The Instigator
Con (against)
3 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
2 Points

US involvement in foreign wars and affairs

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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/21/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,835 times Debate No: 46424
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




P1- We should focus on what is going on within our own country rather than focusing on other countries who have little or nothing to do with what is going on here. We cannot be worried about other peoples human rights when people in America are still fighting for equality.

P2: It is not making us any safer by going into other countries and causing catastrophes there. We are killing innocent people for little to no purpose.

P3: US involvement will cause more people to go against us. As a country we believe we are better than anyone else and hate against America will continue to grow .

C: We should stay out of foreign affairs.


P1) Other wars can affect the U.S. The outcomes of World War 2 could have been different without involvement. Hitler could have accomplished his goals of expansion that could have affected the U.S. directly.

P2) Countries should be working together. The UN helps provide vaccines and food to different countries that can help spread the cause of global cooperation about issues "that no single country can resolve alone".

P3) Involvement can help spread democracy. "Democracy cannot flourish in a lawless climate"
C) The US should be involved in foreign wars and affairs
Debate Round No. 1


P1) The only reason why the US had involvement in WWII is because of the attack at Pearl Harbor. We originally were going to stay out of WWII because of isolationism. Our involvement in the first world war caused major debt, and eventually the stock market crashed. George Washington emphasized isolationism in his farewell address U.S. The marginal interest did not justify the number of casualties

P2) Regardless of the U.N. "member countries act in their own interest rather than the common good, leading to bad decisions."

P3) The US cannot be the world police. Other countries will expect them to be involved every time


P1) World War 2 also helped create jobs for Americans to get out of the depression because of all the factories that were building war equipment. In this case being involved in a foreign war was able to help make the economy better for the United States.

P2) Even before Pearl Harbor FDR was trying to stretch neutrality to help Britain have a better chance of winning war, this made the US an "active" participant in war, thus he was not completely neutral before Pearl Harbor.

P3) The issue is not to be a police but to intervene where help is needed because we are all members of the human race.
Debate Round No. 2


P1) If it was not for FDR's New Deal Plan we would not gotten out of the depression. The New Deal Plan jump started the recovery. By 1970 the GNP had risen to $943 billion-after which point the American economy began to decelerate. 30 years of economic stability v. now being in a $17 trillion debt from borrowing money from other countries and losing every single war since WWII.

P2) FDR must have forgotten that we fought against Britain for equality, & that was the last time any countries came to the aid of the United States. We are in an economic crisis. We don't see any other countries rushing to our aid.

P3) Yes, and we still don't all have equality in the US


P1) The depression did not end solely because of the New Deal, WW 2 did play a part in introducing a new industrial demand.
P2) If we were to concentrate on the past nothing would go further. FDR and Britain were working toward a common goal to stop the Axis. Countries should be able to unite and go after a common goal and not be influenced by past leaders.
P3) There is still a long way to go toward equality in the US, but it can be said that we have been going in the right direction. Years ago the thought of an African American president would have been inconceivable.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Seeginomikata 2 years ago
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:32 
Reasons for voting decision: It is generally a bad idea to use sources from the official government websites when trying to come up with evidence that are in opposition to government policy. Keep this in mind for future reference! This was a tough debate to judge. Con made good points on the benefits of US intervention in the outside world, however I feel that such arguments are not relevant to the debate at hand. This is because I am assuming that the Con's resolution means negative interventions, such as invasions, CIA operations, drug war, terror war, military and economic aid for dictators, etc. The only reason why I'm voting con is because I refuse to believe that anyone would make a debate topic arguing against the things pro argued for, such as UN aid and relief. For the record, the US was never isolationist, and was constantly getting involved in the world abroad, especially Latin America. The World Wars was an inevitability, partially because the government was eager for participation in the war.