The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
1 Points

should we nuke all of the middle east

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/19/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 10 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 373 times Debate No: 82805
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (7)
Votes (1)




first round accept and be serious i honaslty think they should just go


I accept. I will be arguing that we should not nuke all of the middle east.
Debate Round No. 1


at this point in the world they have no use but oil they should just get killed sure there are civilians but honestly what use do they have for society other than make more terrorists why help them just nuke em


Thank you for posting an argument!


"at this point in the world they have no use but oil they should just get killed"

First of all, you concede that Middle Eastern countries have a use. Producing oil so we can use it is most definitely important, so we can't just nuke them for... having a good purpose.

"sure there are civilians but honestly what use do they have for society other than make more terrorists why help them just nuke em"

So because some civilians join terrorist groups like Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and ISIS, that means *every* single one of the civilians deserve to die for it without even being responsible? We can use ballistic massive and napalm bombs on the base of terrorist groups if we really want to reduce the issue of terrorism. Killing the civilians is just wrong. By your logic, we should nuke every country (including ourselves) just because each of them have terrorist groups. Maybe North Korea doesn't have any, I am not sure, but destroying a huge amount of populations from controls is wrong, especially for such a bad purpose. This also includes ALL of the middle east (according to your resolution). Israel is an ally of ours, but because they are in the Middle East, we should bomb them anyway? The problem with your argument is you are supporting nuking all of the middle east due to the intentions of terrorism, which in this case makes me assume you are focusing on certain countries like Iran and Iraq. But since your resolution implies we shall nuke ALL of the Middle East, you have set yourself up for more burdens.


This map will be a useful resource. This shows all of the countries in the modern Middle East.

This includes Israel, which is one of our allies. Are you seriously saying that we should nuke Israel for no particular reason, or rather, because of something that is an issue on other countries? It would be morally wrong for us to bomb one of our allies, and even nuking our enemies in the Middle East would be problem. We are killing lots of citizens who did nothing wrong at all, and by your logic, punishing them for the actions of others.

If you want to get rid of terrorism in the Middle East, or at the very least reduce it, we should only kill the terrorists. When ISIS attacked France, they retaliated by bombing Syria, but only using jets, which shows that they are using less firepower than a nuke, which kills innocent people.
Debate Round No. 2


captianaids forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


captianaids forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by ItsMillsy 11 months ago
How about we choose two candidates from each country; a male and a female. These candidates, being 392 in total, are then divided into groups of 12 countries (both male and female candidates involved). These groups of 24 then fit to the death in a roman gladiator style fight. The SINGLE winner from each fight then represent their country, and the countries that have no surviving members lose. These last 24 candidates fight to death in a rubix cube solving competition. The candidate with the quickest time is the winner. All countries but the one whose candidate won are nuked.
Debate solved.


Thank you
Posted by KingofEverything 11 months ago
I notice a HUGE problem with Pro's argument.
Posted by Sir_Shadow 11 months ago
Posted by Sir_Shadow 11 months ago
Heyy, what if I'm an atheist ;w;


This guy really is an idiot DX
Makes me disappointing in society.
Posted by GoOrDin 11 months ago
atheists. brilliantly idiotic gits.
Posted by captianaids 11 months ago
yes litterally all of it there useless
Posted by MagicAintReal 11 months ago
Wow, I "honaslty" think you don't understand the middle east; you want to nuke the whole middle east including our allies...wack.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 10 months ago
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro ff many times, so conduct to Con.