Instigator / Con

Mall

1492

rating

333

debates

40.69%

won

Topic

#3756

You pick the topic.

Status

Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics

Winner

After 1 vote and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...

Novice_II

Tags

Miscellaneous

Parameters

Publication date: 09.17.2022 05:43PM
Last updated date: 10.20.2022 10:22AM
Type: Standard
Number of rounds: 2
Time for argument: Two days
Max argument characters: 20,000
Voting period: One month
Point system: Winner selection
Voting system: Open

Contender / Pro

Novice_II

1890

rating

debates

93.37%

won

Description

Disclaimer : Regardless of the setup for voting win or lose, The aim of this interaction, Is for those that view it, Learn and or take away anything that will amount to any constructive value ultimately. So that counts as anything that'll cause one to reconsider an idea, Understand a subject better, Help build a greater wealth of knowledge getting closer to truth. When either of us has accomplished that with any individual here, That's who the victor of the debate becomes.

Here's a chance for you to design the platform based on your topic selection.
We'll obviously have opposing sides.

Whatever topic you choose of course, it'll fit whichever side it falls on for you in tandem with the position preset .

***THE TOPICS CANNOT BE DUPLICATE. IT'S AN AUTOMATIC FORFEITING IF THR SAME TOPIC IS CHOSEN***

Questions and concerns, leave a comment or send a message.

Round 1

Mall

09.17.2022 06:01PM

Con

What it is ?

Novice_II

09.17.2022 06:07PM

Pro

"THBT The United States should not nuke Mexico."
Nuke (verb) attack or destroy with nuclear weapons.
Mexico: Mexico,[a][b] officially the United Mexican States,[c] is a country in the southern portion of North America. It is bordered to the north by the United States; to the south and west by the Pacific Ocean; to the southeast by Guatemala, Belize, and the Caribbean Sea; and to the east by the Gulf of Mexico.

Round 2

Mall

09.19.2022 01:08PM

Con

The United States I understand is an organization or corporation titled North America in the the northwestern hemisphere if I'm not mistaken.

This thing exists, functions within the economy and commerce system to support the livelihood and lives of many inhabitants.

Being that is the apparent goal, otherwise there would be no civilization or growing society breaking into the so called United States, there's an aim , there's an objective .

In order to maintain as is, there has to be preservation.

The beings looking to preserve life should defend it by what it takes which is counter attacking that attacking it.

Why? It's because life can't be preserved or the beloved United States, whatever, without doing so.

Just simple computation arithmetic.

Novice_II

09.20.2022 10:22AM

Pro

None of these statements from con are arguments for nuking Mexico. My argument is that:

Mexico is an innocent country, and a trade ally of the US, thus, they have done nothing to deserve being wiped out. The level of devastation this will cause is critical, and Mexico has not wronged the US nor is in any conflict with them.
Mexico is close enough to the US, that American citizens will also be impacted by this (those closer to the southern border) thus we would be unnecessarily harming our own citizens.
This action will set dangerous international precedents on the use of nuclear weapons for convenience.

Novice_II

10.20.2022 01:36AM

8 hours left, and no votes. Please, if you are to vote, make sure your vote meets the voting policy standards. It does not take much.

whiteflame

10.19.2022 11:56PM

-->

@Mall

@Novice_II

@Ehyeh

**************************************************
>Reported Vote: Ehyeh // Mod action: Removed
>Voting Policy: info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy
>Points Awarded: 1 points to Pro

>Reason for Decision:
"Mexico is an innocent country, and a trade ally of the US, thus, they have done nothing to deserve being wiped out. The level of devastation this will cause is critical, and Mexico has not wronged the US nor is in any conflict with them.
Mexico is close enough to the US, that American citizens will also be impacted by this (those closer to the southern border) thus we would be unnecessarily harming our own citizens.
This action will set dangerous international precedents on the use of nuclear weapons for convenience. "

>Reason for Mod Action:
This isn’t an RFD, just a direct quote of Pro’s final round. That is not sufficient.
**************************************************

Lair77

09.19.2022 01:44PM

Please vote for Mall.

Don't reward Novice for sniping.

ILikePie5

10.20.2022 02:14AM

Criterion

Con

Tie

Pro

Points

Winner

1 point(s)

Reason:

I didn’t think plagiarizing was a thing on this site. But Con plagiarized himself from another debate. This is another straightforward decision with a victory for Con. My RFD is very similar to the previous one because of this.

S/G: I award this to Pro. Their sentences made sense and were easy to ready grammatically and structurally. Co on the other hand had run-on sentences (like the very first sentence). Second “sentence” has a sentence fragment as well just as another example.

Conduct: I am giving the points to Pro because Con basically plagiarized his own argument from another debate. Basically a verbatim copy paste.

Sources: I am going to give this to Pro because they provided a source unlike Con. The source is an official government website from the US Trade Representative, highlighting the benefits provided by Mexico in terms of trade. This gives a clear reason why the US shouldn’t nuke Mexico

Arguments: This one goes to Pro as well. The S/G by Pro really makes it hard to understand their argument. My understanding is that Pro makes an argument for defense and preservation of lives in the United States. However, this argument only helps the Pro side of the argument. Defense/sovereignty is an argument Con would bring up. Pro supports his position with the innocence defense and the precedent argument, both of which are compelling and coherent unlike Con’s arguments.

Pro wins.