Instigator / Pro
1500
rating
0
debates
0.0%
won
Topic
#6633
The USA should invade Cuba
Status
Debating
Waiting for the next argument from the instigator.
Round will be automatically forfeited in:
00
DD
:
00
HH
:
00
MM
:
00
SS
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- One day
- Max argument characters
- 3,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
1500
rating
1
debates
50.0%
won
Description
No information
Round 1
Well hello,
I believe that USA should invade Cuba for multiple reasons
I, as an American, enjoy the freedoms I have and would like as much people in the world to have the ability to have the American dream. In which Cubans cannot do right now because of the oppressive government. We see this with the current war with Iran, which is saving people from government that genocides 30000 protesters, and also helps with disabling trading and oil supply for countries like North Korea, China, and especially Russia, as it supplies the Ukrainian War for the Russians. This is similar to Cuba, as the American has not traded with Cuba because of the heavy presence and friendship with Russia, so getting rid of enemy bases 90 miles from the border would help with national security. Finally get the country out of the 50’s, literally.
I get the moral instinct, and I don’t disagree that oppressive governments are a problem. I also see what you’re saying about Iran, Russia, China, and how Cuba fits into that picture strategically. The issue is that intent and alignment don’t override rules.
If my neighbor is abusing his wife, I don’t get to break into his house, beat him, and take control of the situation, even if I think I’m helping. There are laws and procedures for a safety, coordination, and trust. International law works the same way.
The UN Charter is clear. States must not use force against the territorial integrity or political independence of another state (UN Charter, Article 2(4)). The only accepted exceptions are self-defense or UN Security Council authorization (UN Charter, Article 51). Invading Cuba to spread freedom or remove an unfriendly government does not meet either.
This isn’t theoretical. The International Court of Justice ruled that using force or backing regime change without legal justification violates international law (Nicaragua v. United States, ICJ, 1986). After World War II, aggressive war was defined as the “supreme international crime” because of everything that follows from it (Nuremberg Judgment, 1946).
If “we think it’s morally good” becomes the standard, then any country can use that same reasoning. That is exactly what the current system is designed to prevent.
There’s also the practical side. Acting without coordination or warning increases the risk of retaliation and escalation, especially in regions already tied into larger conflicts. That doesn’t just affect the target country, it affects everyone connected to it.
So the disagreement isn’t about whether freedom is good. It’s about whether countries are allowed to ignore the rules to impose it. If the answer is yes, then the rules don’t mean anything.
Round 2
Not published yet
Not published yet
Round 3
Not published yet
Not published yet
Round 4
Not published yet
Not published yet