The Instigator
oliverpuck
Con (against)
Winning
2 Points
The Contender
bryman
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

should the united states of america go and put a stop to joesph coneys acts

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...
oliverpuck
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/25/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 847 times Debate No: 26579
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

oliverpuck

Con

this arguement is between two people and it is about should the united states go to africa and stop and put joesph coney in jail.

bryant fredrecson come here
bryman

Pro

we should because he has kidnap over 9000 kids
Debate Round No. 1
oliverpuck

Con

glad you got on to the debate bryant okay first off it is unconstitusinal for the united states of america to go to africa and kill that hasent killed any americans and dosent pose a current nuclear threat so there is no constitusinal reason that we should go . vote oliver
bryman

Pro

If you had a naber who was kidnaping wood you stop it... you would I know that is a big example but still Kony is a threat to any solders in Africa who are fighting or eaven in a camp.
Debate Round No. 2
oliverpuck

Con

show me proof that there are solders in africa
bryman

Pro

there are out posts all over the world
and a comment I saw had a good point were in the con te tuition doe it say there has to bo a nuclr thret
Debate Round No. 3
oliverpuck

Con

where did you get that info
bryman

Pro

look in the comments
Debate Round No. 4
oliverpuck

Con

now for a closeing statement I would like to say that it is not constitusinal to go to africa and kill joeseph coney for his acts. so I ask you to vote for the constitusion so if you vote for bryman its a vote aginst the constitusion I would like to thank bryman for exsepting this debate and thank you to this website. it was fun
bryman

Pro

god bless the U.S.A I love you
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by emj32 4 years ago
emj32
'Joseph Coney' that made me laugh harder than it should have..
Posted by xenofreedomx 4 years ago
xenofreedomx
To Oliverpuck. I know I shouldn't debate on the comments, so I won't. I do have questions. Where in the constitution does a nuclear threat justify a preemptive strike? Where in the constitution does anything justify a preemptive strike? Although unconstitutional for the United States of America to impede upon another nation's sovereignty, you have noticed any administration since FDR, hasn't cared? The issue being should and is it constitutional are two very separate questions. One is a question about morality the other is a question about legality.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by xenofreedomx 4 years ago
xenofreedomx
oliverpuckbrymanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:20 
Reasons for voting decision: I am voting for a dumb reason. My reason still not as ridiculous as this entire debate. The con has a profile picture of the Doctor (David Tennant, the best doctor)
Vote Placed by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
oliverpuckbrymanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:00 
Reasons for voting decision: I'm leaning towards Con, but neither side provided arguments convincing enough to merit points.