The Instigator
Shadowhuntress
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
sonofathena
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

WWII changed warfare forever

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...
sonofathena
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/12/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 618 times Debate No: 54507
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

Shadowhuntress

Pro

Round one is acceptance
Round two is arguments
Round three is rebuttal(s)
I am saying WWII changed war forever
sonofathena

Con

Good day! ^_^ Good luck! I am the demigod son of athena, 15 years old. With my mom being the goddess of war, I know WWll and it's effects to our world very well. So bring it!
Debate Round No. 1
Shadowhuntress

Pro

Hello. Daughter of Bellona at your service. May the best demigod win.

I believe WWII changed warfare because of many new technologies that arose from the war.
1) The invention of the atomic bomb. Little boy (Atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima) weighed 9.7 tons.(http://www.atomicheritage.org...). Little Boy killed 150,000 people, bringing on a whole new kind of fatal war. (http://www.aasc.ucla.edu...)
2) The creation of jet fighters also revolutionized war. Nazi 262s can fly up to 541 MPH. (http://militaryhistory.about.com...) these new back breaking speeds would forever change air battles and dogfights.
3) radar. Radar now allows us to protect ourselves from enemy advances. Without radar, we would be in the dark."
4) The Nazis invented the first military rockets with the vengeance series. (http://www.theotherside.co.uk...) This would lead to laser guided rockets, and space travel.
I should also mention that the style of war changed completely also. With the blitzkrieg, we were no longer limited to slow, month long battles."
sonofathena

Con

Warfare... Warfare... oh! I remember...
It is that thing where you kill each other for the sake of territory, culture cleansing, and other reasons which, at first sounds good until you see the violence caused in the name of whatever reason that is.

Let's see...
The war between Athens and Sparta happened because of a certain reason (In this case: Athen's fast development) then one of them was victor and the other lost. The victor progressed and the loser wept.

The war between Greece and Persia happened because of a certain reason (In this case: Persia's expansion) then one of them was victor and the other lost. The victor progressed and the loser wept.

The war between Rome and... a lot of barbarians happened because of a certain reason (In this case: Rome is filthy rich so the barbarians tried their luck) then one of them was victor and the other lost. The victor progressed and the loser wept.

The war between the French Commoners and the French Government happened because of a certain reason (In this case: The king's power) then one of them was victor and the other lost. The victor progressed and the loser wept.

The war between America and the Great Britain happened because of a certain reason (In this case: Taxes) then one of them was victor and the other lost. The victor progressed and the loser wept.

The war between The Triple Alliance and The Triple Entente (World War 1) happened because of a certain reason (In this case: Murder) then one of them was victor and the other lost. The victor progressed and the loser wept.

The war between The Axis Powers and the Allies (World War 2) Happened because of a certain reason (In this case: Revenge) then one of them was victor and the other lost. The victor progressed and the loser wept.

The war between USA and USSR (The Cold Wars) happened because of a certain reason (In this case: Different Beliefs) then one of them was victor and the other lost. The victor progressed and the loser wept.

The war between South and North Korea happened because of a certain reason (In this case: Communism vs. Democracy) then one of them was victor and the other lost. The victor progressed and the loser wept.

With that said, I don't really see much change after world war ll
Debate Round No. 2
Shadowhuntress

Pro

There is ONE reason for war. Territory. I want your land, give it to me or die. But the style of war changed completely. New tactics. New weapons. New alliances. No longer was humanity diving into trenches and doing the same thing over and over. The cold war happened over nuclear power. There would have been no such thing without WWII.
sonofathena

Con

War Deity vs. War Deity... a pretty interesting match.
Let me start off by saying, as a daughter of Bellona, you yourself should know that war is not only because of territory, for example, the Peloponesian War happened because of Sparta's intuition that Athens will rise, the cold war was because of communism and democracy, World War l and World War ll mostly happened because of Invidia/Nemesis.

If you are defining warfare as the style of how a war is conducted, then yes, warfare did change, but it did not change everything happening in war, so technically, it did not change warfare forever. In every war, people try to progress in any way they can to win the next one, and if I might suggest a battle that changed warfare (with your definition) widely, I would say it is not World War ll, but the Cold War.

Wars, Battles, they are all endless. As long as we have evil in our hearts, and desire in our minds, we would never abolish warfare, and if we cannot abolish this destructive thing, then we cannot change it forever...
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Gordontrek 3 years ago
Gordontrek
The ocean is made of water, fire is hot, Jesus loves us, the sun is bright.
Round 1 is for acceptance....
Posted by Kc1999 3 years ago
Kc1999
Let us have a debate on the existence of Australia later. I'll take pro.

HINT HINT: Don't debate facts
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Romanii 3 years ago
Romanii
ShadowhuntresssonofathenaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:23 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro argued that WW2 changed the style of war forever. Con argued that WW2 did not change what wars are and why they are fought at all. The only reason I am giving points to Con is because he provided much more elaboration, showing why the weapons a war is fought with are less important than what actually happens during the war: people die and countries (try to) gain power. Sources to Pro because only he/she had any.