The Instigator
rougeagent21
Pro (for)
Winning
54 Points
The Contender
rangersfootballclub
Con (against)
Losing
7 Points

Waterboarding is a just method of gainig information from terrorists.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 9 votes the winner is...
rougeagent21
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/20/2009 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,545 times Debate No: 7019
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (16)
Votes (9)

 

rougeagent21

Pro

I stand in affirmation. I will allow my opponent to open. The question now is: Why is water boarding unjust?
rangersfootballclub

Con

waterboarding is unjust because it is a FACT that the majority of people it is used against are innocent , and forced to admit to crimes they never done .

it is plain and simple it is torture , how would you like it if i grabbed you off the streets tortured you in extrme ways worse than waterboarding ( which america does do ) and focred you to admit to something you never done and put you in jail forever ?

the americans have this attitude after 9/11 i accept it was terrible what happend , but i mean no offense when i say this , but americans need to calm the f**k down . they think since that happned they have the right to torture innocent people and bully everybody. America has a join us or die forein policy.

so i would like you know to justicfy why torture is ok on innocent people .
Debate Round No. 1
rougeagent21

Pro

Well, it seems that my opponent misses the mark in this debate. His entire argument is why we Americans shouldn't torture innocent people via water boarding. Opponent, would you please read the resolution more carefully? I am saying that water boarding is a just way to extract information from terrorists. (NOT innocent people mind you)

"but i mean no offense when i say this , but americans need to calm the f**k down"
Wow.

Since I cannot attack my opponent's case because of its irrelevancy, I will simply state my own case.

1. Water boarding is sometimes necessary to gain information.
It comes down to this: Are we going to honor a radical terrorist's rights, (FYI they have none under the rules of war) or are we going to protect the rights of American citizens? Picture this: Yourself and a terrorist are locked in a room. In the next room, your family is also locked. There is a door separating the two rooms. Only the terrorist know how to open the door. If you do not open the door and get to your family in ten minutes, they will die. Do you
(a) Torture the terrorist
(b) Honor his supposed rights, and let your family die

It seems rather simple to me. Well, until my opponent offers a legit case, I feel no need to expand on my case.

"Water boarding is a just method of gaining information from terrorists"
Affirmed.
rangersfootballclub

Con

thats a stupid response these " die hard terrosists " are human beings becayse the ones you call terorrists are most of the time innocent you say that " we only torture the real terrorits no innocent people " now how the hell would you know that ?? protecting the rights of the american people ? pffftttt dont play that card . You my friend have been brainwashed , seen to much of the news . theres the humane way and well theres the american way , i dont care if i get unpopular comments for saying this but its the truth and you americans need to waken up to what your goverment have done

Torture is not a way to get information because you are forcing people to tell you something that they have not done. even if you saw them blow up a bomb infront of you take them to be tortured chances are they will seem like they have had enough and tell you a lot of crap.

like i say my american friends , wake up smell the coffee take a god hard look at your goverment and tell me what they do to people is humane ? waterboarding is just one of the many things they do and no doubt about it they do ten times worse.
Debate Round No. 2
rougeagent21

Pro

Well, my opponent sure feels very strongly about his beliefs. In his last speech, he made very weak attacks on my case. I will first address these, and then move on to further destroy his.

1.
He tries to attack my case with this statement:
"protecting the rights of the american people ? pffftttt dont play that card."

This is unreasonable! Is he proposing we NOT protect the American people? He gives no warrant to this claim, only that "don't play that card." Pitiful.

2.
"Torture is not a way to get information because you are forcing people to tell you something that they have not done. even if you saw them blow up a bomb infront of you take them to be tortured chances are they will seem like they have had enough and tell you a lot of crap."

My opponent contradicts himself in this statement. He says we can't torture them because they are innocent, (again, please read the resolution carefully) but then not to torture them even if they blow up a bomb in front of us? This is ridiculous! "Oh, well, I'm sure that guy who just blew up the bomb is innocent." NO!

3.
"like i say my american friends , wake up smell the coffee take a god hard look at your goverment and tell me what they do to people is humane ? waterboarding is just one of the many things they do and no doubt about it they do ten times worse."
Once again, my opponent's argument does not pertain to this topic. He is being rach, and making accusatory statements. I cannot consider these arguments, since they are irrelevant. Now to my case.

So, my opponent makes no additional attacks on my case. (However un-specific his attacks were) He DOES NOT address my analogy, nor my contention 1. I leave my opponent with a challenge, in which he must complete it to win this debate.

You must prove what rights terrorists have. (Which is impossible, since they have none, as described in the rules of war) You must then prove why we should protect the rights of radical terrorists over the rights of the innocent citizen. How is that just? Why should we give up the citizen's rights for the non-existent rights of some radical terrorist?

Unless you can answer all of these, you have surely lost the debate.

"Waterboarding is a just method of gaining information from terrorists."
Affirmed.
rangersfootballclub

Con

I make these so called " attacks " because you feel so patoritc about your country that you are willing to say its acceptable to break basic human rights ??

these people do not recive trials , dont say they do because they dont. Let me put it this way you say terrorists have no rights , to an extent i agree . However there was a saying once " one mans terrorist , is anthour mans freedom fighter "

i understand you americans feel strongly about this , after 9/11 i dont blame you to be honest , however whenever american or even british troops have been captured in the past and have been tortured, you americans and the british as well act in outrage when hearing the news , so do i ; i am a british citizen . But is thaat not hypicritical ? you grab a man from his country and torture him ? without trial or anything , i understand the soilders never recvice a trial etc . but thats because they are walking around on the terroritory they shouldnt be in .

now i want you to think about this , you tell me to answer the question . How about you think that torture is in humane and should only be used in the most extreme of cases.
Debate Round No. 3
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
lol there weren't any :)
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
The only thing PRO didn't win was sources...
Posted by Demosthenes 8 years ago
Demosthenes
"Innocent people who were abducted"

Really? You were there, were you?

The people who are being waterboarded are enemy combatants who were captured ON A FIELD OF BATTLE CARRYING ARMS.

Otherwise what is the point of interrogating them?

Its not like the US Army is picking random goat farmers or shop owners up off the street to waterboard. The terrorists (and that's what they are, TERRORISTS) are the ones being waterboarded.

One case where an innocent man was harmed in the process of interrogation DOES NOT exclude it as an effective tool of interrogation.
Posted by I-am-a-panda 8 years ago
I-am-a-panda
If I could vote, I would give most points to Pro

I agreed with Con before and after the debate as it was a weak debate.

Rougeagent has better conduct as he did not attack his opponents beliefs and insult him.

Rougeagent had better spelling and grammar.

Rougeagent had a better argument, as rangersfootballclub merely ranted instead of making an argument.

Niether side used sources.
Posted by rangersfootballclub 8 years ago
rangersfootballclub
i am conducting my self in an bad manner for many reasons , i am sick of the way america treats these " terrorists " mostly innocent people that were abducted , god i dont care what you americans think of what i say anymore , i am not saying america is a bad country in general its great , free speach etc

i am tired off americas forgein policy however , if you cant accept that fair enough i understand , but dont just vote america because you are from their ...
Posted by vorxxox 8 years ago
vorxxox
Yeah, rougeagent21's argument was professional. No offense rangersfootballclub, but your argument was like it was off a blog or something.

You like automatically lose points for spelling, grammar, and conduct, and sources, putting you at a disadvantage.

Actually, that's enough for each vote to automatically favor your opponent, even if your argument is 100% perfect.

I'm not trying to be rude, I'm just saying you should work on that. Oh, and you might want to do some background research on your topic before you go on babbling the word on the street.
Posted by Demosthenes 8 years ago
Demosthenes
rangersfootballclub,

I hate to tell you this, but you really need to get something other than what you see on the news.

Your posts reeks of media spin and complete and utter ignorance, and only by arguing ignorance could an intelligent man get away with writing what you did.

Secondly, you need to speak of the Constitution of the United States with a little more respect.

As an American citizen, I am offended every time you open your mouth, and only because I believe that everyone has the right to say what they think do I not go into full "destroy your pride and self-respect" mode.

This site is for intelligent debate and discussion. I'm not sure you've figured that out yet.
Posted by rougeagent21 8 years ago
rougeagent21
So, riddler, where do you find it?
Posted by rougeagent21 8 years ago
rougeagent21
I was actually asking The_Riddler, since he said that. By the way, please save your arguments for the debate. Thanks ;)
Posted by rangersfootballclub 8 years ago
rangersfootballclub
let me tell you something it might not be against your , holy constitutation but its agaisnt the human rights of every living person .
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
rougeagent21rangersfootballclubTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by resolutionsmasher 8 years ago
resolutionsmasher
rougeagent21rangersfootballclubTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Epicism 8 years ago
Epicism
rougeagent21rangersfootballclubTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by mrbullfrog11 8 years ago
mrbullfrog11
rougeagent21rangersfootballclubTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by vorxxox 8 years ago
vorxxox
rougeagent21rangersfootballclubTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by brendizzle29 8 years ago
brendizzle29
rougeagent21rangersfootballclubTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by sorc 8 years ago
sorc
rougeagent21rangersfootballclubTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 8 years ago
rougeagent21
rougeagent21rangersfootballclubTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by TFranklin62 8 years ago
TFranklin62
rougeagent21rangersfootballclubTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70