The Instigator
clayrobinsonca
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
lil_xandy
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

War on Terror

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 3 votes the winner is...
clayrobinsonca
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/24/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 242 times Debate No: 80091
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

clayrobinsonca

Pro

The war on terror needs to happen. We can't knock on their doors and ask them politely to stop bombing us, it doesn't work that way. The best thing to do is have a strong military, that way countries will see that and won't want to mess with us. Terrorists must be stopped.
lil_xandy

Con

We as the people of, should just leave the middle east and bomb with an nuclear bomb
Debate Round No. 1
clayrobinsonca

Pro

Why are you against the war on terror then if you want to drop a bomb, this argument is no irrelevant now that we both agree. The war on terror is a serious issue that can't be solved by caring about another's 'feelings'. That doesn't make any sense. Peace is ensured by force, not by a unanimous agreement.
Debate Round No. 2
clayrobinsonca

Pro

Then there is no point in this argument.
lil_xandy

Con

lil_xandy forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
clayrobinsoncalil_xandyTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by TheRussian 1 year ago
TheRussian
clayrobinsoncalil_xandyTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: No real debate, Con seemed to have made a mistake.
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 1 year ago
Midnight1131
clayrobinsoncalil_xandyTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: FF, also Pro's argument wins out, they gave a better plan than Con did. They stated that if we have a strong military other countries will take note of that and be more cautious. Con on the other wants to nuke the middle east. First off, this isn't even a stance against the war on terror, because bombing is still partaking in the war, Con also gives no justification of their plan, unlike Pro.