Login/Sign Up




The United States are largely a force for good in the world.
Society

rolanderikson
May 20, 2007
19 votes
11 debaters
6
4
3
3
2
1
1
1


+ Add Argument

9
Yes


rolanderikson
May 21, 2007
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: vancam Show

So in your opinion the US has done no good in the world?

 
dereksemeraro
May 21, 2007
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: supremebeing Show

Quit pissing about one bad president. Theres bad wherever you go. The U.S. is a very strong country, and the heroes of World War II.

 
rolanderikson
May 21, 2007
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: vancam Show

So in your opinion the United States are on the same moral level as North Korea?

 
kenski70
May 25, 2007
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: henthorn Show

On the contrary we are debating American stategy...Our stategy shapes the world.....You facts are again wrong and laughable.....Why was Hiroshima a target?? Do you know??? Could it be that there was a bomb factory there?In fact the bombs used on Pearl Harbour were made in Hirosihma....... Nagasaki just happens to be a Naval base with a city. The Japanese fleet lauched from Nagasaki......Those are legitimate military targets. Not an attempt to kill civilians as the uninformed dumbA$$es think.......
Im also betting those Americans whose lives were saves would disagree with you about what the benifit to the world saving thier lives was.

 
kenski70
May 26, 2007
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: vancam Show

Who the F@*K ever said America was and empire? you......
1) Calling someone is completely acceptable when the person being called that is one.....
2) Star Wars was a huge part of the cold war!! what rock were you under?????
3)You cannot dispute that fighting US forces make lots of our enemies DEAD.........We are the strongest Nation in the free world...Seem right on to me.
4)Again "DUFUS" kill 200k Japs or lose 2 milloin Americans in an invasion DO THE MATH....Also the Japanese would have lost Far more people in an invasion.....So we bombed a city with a Bomb factory and a Naval Base...BOO Hooo
5)Korea may have been a UN initiative But it was the Americans who did 90% of the fighting.....Repeling Communists I might ADD!!!!
6)Vietnam is a prime example of letting the media and politicials decied how the war is fought....Had we been able to take off the gloves Vietnam would still be on fire!!!
7) Again youve got the facts wrong the gas attacks on the Kurds happened in the 80's And the kurd incident happened after the gulf war 1.. Bush withdrew his suport for the kurds after EVERY ARAB NATION ASKED HIM TO......
YOU Say this war is unjust and say Saddam is finnaly out of power.....DIDN'T See many Europeans Stepping up to remove him did ya???
* Heres an idea to end the war......Treat the Iraqis the same way Gen. Sherman treated the South in the American Civil War it was called the "March to the sea".... Go thorugh Iraq city by city. Burn every city to the ground leave no building standing... kill all the men..Leave the rest homeless and starving. Kill off all thier cities that way...Leave them in ashes....We will stop when they surrender, Until then Burn in your heathen hell.....Would you Rather we did that???? We have done it to our own people.....The insurgents would have a hard time finding a place to hide if we destroy all the buildings and houses.......


 
kenski70
May 26, 2007
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: vancam Show

Easy, as it was seen then (In the 80's)The Soviets were the biggest threat to the world....Removing that threat was viewed as good......DUH
Thats why we suported the Afghans.......
Saddam was Against another threat Iran.....The Majority of Americans then (And Now) are still pissed about Iran taking our citizens hostage.....
Why dont you hop off your high horse and face the fact....Not Every thing Americans do HAVE to benifit you!

 
rolanderikson
May 20, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: fetus Show

So 1 "bad" out of how many good? You are judging the US on one incident, if you noticed, the name of the debate is "The US is LARGELY a force for good in the world".

 
dereksemeraro
May 22, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: supremebeing Show

One bad president stains a country. But the United States is still a great force. That's what matters. But I think 2008 presidents will be much better.

 
dereksemeraro
May 22, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: vancam Show

If the United States would be the reason for disbanding the Axis Powers, I'd consider them heroes.


 
rolanderikson
May 22, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: vancam Show

This has absolutely nothing to do with the "Axis of Evil". All I asked was "Do you think North Korea is on the same moral level as the States?" and you have neither answered the question nor said anything relative to the debate. I don't think that you are prepare to say that the US is better for the world than North Korea. By the way, I only used North Korea as an example as most intelligent know how badly it's citizens are treated, not to make some sort of point on the evils of communism.

 
rolanderikson
May 22, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: vancam Show

This isn't about Bush and I never said that it was.

I am asking you one more time, is the United States on a higher moral level than a country like North Korea? Britain, Germany, France, Australia, Japan, all of these countries (And more) operate on a moral level that is above a country such as North Korea.

 
kenski70
May 24, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: vancam Show

Are you some sort of a dufus? did you sleep thorgh history class? For starters Reagan's Star wars program was a sham. It was made to fool the Russians into thinking we had a missle shield to destroy thier ICBMs and it worked! The USSR pumped so much money in tring to make one of thier own, it bankrupted them! the USSR colapsed!
I have not been pumped up by the fantasy world of hollywood I'm pumped up in the classroom where I studied history!!! There is no hype Americans have and will continue to be the killing fist of the free world...
The british took a tumble? the french? seems to me those two nations have existed over 1000 years apiece and are still world powers.....The Spanish lost wars to both England And also against America. Same with Germany. so your comparison is weak.....
Bottem line you point me out one nation as millitarily strong and ecomonically strong as the US.... there are none!
Will history look back and fault the US for;
WW2?....No but will note Germany and Japan's agression halted.....
Korea? the South Koreans sure like us don't they....
Vietnam? the south was very fond of us. They asked for our help in the first place.
Gulf War 1 those Kuwaitis sure like us too, I wonder why?
The current war......Don't tell me noone was happy to see Saddam go...The hell that is there now is a result of the locals killing each other.The US troops have thier hands tied by politicians who wont let them unleash thier true power and smack down the bad guys....(Mainly because the new iraqi Gov wont let us.)

 
kenski70
May 24, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: henthorn Show

You say that Americans wanting to save the lives of thier own is bad???? You Dont understand American strategy then.....It simple Kill as many of the bad guys as possible and lose as few of your own as possible......To me thats common sense
The bombs that destoyed nagasaki and Hirosima Killed roughly 200,000 not millions as you claim. compared to the estimated 2 million US troops that would have been killed invading Japan..... The choice seems obvious to me....
During the 80's the US and Iran absoutely hated eachother(like now) have you ever heard the saying. the enemy of my enemy is my friend? Thay why we suported Saddam then.
In the 80's the Us viewed Russia as our biggest enemy. we supplied weapons to the afgans to repel the invading Russians...So Osama was there BFD. Just how were we to know he was an ingrateful scumbag..... Ive pretty much shot up your whole opening argument so what you got now?????

 
craconys
May 27, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: fetus Show

They created the catastrophy?

Saddam killed hundreds of Kurds with poison gas.
Perhaps they didn't stop it...

 
craconys
May 27, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: vancam Show

"coming in at the last minute" - So the british would have won it anyway?
Or the raping SU-Units?


Do you now what happened in the Normandy?
That was not "last minute" for sure.

 
reezer
May 27, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
The various and sundry (to put it mildly) missteps of the current administration in no way diminish the US' historical place as a force for good.

Those who hate America (as opposed to Dubya and Co.) always have and always will hate America and nothing will change that. At best, those people cannot separate "America" from "Pres. Bush", will have to come around on their own.

 
kenski70
May 27, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: henthorn Show

I was wrong your not under a rock your in some alternate reality!!!!! why would the US be trying to show force to a nation that was our ally at the time?????
Heres another tid bit of info for ya..... The thing that bothered the japs so much about the atomic bomb raids were that only 1 plane did the raid.....Far more japanese died from the mass bombings the US did to them for years launching hundreds of B-29's at a time...The japanese didn't consider just 1 B-29 a threat....If you compare it to Hundreds of B-29's firebombing Tokyo the japs saw no threat at all.... Those fire raids killed more than the atomic bombs did.

 
frankiej4189
Nov 18, 2008
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: vancam Show

"There is nothing heroic about bleeding the mother country dry of it's assets and coming in at the last minute to steal some false glory."

Tis a bit of a stretch to call the 450,000 lives lost an attempt to steal glory as well as to say the US entered last minute. We were very late, but not last minute.

 
+ Add Argument

10
No


supremebeing
May 21, 2007
2 convinced
Rebuttal
Let’s see…
US has one of the highest violent crime rates in the world…
US is one of the major producers of dangerous pollution…
Not to mention, a war based on lies, racism, and greed…


Three strikes, your out.

 
vancam
May 21, 2007
2 convinced
Rebuttal
Force and Good don't work in for me. This is the realworld not Star Wars (as Reagan believed).

Americans have been pumped up by their own entertainment (liberal hollywood aparently) into beleiving the hype.

Lets see who else were a "force for good" or even better as the romans put it "the beacon of light in the darkness" (that's right they said it first).

USA
Nazi Germany
British Empire
French Empire
Dutch Empire
Spanish Empire
...
...
etc etc

Romans

They all took a nasty tumble I'm afraid and when history looks back on them I can tell you that it doesn't look back very kindly.


 
henthorn
May 21, 2007
2 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: dereksemeraro Show

The U.S made an absolute _mint_ from the two world wars. I'm not certain about the moral justification for being the nice lads at the end who came along and cleared up the mess after all the countries on the other side of the Atlantic ran out of money to buy weapons and supplies.

And aside from that, lets just think about how we justify any war as being 'good'?

Dropping two nuclear bombs on Japan killing millions was good because.. um...
Well tecnically it finished the war, instead of lots of close quarters fighting in Japan and the Pacific islands. So it saved lots of lives. Well, American troop's lives.
So America dropped the bombs to save Americans. Oh great, what a fantastic contribution to world affairs.

America funding and supporting the civil war in Spain was good because...
Ooops, forget that one, lots of people dies. But none were American, so it's all fine!

America refusing to join the league of nations was good because...
Ignore that one too - Hitler came to power because without the backing of the US, the league of nations couldn't stop Germany getting stronger. But it kept America out of WWII for a while, so fewer Americans died!

America funding the rebels against the Soviet troops that the Afghan government invited into the country was good because...
Oh no! Remember that nice bloke called Osama Bin Laden the US gave so much money to, and trained all his buddies, and supplied weapons for? Let's not talk about this.

America giving money and supplies to Saddam's old government because they didn't like the regime in Iran was good because...
Wait, didn't he go on to massacre his people, before being toppled in an illegal war which has turned Iraq into an uncontrolable warzone of terrorism and counterattack? Hmmmmm, yeah.

When 'taking democracy to a country' and 'invading a country, collapsing it's government and economic structure and leaving an uninhabitable warzone behind you' become synonymous then you know something has gone dreadfully wrong with the world.

 
supremebeing
May 21, 2007
2 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: dereksemeraro Show

It’s not just the president, it is him, plus the other bozos that continue to blindly follow the madman. It will take decades to dig the United States out of the hole the man is digging for us and our grandchildren. His narrow-minded, distorted view of reality is creating millions upon millions of future enemies of the United States…The respect and honor that took hundreds of years to acquire has been destroyed in less than a decade by who…ONE PRESIDENT.

 
fetus
May 20, 2007
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Well, what defines good?

Look at Iraq. The imposing of Western beliefs created catastrophe.

 
vancam
May 21, 2007
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: rolanderikson Show

In my opinion I don't think that the states or any other empiure has ever been "a force for good" but I recognise they have done good as should any priviledged nation.

 
vancam
May 22, 2007
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: rolanderikson Show

What is it with you guys and communists countries? I don't know enough about what North Korea is meant to have done to place any judegment on it in regards to the States. I know however that it is no way near as priviledged a country and almost certainly will have been persecuted by the western community for it's communist stance (hence all the Chinese aid).

And this axis of evil business, haven't you bnoticed how ridiculous this sounds now.

Please go ahead and name the countries in the Bush's "axis of evil" and what their link to each other is... please do... what links them??? muslim? Shia? Shite? Communist? what???

I try and be patient but sometimes I really loose my patienced with you guys. Luckily me and my girlfriend have decided to move bacmk to Great Britain and it has a lot to do with the political environment here. I honestly worry about making phone calls and sending comments like this because of your "patrisim act", I mean, how bloody blind would an electorate have to be to pass a bill like that? How Blind!

 
tggdan3
May 22, 2007
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Define good.

In religious terms the US is not good because it refuses to establish a religion- so each individual religion should view us as "non-good" for allowing every other religion.

In secular terms the united states has done nothing that is altruistic- everything is politically driven, making it neutral at best, certainly not good. (though not evil necessarily).

If we wanted to do "good" we would give free food or technology to the rest of the world. Free no strings. No alliances, no military bases over there or embassies, but free. That would be "good."

 
vancam
May 22, 2007
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: rolanderikson Show

Actually North Korea has EVERYTHING to do with the "axis of evil" it is part of it according to your boy Bush.

Also, I have repeatedly said that I think the States does good int he world and for the final time my point is that I don't think ANY nation past or present can be considered a "force for good".

All I am trying to get through to you is all the western powers and whoever else you want to compare the states to are as bad as each other and until we have a single hegemony running the world that's how it will continue to be.

 
vancam
May 23, 2007
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: rolanderikson Show

"a higher moral level"!!! you have got to be kidding me! I have send repeatedly that NO I don't think it is a "force for good" and now you want me to say it's NOT on a higher moral level than anyone else.

It's just a country with people in it following their own path, it just so happens that your one in particular likes to think it's doing righteous good things. But so does Iran and N.Korea and Britain and Germany... all countries think they are doing the "right", "good" or justified thing. And all to often when they get pious like that it turns out that they are not. Interesting that you brought up Germany really isn't.

 
henthorn
May 25, 2007
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: kenski70 Show

"You say that Americans wanting to save the lives of thier own is bad"

No, I said it wasn't a good thing for the world. We're not debating how 'good' american strategy is, but how beneficial their actions have been for the world. I would suggest that killing innocent citizens, especially since the second A-Bomb was (allegedly) dropped after the surrender of Japan had already been declared, is not a great thing. whilst there is some justification in killing soldiers who are likely to attack you, there is almost no moral reasoning that supports killing thousands of innocents.

As to the support the US gave to Saddam and Alquieda (no, I don't know how to spell it), each one constitutes two massive mistakes by the US government.

In giving weapons and funding to Iraq, the US was supporting an unjust and religiously motivated war, the simple reason being that America could not justify attacking Iran itself. Iran being vital to trade routes and oil acess for America, they needed a pro-western government running it. So they support an illegal (by thier own standards) war. and then, when they feel Iraq is becoming too anti-american they invade that one themselves.

According to the Afghan government of the time, the Soviet troops were invited into the country because of the rebel uprisings that were threatening to overthrow the state. Purely because it was the USSR aiding the Afghans, the US funded and supported rebel groups - they funded terrorism. It seemed to pass the American government by that the very things these rebel groups were fighting against was represented by American values and social principals (I'm not going to get into a dispute about 'Islamic' terrorism, but that is the position Bin Laden and his followers take on thier motives for hating western civilisation). So the US funded another war, and supported one of the most dangerous terrorist groups around today.

That's three wars and one terrorist movemet. And still, I'd quite like you to reply about the Spanish civil war and the league of nations problems - from where I'm standing that's support for an anti-democratic terrorist group, and the reason WWII started.

Well done america.

 
vancam
May 21, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: dereksemeraro Show

One bad President!!! I count THREE just in my lifetime.

And if any country proved their heroism and selflessness in WW2 it was Britain that stood to loose EVERYTHING while being outnumbered and left un aided by their so called alies.

There is nothing heroic about bleeding the mother country dry of it's assets and coming in at the last minute to steal some false glory.

 
vancam
May 25, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: kenski70 Show

You are greatly mistaken if you think that's going to be the Empire of Americas legacy. Let me clear one or two things up for you.

1. Calling someone a "dufus" is not a sound debating tactic, insults usually take over in an argument where intelligence leaves off. I can see you have made that transition.

2. Although there obviously was plently of propoganda (bullsh*t) flying around in the cold war the creation of Star Wars wasn't part of it and is known today as the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.

3. Are you really going to continue using phrases like "killing fist of the free world" and expect other nations to hold any respect for your "peace" keeping efforts?

4. WW2 - the country that dropped TWO nuclear bombs on civilians (no one has had the gall to do that since).

5. Korea - was a UN innitiative. You see when you take part in the UNITED Nations things work out for the best.

6. Vietnam was a complete shambles where it became apparent that all the money and technology in the world doesn't make American military forces any good at fighting wars.

7. Bush Senior promised the Kurds that Sadam would be overthrown and at the last munite withdrew forces that lead to Sadams gas genocide of your allies (good job).

8. The current war is unjust and although Sadam has FINALLY been removed the aftermath is yet another example of the US incability to plan and execute a war properly.

That's the legacy the history books have for you.

 
vancam
May 25, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: kenski70 Show

"Thay why we suported Saddam then.
In the 80's the Us viewed Russia as our biggest enemy. "

So now, tell me if you think after that statement that America is a force for good in the WORLD!

You use people and have abused your power for your own gain.

Good would be doing it for someone else.

That is not a good use of force.

 
henthorn
May 27, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: kenski70 Show

"the bombs used on Pearl Harbour were made in Hirosihma....... Nagasaki just happens to be a Naval base with a city"

Right, so why the atomic weapons? Why, if these bombing raids were intended purely to disarm the Japanese, were bombs capable of killing thousands of citizens, poisoning the survivors and desimating the surrounding land employed for such a specialist task? Why have atomic weapons never been used since for similar activities in the Middle East, or in the Falklands?

The simple answer is that the use of atom bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima was a display of power designed to frighten the USSR - an act which almost singlehandedly launched the world into the Cold War. The use of devastating weapons by the US kick-started the Arms Race that would continue to accelerate for decades to come, and such an open threat only increased the inclination for Soviet leaders to keep the Red Army divisions in easter european countries recently liberated from the Nazi 'Lebensraum' expansion programme. Until that time, hostilities between the two superpowers was fairly limited - almost entirely restricted to supporting and funding opposing sides in the Spanish Civil War (In which, I repeat, US support was used to crush the Repblic and install a dictator, closely allied with Hitler throughout most of the Second World War).

So the use of atomic weapons devastated one country (making it ripe for the spread of Stalinism, remembering that Korea belonged to Japan at the time), saved some American lives, and brought about the Cold War.

There very few justifications for the use of atomic weapons, and 'They could have attacked us' is not one of them. Nuclear warfare is not defence, it's a monstrosity.

 
henthorn
May 28, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: kenski70 Show

"why would the US be trying to show force to a nation that was our ally at the time????? "

Because it was obvious that the next war would be between the two Superpowers. Quite apart from the paranoia of the US, a cultural feature where being seen as 'second best' in the world stage would be worse than complete annialation, supporting rival sides in the Spanish Civil War a few years previously made it obvious that full blown war could erupt between the US and USSR once the common enemy (Nazi Germany) was defeated.
So yes, the US was trying to intimidate the USSR.

Your point about the fire bombings and other raids of Japan only strengthens the conviction that the use of nuclear weapons was purely as a gross display of military power, and nothing to do with strategic targeting or disarmament.

 
vancam
Jun 07, 2007
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: dereksemeraro Show

"disbanding the axis powers"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! breath !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

it was Bush that "banded" them together ffs.

before he grouped them all in one of his insane monosyllibic speaches they had pretty much NOTHING to do with one another.

 


Use these tags to find similiar debates

society Abortion alcohol america Animal animals army art ban BBC black Britain British Capitalism child children Chinese Communism control convinceme council Court crime criminal culture death death penalty Debate Democracy drugs Economy education England english equality ethics EU evil food Frankie Freedom Gay girls good Government Great Britain health House of Lords human illegal Internet Islam Judge Justice language Law lawyer Legal lesbian Liberty life love marijuana marriage men money morals murder music Muslim Obama opinion parenting parents peace people police politics poor Porn pregnancy prison privacy punishment race racism religion Responsibility Rich Rights School science sex slavery smoking social society Students suicide technology terrorism the UK UN United Kingdom united states USA VanCam Video Games violence war weed white women world