The Instigator
maxh
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
bluesteel
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

UN Security Council Reform (specifics in argument)

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
Pro Tied Con
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: 2/12/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,584 times Debate No: 14753
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

maxh

Pro

Reform plan:
-Eliminate the permanent seats held by the US, China, the UK, and France
-Institute "rotating permanent seats", that is, seats permanently assigned to regions, with the specific nation in the seat being elected amongst the region for a term
-Increase the number of non-permanent seats to twenty

The elimination of the permanent seats held by the UK and France is particularly important as those nations are not necessarily representative of the views of the European Union as a whole. By replacing the current permanent seats with regionally-assigned permanent seats, representation from all regions is assured.
bluesteel

Con

Thanks for the debate maxh.

Eliminating the veto power of the US, China, and Russia will quickly lead to a complete fracturing of the UN. China and Russia would undoubtedly withdraw from the United Nations completely if a "veto proof" decision were foisted on them that they didn't agree with, such as a resolution to force China to further re-value their currency. The US may not withdraw, but it would further attempt to circumvent the UN. In the past, when the Security Council would not approve our "police actions" (Kosovo, Iraq), we just ignored the Security Council completely. As the US increasingly "goes around" the UN, the entire organization will be de-legitimized because it will become clear that they hold no actual authority when most of the major world decisions take place through other mediums: wars/peacekeeping is operated through NATO, major decisions are made through bilateral talks, rather than through the UN general assembly; sanctions are imposed by the OECD, not the UN.
Debate Round No. 1
maxh

Pro

maxh forfeited this round.
bluesteel

Con

forfeit = I win

Unfortunate since it's only 1000 characters.
Debate Round No. 2
maxh

Pro

maxh forfeited this round.
bluesteel

Con

lol, I like how my opponent's Round 1 argument seems to say, by omission, that Russia keeps their permanent seat. I negate: the US should have the only permanent seat.
Debate Round No. 3
maxh

Pro

maxh forfeited this round.
bluesteel

Con

blah blah blah
Debate Round No. 4
maxh

Pro

maxh forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by democrat435 5 years ago
democrat435
cool, you're gonna win for sure, i with the con
Posted by twsurber 6 years ago
twsurber
I'm all for the U.S. not only giving up a permanent seat, but also withdrawing completely from the U.N. Of course losing the U.S. would cut a very large chunk out of the U.N.'s operational capitol :o)
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by J.Kenyon 6 years ago
J.Kenyon
maxhbluesteelTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05