The Instigator
annieoakleyboy
Pro (for)
Losing
4 Points
The Contender
dylancatlow
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

todays americans would win in a fight against the spartans

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
dylancatlow
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/4/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,245 times Debate No: 26879
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (11)
Votes (4)

 

annieoakleyboy

Pro

todays americans have guns and they have spears
dylancatlow

Con

I thank my opponent for this debate.

My opponent lost the moment he did not define "fight", "win", "Americans" and "Spartans" as well as not providing the situation and context he is referring to.

I think that the entire country of the United States would win a war against the Spartan society if they are alive today, however, I do not think that one American without any weapons would win a physical fight against 10,000 Spartans with weapons. He also does not define "win" -- "win" what? Is this an organized duel and only swords are allowed. As you have the burden of proof, I have won this debate by stating a case in which "Americans would lose in a fight against Spartans".


I realize that I am using semantics and totally misconstruing your true intentions but that's what you get for making a debate which you thought you had an automatic win in.

Debate Round No. 1
annieoakleyboy

Pro

dude todays americans are gunna win we have guns they have spears and shields but we have chuck norris who do they have?
dylancatlow

Con

What makes you think that we would necessarily have guns? Do you have a gun in your hand? What if a spartan broke into your house, who would win? Your poorly defined who we're talking about and the specifications of the fight and thus have lost.
Debate Round No. 2
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by dylancatlow 4 years ago
dylancatlow
Lol. I like when he strings out " infanticidal, genocidal, fillicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal" it's like the grand finale of fireworks.
Posted by emospongebob527 4 years ago
emospongebob527
Idk, I just found it somewhere and randomly posted it to a random debate lo,
Posted by Muted 4 years ago
Muted
Spongey, do you have to spread that around like a tract?
Posted by dylancatlow 4 years ago
dylancatlow
Emospongebob527, I agree, but what does that have to do with anything lol?
Posted by emospongebob527 4 years ago
emospongebob527
The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-frreak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, fillicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully. (Dawkins, 2008)
Posted by baseballkid 4 years ago
baseballkid
I would vote for con but my third debate is still going on. So much win sir. this was the best debate I have read on this site so far.
Posted by dylancatlow 4 years ago
dylancatlow
Altilitongitude, you are a disappointment and you obviously don't know how debates on this website work. I clearly provided a situation in which Americans would lose to Spartans in a fight.
Posted by dylancatlow 4 years ago
dylancatlow
Altilitongitude, you are a disappointment and you obviously don't know how debates on this website work. I clearly provided a situation in which Americans would lose to Spartans in a fight.
Posted by philochristos 4 years ago
philochristos
Today's Americans have Chuck Norris. This isn't a fair debate.
Posted by angrymen 4 years ago
angrymen
Could I argue that pacifists living here or people who cant walk or fire a gun would lose?
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by philochristos 4 years ago
philochristos
annieoakleyboydylancatlowTied
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: It's hard to pick a winner or a loser since, as Con pointed out, the conditions were not stipulated. There was no well-defined point of view to be debated.
Vote Placed by Muted 4 years ago
Muted
annieoakleyboydylancatlowTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Weird debate. Pro, however, did not fulfill his BoP. Con's arguments were slightly better
Vote Placed by Altilongitude 4 years ago
Altilongitude
annieoakleyboydylancatlowTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: The stipulations could be inferred by Pro's first argument. Conduct to Pro for Con trying to twist them anyway.
Vote Placed by angrymen 4 years ago
angrymen
annieoakleyboydylancatlowTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con gave better reasons than "we have chuck norris" and "we have guns".