The Instigator
Stacey
Con (against)
Losing
6 Points
The Contender
debaterx
Pro (for)
Winning
33 Points

The war in Iraq

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: 10/17/2007 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,207 times Debate No: 9
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (5)
Votes (9)

 

Stacey

Con

I strongly disagree with the decision of war, we should'nt of even went to war with Iraq, I believe it was all decided upon Bushes' greed for wealth.
debaterx

Pro

The war in Iraq is a nessacary cause. a preliminary strike was needed due to the fact that Sadaam Hussain had weapons of mass destruction, which he would've used if the U.S. had not interveined.hoe do we know he had WMD's we gave them to him during the cold war to fight off communist influence and rise against a regieme the U.S. deemed hostile. How do we know he would've used them, he killed hundreds of thousands of his own people even his family. He made many threats to use them against the U.S.; whom he despises. Operation desert storm and the operation irqi freedom are the same war ther was no treaty ending the first iraq war and thus we were there not only for the cuases of weapons of mass destruction and the furthering of all human's rights.
Debate Round No. 1
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Phil 9 years ago
Phil
Bush never worked for Haliburton...Cheney did. If you have some evidence that either the President or Vice President have profited from this war, I'd be the first to change my opinion on the matter. My guess is that you cannot product any proof.

Haliburton is one of only 2 or 3 companies in the world that are able to do the work need in Iraq, and that's why they get some of the military contracts.

I'm sorry, but getting rich from campaign contributions makes no sense either. Every monetary donation to a public official is made public. The donations do not go directly to the pockets of the politician, but rather the campaign.

Terrorists are being created by other terrorists because of indoctrination and religious lies. America is an easy target because of our wealth and power.

When you disagree in a manner that encourages our enemies to continue fighting, that is the definition of giving aid and comfort to the enemy. These types of liberal lies that your propagating are directly putting our soldiers in harms way, because they encourage our enemies to continue fighting. I suggest you think outside the box to which you're clearly confined. Try getting your news for a week from Fox News, or talk to a some soldiers who are serving in Iraq. We are making difference, and we are winning this war.
Posted by Harlan 9 years ago
Harlan
Telling liberals to "shut your mouths because you're all giving aid and comfort to our enemies" is the kind of logic that needs to be discouraged.

It's basicly saying:

"If you disagree with us, your whole family is in mortal danger"
Posted by wryan 9 years ago
wryan
All right, idiotic was harsh. I will admit that I don't think personal profit motivated Bush. However, I dissagree with all your other stements.
Posted by wryan 9 years ago
wryan
1. Halliburton. He worked for oil companies, and oil companies have benefited from the war.

2. He got rich from campaign donations from the aforementioned companies.

3. We did create many of our enemies. the average citizen of Iraq had no reason to dislike us before we invaded. Furthermore, We have turned international opinion against ourselves. Nearly every other foreign country views us with dislike, because of this war. They were not born disliking us, and no one is born evil. That is such a huge fallacy I won't even argue it.

4. Disagreeing with our president's actions is not giveing aid and comfort to our enemies. Unless the "libs" are sending stinger missiles to Al Queada, or letting terrorists live in their basements, they are doing nothing wrong. Furthermore, the assertion that they should "shut their mouths" because they have an opinion contrary to yours is an violation of American's right to free speech.

There, I have disproven every one of your idiotic points.
Posted by Phil 9 years ago
Phil
Anyone else tired of the liberals saying, "we went to war in Iraq so Bush and his buddies could get rich?" This has got to be the dumbest argument floating out there. If you actually believe this theory, please explain how exactly Bush has gotten wealthy from this war. Or, explain which of his friends got wealthy from this war. Unlike Clinton, Bush actually cares about our military, and I personally don't believe he would EVER send our soldiers into harm's way unless it was to protect the citizens of this country. He actually is an honorable man, and you libs need to shut your mouths because you're all giving aid and comfort to our enemies. Yes, we actually have enemies out there. And no, we didn't create them…some people are just born evil.
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
StaceydebaterxTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Spelling and grammar to Pro due to the grammatical errors by Con and Pro made a better and more indepth answer concerning the Iraq War and thus he gets arguments.
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
StaceydebaterxTied
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 kinsky 2 years ago
kinsky
StaceydebaterxTied
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: no counter arg from con. why do a one- rounder?
Vote Placed by rajun 3 years ago
rajun
StaceydebaterxTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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: Do i need to say something?
Vote Placed by Amveller 6 years ago
Amveller
StaceydebaterxTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: One rounder starting with one sentence hmm? I have to go with Pro for the simple fact he said more
Vote Placed by AntiChrist666 6 years ago
AntiChrist666
StaceydebaterxTied
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 kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
StaceydebaterxTied
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 TheGreatDebate 9 years ago
TheGreatDebate
StaceydebaterxTied
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 jgirl247 9 years ago
jgirl247
StaceydebaterxTied
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