The Instigator
UttermannMCS15
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
LeemingMSC15
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

U.S government should make more of an effort to stop ISIS

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 1 vote the winner is...
LeemingMSC15
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/16/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 734 times Debate No: 71759
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)

 

UttermannMCS15

Pro

As a nation built on a foundation of democratic values, the United States has an obligation to smother oppressive regimes. In the debate of US involvement in the middle east regarding ISIS fundamentalism, the same principles would expand to include radicalism. There have been several incidents in the past year where US journalists have been captured and executed just for ISIS political gains. In this scenario, it would go against the United States core values of freedom and democracy. If the US does not get involved now, ISIS will continue to terrorize and oppress innocent people, including American citizens. #wedontnegotiateterrorists
LeemingMSC15

Con

The U.S. government does not need to make an effort to stop ISIS. Their are hundreds of other oppressive regimes including North Korea that take a higher priority. The only reason the public knows about ISIS is because the U.S. government is trying to cover up something else and over exaggerate the media. George Washington once said in his farewell address was that his primary concern was to have the U.S. not intervene with outside affairs. ISIS should be dealt with the nations around them. Not with a nation across the world and loses money trying to buy oil for their planes.
Debate Round No. 1
UttermannMCS15

Pro

Obviously there are other oppressive regimes, but last time I checked, they didn't kill innocent American citizens. In this case, the US government has an obligation through the Constitution to safeguard its citizens. Letting ISIS continue to terrorize isn't going to solve anything. ISIS is only gaining membership and strength. If the United States shifts its foreign policy to be even more lax towards terrorists, more American lives are going to be at risk. Regarding your comment about Washington, we don't live in the 18th century. It's called globalization. America is more involved than ever with other nations around the world.
LeemingMSC15

Con

ISIS's threat on American citizens is minimal if it exists at all. They have killed less than five americans, and none of them were on American soil! How can you justify that ISIS is a threat at all. Money spent to destroy this destitute minuscule threat is wasted especially when the national debt is taken into consideration. Clearly the government has blow ISIS out of proportion and has mass marketed this propaganda for their own agenda whatever that may be.
Debate Round No. 2
UttermannMCS15

Pro

We believe that the United States needs to intervene in the ISIS situation, not because of the number of Americans that they have killed, but the simple fact that the Americans that have been killed have not gotten justice.
LeemingMSC15

Con

The Americans have gotten justice. Many ISIS troops were killed during the raid in Europe from the combined forces of Russia, USA, and Britain. More ISIS troops have died then Americans.
Debate Round No. 3
UttermannMCS15

Pro

It may be true that many ISIS members have died but that does not make up for the loss of American life. The leadership of ISIS is still fully intact so the killing of Americans and other world citizens will continue.
LeemingMSC15

Con

The US already does enough to try and slow down ISIS. If they want to be stopped they should be destroyed by a combined effort of Russia, US, France, England, and any other country that opposes the regime. We should not go into a full out guerrilla warfare war just like Vietnam. We will lost just Vietnam and will lose this.
Debate Round No. 4
UttermannMCS15

Pro

There is more than one solution to stopping ISIS, violence is not the only answer. The US could make an effort to negotiate with the leadership of ISIS and also the countries for which ISIS is stationed in to try and seek a solution and stop the spread of ISIS ideology.
LeemingMSC15

Con

Wait what? You said in your opening argument and I quote, "#wedontnegotiatewithterrorists." Now you are saying we should negotiate? The inconstancy here is not valid. You stated American should be the leading force of this war. I believe they should not. American should stop being the world's police force and have a group task force deal with this problem.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by stonemmsc2015 2 years ago
stonemmsc2015
I'd have to agree with the con side in this debate even though I support a bigger initiative to stop ISIS. The arguments put forth by the con side were better and the pro side fell apart in the last argument. America has not/will not negotiate with terrorists ever as stated by George W. Bush the day after September 11th, 2001. America has a strict stand on that and will never stray from it so the pro's side last argument is a fantasy of some kind that won't happen.
Posted by wowmasterolearyshane2015 2 years ago
wowmasterolearyshane2015
let's just nuke the whole region.
Posted by americanmade23 2 years ago
americanmade23
the US needs to do all lot more to stop ISIS if only because very soon America and it's allies will be attacked by ISIS. the US always is under assault of some type by extremists Muslims, so why should we sit back and just wait for another attack?! we need to get down to business and start fighting ISIS now not later when tens or hundreds maybe thousands of innocent Americans have died because of our in-action
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Death23 1 year ago
Death23
UttermannMCS15LeemingMSC15Tied
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: .This debate sucked. It seemed like a chat room conversation more than a debate. Anyway, convincing goes to Con because he cited cost, which was one of the few legitimate considerations. Pro failed to justify the cost. Pro supposed that ISIS was somehow a threat, but did not explain how ISIS threatens America. Pro also cited justice for the handful of Americans killed by ISIS, which is important However, Pro did not explain how justice for those dead Americans would be achieved by stopping ISIS. Pro's backpedaling in the final round did not engender my confidence.