The Instigator
Pro (for)
35 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
7 Points

Quick Debate: The US should not send troops to stop the ISIS offensive

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 6 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 6/18/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,788 times Debate No: 56837
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (22)
Votes (6)




Since this is a developing situation, only evidence available right now will be viable for this debate. My opponent can accept or go first. I really do not care.


I take the challenge. Also, I presume that I am for sending troops to Iraq.

Bush Doctrine

Bush Doctrine states that we must protect our resources and protect others from terrorists. The goal of this is to spread democracy throughout the world, ESPECIALLY, the middle east in order to fight terrorism.


As for the logical side of the debate/conversation is this. IF the US was to lets say get involved ONCE MORE in Iraq; we would be letting the militants know we are STRONG. Allowing ourselves to not get involved would simply makes us look weak. We are not a weak country. We are a strong country.
Debate Round No. 1


I. It's not our war

Many are under the impression that we have a "duty", or "responcibility" to help others across the world. We have international organizations that can be used to stabalize the world, but one thing holds true, manifest destiny is outdated. It is not our duty to spread democracy to the west, or any other form of post imperial doctrine.

II. International Image Stained

The US, following the global leadership report, dropped in popularity every time we escalated a war in the middle east. The international community thinks we're in the wrong, and I do as well. The International community are our biggest tool, and we need to recognize that interdependence is the key to economic growth.

III. Wars cost billions of $ and lives

Our 10 year campaign in democracy building has earned us nothing. We are spending about 100 billion a year in maintenance and transportation in the middle east. This is slowly starving American citizens and our costing us more lives than lost by soldiers in Afghanistan, which is already above 40,000.

IV. Terrorists can't be beaten

If these people were even terrorists. They are the opposition in a civil war, and the US conservatives think they can just call a rebel a terrorist, and be justified in fighting them. Truth is, we are picking sides in a civil war, and we are currently backing the losing side.

Estimates have it that it would of taken about 100 years of occupation in Iraq before terrorism would be completely crushed.

V. Bush Doctrine

When has that ever worked for us? No seriously, has their been one time the bush doctrine worked in our advantage? It put us in massive debt and unemployment, killed the bond market, and made investors lose billions in forex.

And for what? So another nation can vote in a different dictator?

VI. We need to look STRONG

No we don't. Who cares if we look weak? My opponent has already contended that we're strong, so their is no need to prove anything. Are the 10,000's of soldiers who died pointlessly in Iraq worth appearing strong?


You may be right in the fact that it may not be our war. However, what happens when freedom in Iraq is eradicated? Whose job is it to maintain that freedom? No one else will do it. Who is going to do that? We, the US, will have to.

We are the global image for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as stated in the US Constitution. People look up to that constitution internationally. People move here for that reason. Why else would they move to the United States?

Wars do cost money and they most certainly do cost lives. There is no doubt about that. However, people sign up for that. They aren't made to join the military. That is all voluntary. As for money: what else do you know of that doesn't cost money. I agree there is more and better to have that spent on like NASA for instance. They're budget is only 7-16 billion dollars whilst the national defense budget is somewhere around 615 billion dollars.

Terrorists can be beaten. How do you know they can't? Is there a scientific law that states that they can't? Also, I am pretty darn sure that it would not take 100 years for terrorism to be crushed in Iraq. It is how you eradicate terrorism. Not how long. I agree you can beat terrorism peacefully. Show people the more justified side of things. Let the people know that violence is never a good answer. Show them there is better ways to show people you don't agree with them.

V & VI
The Bush Doctrine is a more conservative way of saying we just need to be in the middle east to protect our resources AKA oil. However, it is what every politician in DC agrees with because they are greedy old men who just want something to hang onto. They are old; I honestly don't think they know better, they are like children with billions of dollars in their bank accounts. Lastly, we do need to look strong. We may look strong now but if we stop trying looking strong; we will appear weak.
Debate Round No. 2


I. United States had a responcibility to maiontain freedom

No we don't, and freedom isn't something you can give people. Free men decide, other men comply. This point is completely unsubstsantiated, and their IS no reasoning on why we have to govern others.

II. We are the best

We don't need more people moving to the United States. We have 6% unemployment, and have a market that's unattractive to new multi nationals. Getting into more wars will make us less than the best, if we even were.

III. Money and Lives

My opponents rebutttal is weak. To shorten what he just said, everything costs money, and people aren't forced to go and die. People put their faith in their CO and government that they will go and fight where they're needed, and do a service for our nation. This tied into my point that we are sending warm bodies at a problem that cannot be fixed.

As for money, the taxpayers do not know what or where it is going towards. All we see is a 820 billion broad budget. At least with wars on terror we know what we're getting ourselves into. A unpopular war that will boost the budget even larger.

IV. Terrorist Tactics

My opponent did not understand my contention. ISIS are not terrorists, they're a side in a civil war pooled into Iraq. We are not fighting terror, we are choosing which one of two governments should rule Iraq. It is not our responcibility to fight or choose who gets to run a country that we know nothing about.

V/VI. Bush Doctrine

Well.... thanks for clearing that up. Vote Pro.


I forfeit my argument as I cannot find a rebuttal to make towards Pro... The debate was enjoyable nonetheless. Thank you Pro.
Debate Round No. 3
22 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ChosenWolff 7 years ago
Manatacious, you voted for the wrong person
Posted by Gogert777 7 years ago
Tatertots where frogs that used coverups to stop talking psilocybin mushrooms. I HAVE SPOKEN
c-4 dra_ho_ha!
Posted by ChosenWolff 7 years ago
It was supposed to be
Posted by Sashil 7 years ago
In what sense is this a 'quick debate'? o.O
Posted by ChosenWolff 7 years ago
Woah, I will submit in 5 minutes
Posted by Tyler5362 7 years ago
To Pro... I am gonna call it a night. I'll debate tomorrow...
Posted by ChosenWolff 7 years ago
Posted by Kc1999 7 years ago
Eh......I'm sure Burma kills elephants. After all, they invaded our country over two elephants that were white.
Posted by ChosenWolff 7 years ago
I will submit VERY soon
Posted by ChosenWolff 7 years ago
I will submit VERY soon
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by neutral 7 years ago
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: Con never really tried. I could do better, even though I support Pro on this one. ;-)
Vote Placed by Manastacious 7 years ago
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: concession
Vote Placed by Raymond_Reddington 7 years ago
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: Concession
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 7 years ago
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by Themba 7 years ago
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: Concession.
Vote Placed by ESocialBookworm 7 years ago
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: Con conceded.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.