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

fragment of peace

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: 7/16/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 574 times Debate No: 93829
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




all nuclear bombs should be locked in a place, and every country should have a fragment of the key.


I fail to see any benefit of such a strategy.

It would be a dubious assumption to believe that those countries in possession of nuclear armaments would freely give them up in exchange for this key fragment.

This agreement would give a distinct advantage to dishonest countries who withhold some of their arms from this locked place. I don't believe we would want the dishonest countries to be the only ones with a nuclear weapons when the place is locked.

Eight soverign states have successfully detonated nuclear weapon technology [1]. Even if all the countries with nuclear capabilities gave them up freely, then they could just reassemble their arsenal.


Fragment of peace has no likely benefit, and can potentially be exceedingly dangerous.

Debate Round No. 1


why talk about assumptions.. is there a need to assume things?

yes the place is a bit weird, because if one goes of they all go of.. havnt thought about that one yet

i dont understand why you minds are so blank.. second brainless take on this... it is for war to beg for peace..

maybe the nuclear bombs should stay where they are but build in some lock things that cant be touched having without all the keys

your brain is exceedingly dangerous.. it infects people through words and lack of humanity inside.. how is that idiot


I'll waive this round for equal time. Thank you for the topic. Vote con.
Debate Round No. 2
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
for nuclear war to beg for peace
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by tajshar2k 2 years ago
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro failed to defend his BOP, and gives no concrete reason as to why we need to lock nuclear bombs. Therefore, I give Con the win since he shows negatives to locking nuclear bombs. Con also had better grammar, and used sources.