The Instigator
Shtookah
Pro (for)
Winning
21 Points
The Contender
elicamacho22
Con (against)
Losing
7 Points

You can not win a war on "terrorism"

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
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
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/21/2010 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,016 times Debate No: 13193
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (4)

 

Shtookah

Pro

ter�ror�ism : the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
Sense 9/11, the United States had begun a full fledged war on "terrorism". The tittle of "War on terror" intrigues me. Because if I'm not mistaken Terrorism isn't a group of people, but rather a military tactic bred from an idea. My question is how can such a war be won? Is it possible? If American Forces were to capture Osama and the heads of Al-Qaeda would the war on terror be over? I see this to be impossible because you simply cannot win a war on terrorism as you simply cannot "defeat an idea". From a philosophical standpoint, I see this war to be kind of (Hold your ears right wingers..) a joke.
elicamacho22

Con

Ok first of all for my first contention...its not only that it wont stop the war but as if we are fighting fire with fire if you know what i mean. But i see no Value...as if We were to bomb them because they bombed us on 9/11 then its the right thing because im sure we killed as many people that they killed in 9/11.
Debate Round No. 1
Shtookah

Pro

War : a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations.
Terrorism : the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
1. A war on terrorism can not be won because you simply can not kill, defeat, etc an idea.
"You can kill a man but you can't kill an idea."-Medgar Evers.
2. There has been no immediate exit strategy, making the supposing judgment that there is no end in sight and will be a never ending conflict.
http://www.cbsnews.com...
This link is Bush himself stating the U.S. can't win the war on terror.
my opponent claims instead of a war, its a "fighting fire with fire situation"
elicamacho22

Con

What im really saying is that not fire with fire but the intimidation that wiol be set so if the enemy is intimidated then no war would ever start because first if all with nuclear weapons for example: we hold a bigger threat than anyone else...as of now the new START treaty was renewed as of april this year so we give a new kind of terror that tells the enemy not to fire on us.
Debate Round No. 2
Shtookah

Pro

My opponent did not even come close to expressing the slightest opinion as to why you can win a war on terrorism. You did not attack my argument of why the war is from a metaphorical standpoint, illogical thus making the ability to achieve victory in the war possible. Knowing this, I feel I won this debate due to the lack of attack against my arguments or any form of the slightest plausible reasoning as to why a war on terror can be won. In conclusion, a war on terror can not be won because you can not kill an idea or defeat a military tactic... If my opponent suggests an eye for an eye argument, all I have to say is " An eye for an eye will make the world go blind."-Mohandas Ghandi ... but thats a different argument
elicamacho22

Con

elicamacho22 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by InsertNameHere 6 years ago
InsertNameHere
The war on terrorism is absurd. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 yet they were they were the ones being invaded.
Posted by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
lol @ devinni
Posted by devinni01841 6 years ago
devinni01841
Clarification:
we were not bombed on 9/11, four of our planes were hijacked and crashed into buildings and a field
Posted by darkkermit 6 years ago
darkkermit
This debate is going to be a semantics debate. No doubt.

You can't "win" the war in a traditional sense since one side cannot surrender. Therefore the definition o "win" and "war" are going to be defined in a different ways from normal in order to win the debate.
Posted by wjmelements 6 years ago
wjmelements
You can not win a war on "drugs"
Posted by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
I'm pretty sure the war on terrorism refers to a specific group of terrorists...
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Contra 5 years ago
Contra
Shtookahelicamacho22Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Did Con even argue?
Vote Placed by ittastenasty 6 years ago
ittastenasty
Shtookahelicamacho22Tied
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 Erick 6 years ago
Erick
Shtookahelicamacho22Tied
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 
Vote Placed by Shtookah 6 years ago
Shtookah
Shtookahelicamacho22Tied
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