The Instigator
utahjoker
Pro (for)
Winning
10 Points
The Contender
baseballkid
Con (against)
Losing
1 Points

current united states foreign policy in the middle east undermines our national security

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 2 votes the winner is...
utahjoker
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/14/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,146 times Debate No: 27212
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (2)

 

utahjoker

Pro

First round is acceptance then is followed by two rounds of debate then followed by a voting period of three days. May the best argument win.
baseballkid

Con

Lets a go. I just realized that this was just 1k characters. :(
Debate Round No. 1
utahjoker

Pro

The three points we will be discussing. Our three points are fist history has proven it undermines our national security, America is in more danger there, and lastly doing more harm than good.

First point is that history has proven that when the United States is occupying and putting sanctions on Middle Eastern Countries like Iraq. On December 16, 1998 Bill Clinton launched a four day bombing campaign against Iraq who was already blockaded and starving. Hundreds of civilians where killed in the campaign. This and already having put sanctions and occupying Iraq for more than eight years lead to over half a million children dying or already dead because of bombings and the lack of medicine and food because of the sanctions the United States put on the country. How this all relates to national security let us jump to the date of September 11, 2001 where four planes where hijacked and flown into the world trade centers and the pentagon. This lead to the deaths of 2, 996 innocent Americans. How does this relate to what happened in the 90"s with Iraq well in October 2001 only a month after the 9/11 attack a video of Osama Bin Ladin Being asked about why he was a part of the 9/11 attacks That he was angered with how many of his people died because of America"s sanctions. That why are they being attacked from the world when America committed a similar crime.
Unconstitutional act of war that America showed to the people of Iraq and Middle East.

Our second point is that the United States is in more danger there than anywhere else. The biggest threat to Americas national security is not any military the Middle East has it is the rogue groups of terrorist would be America"s most feared opposition. The last time America was attacked by an actually military from a nation was 60 years ago in pearl harbor by the country of japan. terrorism can"t be stopped is can only be prevented by having a strong defense and being in a country instead of being in America to defend our country. Terrorism is not a place, person, or thing it is an action an idea a military tactic. Terrorism can"t couple of bullets.

Our last point is that United States is doing more harm than good. In the ten year war of have died, and for the United States army around 5,000 have died. The bandage the U.S government tried to give its people by going and fighting against these terrorist groups in the Middle East has led to another 5,000 deaths that is 2,000 more than 9/11 and 8,000 total and growing. Iraq and Afghanistan 132,000 civilians have died I thought the government was trying to bring peace and democracy to the Middle Eastern people how can they enjoy freedom when they are decaying the streets.
baseballkid

Con

1:1998 is not recent enough to be in this debate. It was two presidents ago and our policies have changed.

2:The problem is that these terrorist organizations are in the middle east. We are using drone strikes to get rid of these terrorists.(http://articles.cnn.com...)Osama bin laden himself even talks about drone strikes getting the job done. We are stopping major terrorism attacks.

3:We are stopping terrorism and giving help where help is needed. "The revolts embody American values and, at least in Tunisia and Egypt, have achieved significant political change through non-violent methods, striking a blow to radical ideologies that depend on violence."(http://www.nydailynews.com...)

Our policies have changed since the 1998 incident so that is irrelevant and we are stopping terrorism and helping the mess of the arab spring.
Debate Round No. 2
utahjoker

Pro

1998 is not recent enough to be in this debate
In the 1990's the United States was occupying Iraq and they are doing the same thing even in 2012. The old saying If you don't learn from history you are bound to repeat it, right now the United States is going down the same path that could lead to more attacks on the United States soil.
Drone Strikes are getting rid of terrorists
Reports that from June 2004 through September 2012, that these drone strikes killed 2,562 - 3,325 people in Pakistan, of whom 474 - 881 were civilians, including 176 children, also injured an additional 1,228 - 1,362 individuals.This is just in Pakistan the United States could be killing these terrorists, but the United States kill far more innocent civilians then Terrorists.
We are stopping terrorism and giving help where help is needed.
Terrorism has gone down, but it has migrated to Africa and Syria. If the United States is giving help where it is needed, why haven't stepped in for Syria really
1998 is not recent enough to be in this debate
In the 1990's the United States was occupying Iraq and they are doing the same thing even in 2012. The old saying If you don't learn from histrory you are bound to repeat it, right now the United States is going down the same path that could lead to more attacks on the United States soil.
Drone Strikes are getting rid of terrorsts
Reports that from June 2004 through September 2012, that these drone strikes killed 2,562 - 3,325 people in Pakistan, of whom 474 - 881 were civilians, including 176 children, also injured an additional 1,228 - 1,362 individuals.This is just in Pakistan the United States could be killing these terroists, but the United States kill far more inocent Civillains then Terrorsts.
We are stopping terrorism and giveing help where help is needed.
Terrorism has gone down, but it has migrated to place such as Africa and Syria. If the United States is giveing help where it is needed, why haven't stepped in for Syria really if the plan is to help Middle Eastern countries with democracy and freedom why hasn't the United States gone in and help solve the problem. The answerer is that they don't care who they help they just want something and that something is oil.

United States has done this before and got burnd this is why bring the troops back and take a new plan to keep America safe.

Sources-
http://www.cnn.com...
http://counterterrorism.newamerica.net...

http://topics.nytimes.com...
http://uspolicy.belgium.usembassy.gov...
baseballkid

Con

We are staying out of wars and pulling out of Iraq. Our policies are changing.
There have been no major terrorist strikes on American soil after we started drone strikes.(http://www.examiner.com...)The policy is working and that is why this policy is getting continued. This is helping america and this is what this debate is about."Terrorism has gone down"
This is what I am trying to prove and migration just means that we are making their current region uninhabitable.

The United States is helping when people need it. Look to Egypt. We helped people when they needed it and we spread democracy where possible. Your point in Syria is not relevant because we are staying out of wars that we cannot "win". There is nothing to gain from going to this war while there was in Egypt.

Our policies are working because of a lack of terrorist strikes and only joining wars that we can profit from.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by utahjoker 4 years ago
utahjoker
The problem is the United States is like a teenage girl with a credit card they care about everyone else and can't stop spending.
Posted by AlextheYounga 4 years ago
AlextheYounga
By diverting all of our resources to over 130 countries, our national defense at home becomes diluted. We need to defend THIS country. Not other countries. Our intervening in other countries destroys our security, liberty, and destroys wealth.
I recommend watching Ron Paul's "What if?" speech and his "Imagine" speech.
Posted by Zaradi 4 years ago
Zaradi
Was it really 1k limitations?
Posted by baseballkid 4 years ago
baseballkid
why are his arguments so much longer when i used all characters?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by AlextheYounga 4 years ago
AlextheYounga
utahjokerbaseballkidTied
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: Ron Paul!!
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
utahjokerbaseballkidTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's arguments seemed to be more focused on justifying the use of drone warfare in the middle east rather then the debate topic about whether the entire US foreign policy undermines national security or not. Pro showed numerous cases of negatives effects US foreign policy has triggered and the con didnt convincingly justified why they arent negative or why the postive effects outweight the negative ones. Arguments to the pro, sources were even enough in my opinion, pro did have some grammar problems, and conduct was even.