Instigator / Pro
1
1294
rating
75
debates
18.0%
won
Topic

The United States should stay out of foreign entanglments

Status
Finished

All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.

Voting points
1
0

With 1 vote and 1 point ahead, the winner is ...

billbatard
Parameters
More details
Publication date
Last update date
Category
Philosophy
Time for argument
One day
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Winner selection
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
1,000
Required rating
1
Contender / Con
0
1477
rating
1
debates
0.0%
won
Description
~ 360 / 5,000

The constitutional Founders of this Nation warned of foreign entanglements to avoid empire, and its harms, and yet here we are all over the chessboard we've been in afghanistan like what 20 years? does sit ever get better? unless a nation directly threatens us or our interests we should stay out of the global soap opera we never sem to make things any better

Added:
Instigator
--> @DroneYoinker

"In summary, the original intent of the Second Amendment was to protect the right of the states to form and maintain state militias, free of the potential federal incursion created by Article I, section 8, clause 16 of the Constitution. Hopefully, we will one day get an intellectually honest majority on the Supreme Court that will reverse the judicial activism that the five right wing ideologues on SCOTUS forced on the American people in Heller, Citizens United, and the majority's dangerous restriction on the interstate commerce clause in National Federation of Independent Business et al. v. Sibelius (otherwise known as the "Obamacare" decision). " https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2012/12/25/1171716/-The-Second-Amendment-Has-Nothing-to-Do-with-Gun-Ownership

Added:
Instigator
--> @DroneYoinker

The Gun Lobby's interpretation of the Second Amendment is one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American People by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime. The real purpose of the Second Amendment was to ensure that state armies - the militia - would be maintained for the defense of the state. The very language of the Second Amendment refutes any argument that it was intended to guarantee every citizen an unfettered right to any kind of weapon he or she desires.
Retired Chief Justice Warren Burger, "The Right to Bear Arms," Parade Magazine, January 14, 1990.

Added:
Instigator
--> @DroneYoinker

there is no right to own a gun, states has permission to form militias ans since the advent of national guards and standing armies? the second amendement is completely obsolete in realiy despite what any gun nut say there is absolutely no right to own a gun none at best it is a priviledge, the right to bear arms is a fiction

Added:
Contender

Ok, you know what. I'm not cut out for this. I'm going to stick to one thing at a time. I have absolutely no time to get on this site.

Added:
--> @billbatard

The reason I asked the question was due to the fact that you referenced the 2nd Amendment and conflated that with the foreign affairs statement. One is a right, one is a suggestion. You determine which is which.

Added:
Contender

OMG I'm so sorry I forfeited. I keep forgetting this place exists because of DDO. I'll make it up, I promise.

Added:
--> @billbatard

Wait a minute, bro. You are for gun control, but now you're citing the Founders. Doesn't that also make you a hypocrite?

Added:
Instigator
--> @DroneYoinker

thats because it was a stupid question

Added:
Instigator
--> @DroneYoinker

why does it have to, whats so important about the constitution there is nothing in the constitution that prevents us from avioding foreign entanglements either where in the constittuion does it say we have to stick our nose into everyones business? see what i did there? ther eis nothing in the contittution saying we have to go around the world playing police man either

Added:
--> @billbatard

I don't think you answered my question though. Where on the BILL OF RIGHTS or CONSTITUTION does it say that?

Added:
Instigator
--> @DroneYoinker

Washington dedicates a large part of his farewell address to discussing foreign relations and the dangers of permanent alliances between the United States and foreign nations, which he views as foreign entanglements.[9] This issue dominated national politics during the French Revolutionary Wars between France and Britain. Federalists favored Britain and the Jeffersonian Republicans favored France. The Republicans wanted the U.S. to honor the 1778 Treaty of Alliance and to aid France, while the Federalists favored an alliance with Britain. Washington had avoided American involvement in the conflict by issuing the Proclamation of Neutrality, which in turn led to the Neutrality Act of 1794. He tries to further explain his approach to foreign policy and alliances in this portion of the address.

Washington advocates a policy of good faith and justice towards all nations, again making reference to proper behavior based upon religious doctrine and morality. He urges the American people to avoid long-term friendly relations or rivalries with any nation, arguing that attachments with or animosity toward other nations will only cloud the government's judgment in its foreign policy. He argues that longstanding poor relations will only lead to unnecessary wars due to a tendency to blow minor offenses out of proportion when committed by nations viewed as enemies of the United States. He continues this argument by claiming that alliances are likely to draw the United States into wars which have no justification and no benefit to the country beyond simply defending the favored nation. Alliances, he warns, often lead to poor relations with nations who feel that they are not being treated as well as America's allies, and threaten to influence the American government into making decisions based upon the will of their allies instead of the will of the American people.

Added:
Instigator
--> @DroneYoinker

George Washington's farewell address is a letter written by President George Washington as a valedictory to "friends and fellow-citizens" after 20 years of public service to the United States.[1] He wrote it near the end of his second term of presidency before retiring to his home at Mount Vernon in Virginia.

The letter was first published as The Address of Gen. Washington to the People of America on His Declining the Presidency of the United States in the American Daily Advertiser on September 19, 1796, about ten weeks before the presidential electors cast their votes in the 1796 election. It is a classic statement of republicanism,[2] warning Americans of the political dangers which they must avoid if they are to remain true to their values. It was almost immediately reprinted in newspapers throughout the country, and later in pamphlet form.[3]

The first draft was originally prepared by James Madison in June 1792, as Washington contemplated retiring at the end of his first term in office.[4] However, he set it aside and ran for a second term because of heated disputes between Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton and Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson which convinced Washington that the growing tensions would rip apart the country without his leadership. This included the state of foreign affairs, and divisions between the newly formed Federalist and Democratic-Republican parties.[5]

As his second term came to a close four years later, Washington prepared a revision of the original letter with the help of Hamilton to announce his intention to decline a third term in office. He reflects on the emerging issues of the American political landscape in 1796, expresses his support for the government eight years after the adoption of the Constitution, defends his administration's record, and gives valedictory advice to the American people.[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington%27s_Farewell_Address

Added:
--> @billbatard

Where on the constitution or bill of rights is it written that the US needs to stay out of foreign affairs?

Added:
Contender

Could you add more to a case? I have nothing to refute!

Added:
Instigator

so all of a sudden the priciples of the founders are NOT universal? so then can we finally get rid of th second amndment by the same reasoing?

Added:

Do you think the strategy for a small weak country such as the one you attributed to Thomas Jefferson should also be used by a super power?