The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

THBT "Operation Unthinkable" should have been implemented and supported on July 1st, 1945

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
UtherPenguin has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/17/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 1,133 times Debate No: 97090
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




Well, that was quite the mouthful. Playing devil's advocate for this debate.

-Burdens on Pro
-If you're intrested in the debate, be sure to comment below.
-Be civil and follow the format.

Round 1: Acceptance
Round 2: Opening Cases
Round 3: Rebuttals
Round 4: Closing Arguments/ Counter-rebuttals


This house: The Western Bloc; UK, America and their allies.

Operation Unthinkable: "Operation Unthinkable was a code name of two related plans of a conflict between the Western Allies and the Soviet Union. Both were ordered by British Prime Minister Winston Churchill in 1945 and developed by the British Armed Forces' Joint Planning Staff at the end of World War II in Europe." (Source:

implemented: To be put to action.

Debate Round No. 1


Apologies for the inconvenience, I cannot posy my arguments now. I'll pass this round and let Con do his arguments

Oncw more, apologies.


It's a shame my opponent couldn't post his argument so here's mine on why Operation unthinkable shouldn't have proceeded.

1)The allies were outnumbered: The Soviet numerical superiority was roughly 4:1 in men and 2:1 in tanks at the end of hostilities in Europe. Meaning the allies would need a miracle to even make the first push through Germany.

2) Attrition: As Sun Tzu said "gThere is no instance of a nation benefiting from prolonged warfare."h This is even more true for the allies because with every passing day the Soviets reinforced their gains. It would be improbable for them to push them till Poland. The Soviets can hold and push the allies out of mainland Europe, the allies don't have the luxury of waiting.

3)The operation's success was purely based on luck: As said by the British staff committee the success of the operation was based on surprising the soviets. Which was pretty hard considering Stalin was a paranoid nut job who always knew the allies could betray them.

4)The Soviets could retreat, the allies could not: The territory proposed to be pushed into eastern Soviet land to counter all communist influence in Europe. This gave the soviets enough territory to back off if they needed to regroup. This was not a luxury that the allies had. They had to push fast and hard if they wanted to have any chance of winning.

Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by JackHex 4 years ago
I am willing to fully discuss this subject and tell you why it was an awful idea.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

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