The Instigator
Agomoni
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Cliff.Stamp
Pro (for)
Winning
26 Points

Western liberal countries have a moral duty to spread democracy across the world using force where n

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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/20/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,087 times Debate No: 16604
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (4)

 

Agomoni

Con

A moral duty,nah.A duty all the same,that to their own people who were promised economic stability before elections.One surely understands their concern for poor,dirty Third World rats living under opression.But one also understands that it's an easier task to siphon off oil and ore,and also a congenial market to sell McDonald's burgers,when a country lay in the hands of smiling politicians,those whom you helped come to power.Rather than when grumpy guerillas hiding in caves are the bosses.
And if them smiling politicians try to extricate themselves from under their thumbs,you could always drop bombs.Since the anti-aircraft missiles they have were bought from you anyway,and they'd find they're just a little inaccurate for practical purposes,it's a safe bet.
Cliff.Stamp

Pro

Resolved : Western liberal countries have a moral duty to spread democracy across the world using force where n

Agomoni opens with the above resolution and then takes Con, and thus their position can be inferred to be that western liberal countries do not have a moral duty to [...]. Forgetting about the part of the resolution which is chopped off, it seems clear that they are advocating that said Western countries should stop acting as world police[1] as they have no moral duty to do so.

The first point to be raised in such a contention is what is the foundation for the moral claim by which this assertion can be carried or refuted. Is Agomoni arguing for nihilism whereby there are no moral duties[2] or are they arguing for moral relativism where by both countries could claim equal status on inherent moral duty and neither could claim the other was objectively wrong and thus have clear moral ground to force the other to change. Or are they advocating for a form of moral objectivity which does not provide such a clear and uncontested moral duty?

However, this seems to go completely out the window with the opening post :

"A moral duty,nah.A duty all the same,that to their own people who were promised economic stability before elections."

The contention now seems to be shifted significantly and Agomoni is arguing that while there is no moral duty, there is an inherent duty based on the obligation to live up to a commitment made to the populace which apparently demands said actions in order to meet election promises. This seems to be fairly clear and is expanded on further in the following :

"But one also understands that it's an easier task to siphon off oil and ore,and also a congenial market to sell McDonald's burgers,when a country lay in the hands of smiling politicians,those whom you helped come to power.Rather than when grumpy guerillas hiding in caves are the bosses."

We have therefore a number of assertions, non-trivial to support which are in support of a resolution to enforce democracy to ensure local economic value. In order for Con to carry said resolution then they would have to provide support for the following contentions :

1) Western politicians made promises of economic growth and stability which are endorsed by the voting populace to the extent they would support war to enforce democracy.

2) That said war and occupation and subsequent puppet democracies would actually lead to economic growth and stability for the originating western countries and not induce any direct or indirect consequences otherwise. This would entail obviously that such regimes would be stable long enough to provide the necessary financial returns.

3) Further such an action is the best way to achieve such a desired economic goal

This is an interesting and not uncontroversial assertion and I look forward to Agomoni fleshing out their argument so as to carry it.

[1] http://www.teamamerica.com...

[2] http://www.iep.utm.edu...

[3] http://plato.stanford.edu...
Debate Round No. 1
Agomoni

Con

Agomoni forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Agomoni

Con

Agomoni forfeited this round.
Cliff.Stamp

Pro

Resolution Negated.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
"One surely understands their concern for poor,dirty Third World rats living under opression."

One surely does.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
AgomoniCliff.StampTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
AgomoniCliff.StampTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by YYW 5 years ago
YYW
AgomoniCliff.StampTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Witty response on Cliff's end; and enjoyably short -though the convenience of brevity only comes as a result of CON's forfeiture.
Vote Placed by innomen 5 years ago
innomen
AgomoniCliff.StampTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Obvious win.