

I'm all for sending weapons to the Georgians, it won't make a difference. Just not man power. When the russians when this, then we should monitor them. Attack a bigger country, f*ck them, send military, run the russians into the ground again. There not going to. Its not the same as 1930, dude. This is the 21st century, and they know it, they are afraid of us. However they choose to deal with it, they don't want a war with us. No one wants to go one on one with the U.S., now do they? If Russia DID go to war with us if we DID send troops, they're most likely going to try and bring in China. Then you know what we are going to do? We're going to bring in NATO. England, France, Germany, and other countries. That right there is enough to beat them. What would you do? Your not going to surrender, the russians are to stubborn. WHent hings get really bad, YOU NUKE! Thats that. Everyone would.

No, they didn't attack during the cold war, but they came pretty dang close. How about we name some situations?

The Cuban missile crysis. a favorite of mine. Hell, if they got the nukes there, screw the cubans, I KNOW America, if not nuking the Russians, would go and beat the living hell out of the russains. Thats common sense, right there.

Russia got dangerously close to the west, and if you google it, most of them we're building there military ever stronger, and stopping to care about the costs. Lithuania, and georgia, for instance. Afghanistan might be a little to close, but I don't think it played a huge factor. They did indeed have many strategic positions if you think about it. I'm sure we wouldn't want a repeat of this, now would we? EEEEEXXXAAAACCCCTTTTLLLLYYYY.

My next arguement---
Why would the Russians want to go anywhere beyond there "boundaries"? Why do they want to threaten the west? They know as well as we do, that WWIII could definately mean a very bad change in the world. Maybe even the end for all, or most of mankind. They know this! Whether or not it be religiously, or scientifically connected, it could. Slap there wrist, punish them, and don't send troops.
The_Devils_Advocate

Pro

Thank you for this wonderful debate monster. During this round, I will show how my opponent has shifted his argumentation. I will prove how he is wrong in his analysis of the situation, and how the evidence I have provided is enough to win the round.

My opponents first argument says that if Russia invades then China would help Russia out. I have a couple arguments here. My first is that they wouldn't help Russia out. The reason for this being because China has given a lot to the international community. With the olympics being one of the biggest events in the world, China gave ground on a lot of different issues. They increased their cleanliness and effectiveness in order to please the international community. This has resulted in the international community's respect for China growing exponentially. In fact, China is no longer the international bad guy. Instead, with Russia invading Georgia during the world cease fire so typical of the olympics, they have taken the place of China. China is not eager to resume its role as the world's villain and therefore wouldn't help. They wouldn't be happy with the west interfering, but they wouldn't help Russia out.

He then argues that Putin isn't a bad guy. The fact that Putin planned on invading Georgia and then did, shows that he is willing to go to war. Georgia is seen as an independent nation. They aren't Russian. You seem to be misguided here. Russia has absolutely no claim to Georgia whatsoever. So their invasion is unwarranted.

Now to answer your question. Why is it any of our business? Because Georgia is a part of the world we live in. To stick our heads in the sand and let it happen is a naive way of dealing with things. Especially with the rise of a global market and economy, every other country becomes important to every other country. If we sit back and let the world do what it wants, then this will hurt us in more than one way. It is our business because we can't sit back and allow the little kid on the block to get picked on by the big bully. We interfere to show the other nations that they can't do whatever they want and get away with it. There has to be consequences.

Now you start to say that we should send weapons to Georgia to help them. This is a contradiction to your statement. You originally said that we should stay out of Russia. Now we're going to interfere? You have changed your standpoint and that should lose you the round.

And your last point completely agrees with mine about Russia not going to go to war with us. You have completely proven my point.

Now to discuss where I'm winning on my argumentation. My opponent dropped the analysis I gave on Russia planning on interfering with Georgia. This argument has never been debated and shows how Russia's ultimate goal was to invade Georgia. Look up to the orginal three premises I gave in round one. Each one has been supported and won by myself.

All of this proves why I should win this round. I thank you monster for this debate and wish you luck in future rounds.
Debate Round No. 3
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by abarmot 7 years ago
abarmot
Why start a debate if you both have no idea what you are talking about?
First of. Both Russia and USA have SEVERAL TIMES more than they need to not damage but utterly obliterate ANY country on this planet. So neither Russia nor US is dominant in this aspect of military.

Second, even Bush wasn't that big of an idiot to send US troops and risk open conflict with Russia. I am not even going to discuss this because even Dick Cheney would by laugh himself in to a heart attack if he heard such a suggestion.

As far as Russian military exercises near Georgian border. This was meant to send a very clear message to Georgia "Don't even think about attacking South Ossetia". As a matter of fact Russian president openly came out and stated that if Georgia attacks Russia will have no choice but to respond.

The point is Mexico can't be long term hostile to USA and Georgia can't be long term hostile to Russia. The economic, cultural and geographic ties are too tight.
Posted by Monster 8 years ago
Monster
i think you miss took what i was saying devil, but all in all good analysis. great debate
Posted by PoeJoe 8 years ago
PoeJoe
http://www.debate.org...

Read my comment (first one).
Posted by Monster 8 years ago
Monster
wow, triple post... heh

sorry
and DA, i agree, the analogy i gave was kind of inappropriate for the situation. apolgies
Posted by Monster 8 years ago
Monster
take that back, turning 13 next month. and if you still dont beleive me, the only two places i listed my real age are http://www.z11.invisionfree.com...
and
http://www.chaosden.ipbfree.com...
i am listed as Monstermaster.
i belong to various other forums.....

would u like me to list them so i can prove it to you?
Posted by Monster 8 years ago
Monster
yeah.... im turning 13 this month. go ahead, trace my email, i never put my real age. i put in random numbers so i dont have to go through age crap, the deleting browsing history, cookies, and other data... gets annoying....

Also----
I watch the news alot.... My grandfather has ties to my state government, and when Barrack Obama came to my city he was the one to escort him everywhere, and also greet him. i am experienced in politics for my age, and before you pull the "your going with what your parents say" on me, mom is hardcore liberal and dad is hardcore conservative (don't ask me how it works, because i dont know lol)... so i based my opinion around what ive heard from them
Posted by Labrat228 8 years ago
Labrat228
I agree Devil (25 Characters)
Posted by The_Devils_Advocate 8 years ago
The_Devils_Advocate
So...with an IQ of 160, why are you a 24 year old male in the seventh grade? Me thinks you a liar.
Posted by Labrat228 8 years ago
Labrat228
then good monster, learn about it. And if your in the 7th grade your just starting to learn about Russia. Remember this "Those who don't learn from history are condemned to repeat it"
Posted by Monster 8 years ago
Monster
Heh, I am currently in 7th grade
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by The_Devils_Advocate 8 years ago
The_Devils_Advocate
MonsterThe_Devils_AdvocateTied
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 Monster 8 years ago
Monster
MonsterThe_Devils_AdvocateTied
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 Rezzealaux 8 years ago
Rezzealaux
MonsterThe_Devils_AdvocateTied
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 
Vote Placed by Labrat228 8 years ago
Labrat228
MonsterThe_Devils_AdvocateTied
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 
Vote Placed by Cooperman88 8 years ago
Cooperman88
MonsterThe_Devils_AdvocateTied
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