The F-22 Is Better Than The F-35
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 2 votes and with 2 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- 30,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
No information
Well in my opinion, the F-22 Raptor is better and more advanced technologically than the F-35 Lightning.
the F-22 is equivalent in power to five F-15 Eagles.However, the F-35 cannot even match a F-16.
original topic. I would like to see this re-framed as a genuine, current policy debate.
Both debaters offered minimal effort. Pro opened with irrelevant opinion and a sloppy comparison that offered no insight. Con correctly called the sloppiness but nearly lost me by arguing "better at crashing." I understand Con is K'ing a subjective thesis but Con is also profoundly undermining an already scanty case.
Ultimately, Pro loses arg because Pro failed to offer substantial offense which seems to have given Con an excuse to phone in the defense. Links to other people's arguments are seldom persuasive to this voter.
Conduct to Con for Pro's triple forfeit.
Conduct to con as pro forfeited most rounds.
A large number of subjective and arbitrary reasons for why one machine is better than the other. The resolution is comparative, so any examples where there is a clear comparative ground to say one is better than the other is what will score this one for me.
Con doesn’t provide much in the way of objective comparison between the two that doesn’t fall down on more than subjective grounds - one is old news, or not relevant is not a great reason to vote for con. While con did spend time indicating there is some differences in their roles, there is no reasonable objective data upon which to vote that the F35 is better and thus vote for con.
Pros main argument, and only example of a compelling objective difference is that the F22 our performs the F35. This appears to be both relevant to the topic, and obviously an intuitive reason to conclude the F22 is better than the F35. On those grounds: arguments to pro.
*******************************************************************
Vote Reported: Scott_Manning // Mod Action: Removed
Points awarded: 3 points to pro for arguments, 1 point to con for arguments
RFD: I absolutely agree with Ramshutu. I would also like to say that I think Con screwed up a bit at the better at crashing part.
Reason for mod action: (1) The voter must assess the content of the debate and only the debate, any reasoning based on arguments made or information given outside of the debate rounds is unacceptable. This includes reasoning that stems from already-placed votes, comment sections, and separate forums. Votes that impermissibly factor in outside content and which are reported will be removed. In this case, the voter relies on Ramshutu's vote, which is forbidden. (2) Finally, the conduct point is not explained. In order to award conduct, the voter must:
Provide specific references to instances of poor conduct which occurred in the debate
Demonstrate how this poor conduct was either excessive, unfair, or in violation of mutually agreed upon rules of conduct pertaining to the text of the debate
Compare each debater's conduct from the debate
Misconduct is excessive when it is extremely frequent and/or when it causes the debate to become incoherent or extremely toxic. In the case of awarding conduct points solely on the basis of forfeits, there is an exception to these steps: a debater may award conduct points solely for forfeited rounds, but only if one debater forfeited half or more of their rounds or if the voter also awards argument points (or explains their decision not to award argument points in a manner which meets the argument points voting standards).
The voter should review the COC here: https://www.debateart.com/rules
*******************************************************************
He technically wrote " "
How did you manage to publish nothing at all?
Better at crashing?! Are you feeling alright? You need a doctor?
Forgive me if I put up too many sites.
I like this topic because it has to do with public policy and is a subject I've never really researched. I bet the questions involved in fighter jet design and engineering are fascinating. If I was debating this, however, I'd be tempted to go after the weakness of "better than." Better for who? Not better for ISIS fighters or Yemeni villagers. And aren't we comparing apples and oranges? The F-35 is an air/ground attack vehicle, the F-22 is an air/air attack vehicle. The F-22 is designed to beat a plane like the F-35.
A plane with 2005 avionics vs one with mid to late 2010s avionics?