The Instigator
hsteacher
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
DrunkHoboSniper
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

war

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/23/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 441 times Debate No: 119583
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

hsteacher

Con

I've had it with this war bs. This country has been at war almost continuously since 1776. There's been only 21 years of peace. Google "how long has US been at war"
I say take every single troop out of everywhere forever, And point nukes at everyone, And say to everyone : touch us and you're dead period.

Getting us out of Syria is one of the few good things Trump is up to. And these loony generals and advisors are mad. LOL! They must want the USA to be at war constantly forever, And won't be happy any other way.
DrunkHoboSniper

Pro

I disagree the United States federal Government should immediately declare war, Invade, And launch a first strike nuclear attack on every country that has nuclear weapons
1
First is Empire

1. Hardt and Negri write in 2017 in their book assembly that the Con"s cries to prevent their impacts is a false front provided by the Empire to terrify the subordinated into submission

The image of an omnipotent Leviathan is just a fable that serves to terrify the poor and the subordinated into submission. Power is always a relationship of force or, Better, Of many forces: "subordination cannot be understood, "except as one of the constitutive terms in a binary relationship of which the other is dominance. " Maintaining social order requires constantly engaging and negotiating this relationship.

2. Hardt and Negri write in 1994 in their book the Labor of Dionysus, You should resist all manifestations of Empire
the affirmation of its own power. "Labor is the living form-giving fire, The affirmation of labor in this is the affirmation of life itself. We recognize perfectly well however that the work contemporary society is seldom so joyful, But is characterized most often by boredom and tedium for some, And pain and misery for others. Endless repetition of capitalist work presents itself as a prison that enslaves our powerThe labor we affirm must be grasped on a different plane Living labor produces life and constitutes society in a time that cuts across the division posed by the workday, Inside and outside the prisons of capitalist work and its wage relation, The life force always already active in dynamic networks of cooperation, In production and reproduction of society, That courses in and out of time posed by capital.

3. Hardt and Negri write in 2000 in their book Empire that the Con act"s as the police force of a regime that allows capitalist domination and biopower to become transcendent, Reaching throughout the totality of society.
When the synthesis of sovereignty and capital is fully accomplished, Sovereignty becomes a political machine that rules across the entire society. The multitude is transformed into an ordered totality. , Sovereignty is also a police power. It must continually accomplish the subsumption of singularities in the totality, Modern sovereignty, Realizes a new "individual" by absorbing society into powerthe relationship between society and power, Between the multitude and the sovereign state, Is inverted so that now power and the state produce society. . The realization of modern sovereignty is the birth of biopower. [35]
2
Next is the survival of all life

A. Glen Barry writes in 2015 that Biosphere collapse is inevitable " 3 warrants- resource depletion/overpopulation/inequality
http://www. Scoop. Co. Nz/stories/WO1507/S00150/biosphere-collapse-the-biggest-economic-bubble-ever. Htm
The global ecological system is collapsing The biosphere" is having its constituent ecosystems liquidated for resources. Inequitable overconsumption has achieved such momentum that key ecological planetary boundaries have been surpassed, " as human numbers went from one to seven billion in a century " can fairly be characterized as willful ecocide. .

B. Nuke War solves

Dr. Joseph Caldwell writes in 2010 that poverty, Resource scarcity and overpopulation are mounting pressures that will soon cause a global nuclear war the faster that happens the greater hope to avoid biosphere extinction
Posted at Internet web site http://www. Foundationwebsite. Org 0)]

It would appear that global nuclear war will happen very soon, For two main reasons, . First, Human poverty and misery are increasing at an incredible rate. . The pressure for war mounts as the population explodes. Second, War is motivated by resource scarcity. With each passing year, Crowding and misery increase, Raising the motivation for war to higher levels. A third factor motivating global war, Involves timing. If anyone is motivated to wage global nuclear war and has the means to do so, Sooner is very likely better than later. If delayed too long, There may be nothing left to gain. With each passing year, The planet's biodiversity decreases, Another two percent of the planet's remaining petroleum reserves are consumed, And the risk of biospheric extinction) increases. Once gone, These resources are gone forever. Extinct species will never return, And the planet's fossil fuel reserves, Once exhausted, Are gone forever. Human industrial activity will consume all of the remaining petroleum reserves and destroy millions of species more, Including the larger animal species. For those tempted to wage war, The time to strike is now -- in fifty years there will be nothing left to win.

Newshub, Writes in 20018 that life would survive this war
https://www. Newshub. Co. Nz/home/new-zealand/2018/06/what-happens-to-nz-if-global-nuclear-war-breaks-out. Html
Where does New Zealand fit into all this we would likely be spared the worst consequences of all this. Experts say that we'd have little to fear from radiation drifting our way. The most harmful isotopes would decay before reaching our shores, And even fallout drifting over from a potential attack on Australia would likely be blown eastward, Where it would be rained out. It's a similar story when it comes to surface temperature. According to the study, The scenario it's based on would produce a drop of around somewhere between 1 and 1. 5 degrees - nothing to sneeze at, But substantially less than the 5-7 degrees below normal predicted in the centres of North America and in New Zealand, You can still be growing crops

Dr. Joseph Caldwell writes in 2010 that when we survive, We will pick up the pieces, Start anew with a new mindset
Posted at Internet web site http://www. Foundationwebsite. Org

As much as the US government and many environmentalist movements would lead you to believe, Nuclear war will not be the end of the world, It well be the salvation of the world. After a nuclear war mankind will simply "pick up the pieces" and start to all over again. Unlike previous history, It is likely that economics wouldn"t continue to be the "driver" of man"s progress. A minimal-regret strategy offers a way to do things differently
Debate Round No. 1
hsteacher

Con

Lol, I'm almost inclined to agree with you.

But I'd rather try to avoid a full scale nuclear holocaust fest.
I think it'd be better to point at everyone, And say don't try anything. At least that way there's a good chance of ending extra suffering.

You know, When we go to war with a place like Syria or Afghanistan, The thing we are fighting for is this - so that those stupid irresponsible psychos can keep having offspring in the middle of hell! That's about it. If those dumb asses don't like their situation, As all they have to do, Is stop having offspring, And whoever is attacking them will stop. And a lot faster than we could ever stop them too. Because if they stop having offspring, Their opponents problem will be solved.
SO, That is essentially what all these wars we keep getting into are about - so that dumb asses who shouldn't be having kids, Can keep having kids in the middle of hell zone.
I say if they're rotten enough to have kids in the middle of hell, Then screw em, Because there's no hope for those psychos anyways!
DrunkHoboSniper

Pro

1

The Con"s cries to prevent their impacts is a false front provided by the Empire to terrify the subordinated into submission- that was Hardt and Negri 17

The impacts that they present are greatly over exaggerated.
They want their impacts to seem big and that only the Empire is able to solve them
They are trying to create a world where the Multitude is completely dependent on the Empire and they do that through morality
The Con uses morality to justify its intervention to suppress those who threaten the Empire
Wood in 2002 writes
Moral intervention often serves as the first act that prepares the stage for military intervention. More often it is dictated unilaterally by the United States. Which charges itself with the primary Empire. These enemies are most often called terrorist, A crude conceptual and terminological reduction that is rooted in a police mentality

Which military intervention is what they claim to solve for in the first place this turns their claims
They only use morality as a false front. They only pretend to care about their impacts when in reality the only thing that that they care about is the ability to control others" lives
Then there is the topic specific link
I called to reject the Con and cause a nuclear war they concede that you should reject them because they promote the Empire
This will kill the Empire Cross Apply the last Caldwell in 10 evidence from the 1st round that talks about how Unlike previous history economics won"t continue to be the "driver" of progress.
Industrialization would be solved. It"s science.
Dr Caldwell writes in 2014
The preceding chapter showed that a low-level nuclear attack can destroy a very large proportion of the world"s city population. This chapter examines what is left, After such an attack. The purpose of this chapter is to impart a sense of the level of destruction of the global economic system. To that end, It examines the damage to the major world countries, And summarizes the damage to each country. The list includes total number of cities, Total city population, The number of cities targeted under each attack, And the proportion of the city population destroyed under each attack (amount and percentage).

MINIMAL REGRET POPULATION DOES NOT INCLUDE THE EMPIRE, ENDS ALL WAR, POVERTY, FAMINE & PLAGUES
Caldwell writes in 2003
In the synarchic minimal-regret population, There is no global poverty and no global war. There is no global disease: the risk of a planetary epidemic is minimized. There is no global famine. The scourges of civilization " plague, Famine, And war " are eliminated.

Impact level
The Con acts as the police force of a regime that allows capitalist domination and biopower to become transcendent, Reaching throughout the totality of society.
-Hardt and Negri 2k
When you allow the Empire to solve for impacts they get to now control those individuals lives. That is the only reason that the con is calling for the prevention of their Impacts
That was the Morality and false front links

2
OVERVIEW
Biosphere collapse is inevitable " The Empire continues to pillage the planet and one way or the other we are going to destroy it- my Barry in 15 evidence is very specific to this. The only way that we can attempt to get rid of our current mindset in relation to the environment and war is to have a minimal regret strategy- to have a nuclear war. This will destroy the Empire

The only way we have a chance of surviving is to start an all our nuclear war! This is our Caldwell 10 evidence that calls for an all our nuclear war because it is the only way we can ever shift our consciousness. This shift in consciousness will "Create a world beyond the dichotomy of war" meaning that this will indeed be the war to end all wars and ending the Empire with it. This means I solve the prevention of war better than the Con
We only need to win four things. 1. In the world of the con we are all dead from the impending biosphere collapse. 2. The nuclear war stops the biosphere from collapsing. 3. Some form of life will continue to exist on Earth. 4. That life will have a peaceful mindset which stops error replication.

Biosphere Collapse
A. Extend Barry in 15. Biosphere collapse is inevitable for three reasons, Inequality, Resource depletion, Overpopulation.
B. Look the Con says that they don"t want to cause a nuclear holocaust but drops that the biosphere is going to collapse which means that you must vote Pro to cause a nuclear war that stops the biosphere from collapsing

Nuclear war solves

A. The only way that the world will be saved is through nuclear exchange, Faster the better " that"s Caldwell in 10
B. Cross apply the Caldwell in 14 card from the Empire debate that shows how the nuclear war will solve for the biosphere collapse because industrialization is taken out.
C. This means that the nuclear war would take out the Empire because it will take out industrialized area"s where the Empire is located
D. The nuclear war Solves Future Generations Dr. Caldwell writes in 2014

Although a minimal-regret nuclear war may kill almost six billion people, That must be balanced against the very real possibility that not having such a war may not only result in the deaths of six billion people, But also the extinction of all other species on the planet If the Earth can support ten million people indefinitely, That represents forty quadrillion person-years of life. Is that amount of human life inconsequential compared to the lives of the mere six billion that occupy the planet today?

Survivability
Life will continue post nuclear war " that"s Newsweek 18

They don"t provide a reason as to why we don"t survive

Mindset Shift

Extend Caldwell in 10 from the mindset shift debate from the 1st round. The nuclear war acts as a new method of thinking that stops future industrialized activities.

Cross apply the Caldwell in 03 from the Empire debate that talks about how mindsets that allowed the spark to happen in the first place won"t be present in the minimal regret population

A. Biodiversity collapse is the largest impact in the round. In a world of extinction no other impact matters. Life is a pre-requisite to other impacts and the focus of stopping the collapse and the Empire is the only impact that matters.

B. Nuke first, Ethics and morals later. Nukes must preclude. Also any reason why they say this is immoral or wrong is just a link to Empire they are throwing out all stops to try and prevent the Nuclear war from occurring the Empire is doomed it the spark happens and they know it. Dr Caldwell writes in 2014

The adopted approach does not preclude those higher goals, But it does address the fact that if the planet is destroyed, Then the achievement of those higher goals may be impossible. The adopted approach are necessary for the achievement of higher goals.

C. The Pro is the only side that guarantees future generations, Outweighs the Con, Cross apply future generations

D. The con tries to outweigh on magnitude but forgets that their impacts are inevitable in the world of the Empire. The Role of the Judge is to choose the vision for the world that extends opportunity for Empire free future generations, Not steal it away for short term gratification. This means that even if the aff can leverage they solve biosphere collapse but the nuclear war is still justified as a way to destroy the Empire Caldwell in 14 writes

In the long run, As Keynes noted, We are all dead. In the long run, Our sun runs out of fuel and the biological life of our solar system dies. In the short run, However, Things do matter. Life is not without meaning and purpose, But you must define the meaning and purpose. Your life will be defined by the stands that you take. This planet can support human society and nature for a few more years, Or it can support human society and nature for several billion years more. The choice is ours.
Debate Round No. 2
hsteacher

Con

You got too much time on your hands.

Plus, You seem out of touch with reality.

I'm serious here - find something better to do with your time, AND don't believe most of what smart people say - smart people often are out of their minds, Just like dumb people.
DrunkHoboSniper

Pro

You"re Voting Pro for 3 reasons
1. The Con concedes that you should reject them for their support of the Empire
2. They Concede that The Pro can stop all future wars
3. They concede that the Pro can save all life on Earth that would otherwise be dead in the world were the judges vote Con

1

Link level
Remember Hardt and Negri in 17 they present their impacts as being greatly over exaggerated and that only they can solve them so we can put our faith in the Empire
Remember the Wood evidence that states they only use morality as a false front. They only pretend to care about their impacts when in reality the only thing that that they care about is the ability to control others" lives
I then called you to reject the Con because they support the Empire and also Voting pro would cause a nuclear war that will solve all of the Cons claims as well as take out the Empire and solve the biosphere from collapsing

Impact level
The Con acts as the police force of a regime that allows capitalist domination and biopower to become transcendent, Reaching throughout the totality of society.
-Hardt and Negri 2k
When you allow the Empire to solve for impacts they get to now control those individuals lives. That is the only reason that the aff is calling for the prevention of their Impacts
That was the Morality and false front links

2
Overview
The argument here is a simple one. First is that because of overpopulation and resource depletion the biosphere is going to collapse when that happens all life on Earth will be killed. The only hope we have is a nuclear war and when the Con pulls back American Troops it greatly decreases the chances of a nuclear war, Meaning that we will all be killed in the collapse. A nuclear war will take out the industrialized areas meaning it solves the collapse. Next is that humans will survive the nuclear war and finally is that those who are left will have a new mindset which means that we will not have to risk the biosphere collapsing. Ill break down all four parts of this debate now.
Biosphere
Remember the Barry in 18 evidence the biosphere is going to collapse for three reasons
-Resource depletion
-Inequality
-Overpopulation
The Con does not do enough on the collapse debate when they concede these three internal warrants from the Barry evidence. This means that I am winning that an con vote means that all life on the planet is died the only question now in the debate is who can better solve the coming collapse.

Solvency
Remember the Caldwell in 10 evidence that says that the faster the nuclear war happens the better
-More Resources left over after
-Happens after the collapse
Remember the Caldwell in 14
-There will be an immediate hall to industrial activity
-The nukes will restore the planets biosphere to the way it was prior to industrialization
-It saves the planet for future generations
This also means that it takes out the areas were the Empire is
The Con does not do enough work as to why a nuclear war will not solve the incoming collapse of the biosphere. This means that if I can win a 1% chance of survivability then you should vote Pro as I provide the planet with future generations
Remember the impact magnifier
-Future Generations
I are wining that a nuclear war will solve the biosphere collapse
Survivability
Remember the Newshub evidence
-New Zealand would survive a nuclear war even if Australia took a direct hit
Mindset Shift
Remember the Caldwell evidence that isolated how the Nukes will be so bad that will stop error replication
Biodiversity collapse is the largest impact in the round. In a world of extinction no other impact matters. Life is a pre-requisite to other impacts and the focus of stopping the collapse and the Empire is the only impact that matters.
Remember that spark must preclude. There cannot be any achievement of higher goals if the planet is destroyed because of the collapse spark must come first
Lastly remember the Role of the judge which was to vote for the team the extends opportunity for future generations and the Pro is the only side the does that

They concede that the judge is voting for whom ever extends the life for future generations this means that you have to vote pro because in the world of the Con we are all made slaves to biopower from the Empire as well as every living thing is dead from the collapse. In the world of the Pro the Nuclear war takes out the Empire and stops the collapse from occurring

Remember you"re Voting Pro for 3 reasons
1. The Con concedes that you should reject them for their support of the Empire
2. They Concede that The Pro can stop all future wars
3. They concede that the Pro can save all life on Earth that would otherwise be dead in the world were the judges vote Con

Also I am not out of touch with reality these things are just fun to thought contest
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by OisinMullarkey 3 years ago
OisinMullarkey
Pro's argument neglects to mention or challenge present day societal moral and social values like the value of human life, Although it may be a valid solution long term it comes at a great cost which I'm sure the majority is not prepared to handle. There is likely far better and moral long term solutions revolving around immediate reform in society and industry. That being said Con presented no argument therefore I won't vote on the topic.
Posted by DrunkHoboSniper 3 years ago
DrunkHoboSniper
I <3 Nukes
No votes have been placed for this debate.

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