Sedo - Buy and Sell Domain Names and Websites project info: debate.com Statistics for project debate.com etracker® web controlling instead of log file analysis
The Instigator
dairygirl4u2c
Pro (for)
Losing
21 Points
The Contender
Labrat228
Con (against)
Winning
48 Points

obama... just as much if not more merit, against the surge and for troops in afghanistan

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Started: 7/21/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 months ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 177 times Debate No: 4754
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (11)

 

dairygirl4u2c

Pro

the position is being compared to mccain's.

there was an addition in 20000 troops to iraq, to make it 1.8 or so instead of 1.6 hundred thousand troops.

the iraqi government was already, before the surge, coalescing its own troops.

20,000 troops is negligible given the overall number already there, and the force the iraqis were forming and had.

that the generals in iraq wants more troops, only shows they want to win there, and hte better way to win is to have more troops.

but there can only be so many troops in either iraq, or afganistan.

even if there were more troops to add to the total in both countries, which there's not many more, whatever is in iraq, is by definition not in afghanistan.

afghanistan is in bad shape.

so, the surge and even some iraqi brigades should have been put to afghanistan, probably, as it would have had more effect there.

(this is only a fact finding mission mostly, this debate, to see if there's a way to know what would have happened, and if there's more than just the rhetoric i'm putting out, and that i expect will be given back. my judgment says the above is right, but i think more info is needed, which i seek, mroe facts. if you think the above position isin't even possibly right, but irrefutably wrong, i'd like you to focus more on that. more than just rhetoric, if possible, please)
Labrat228

Con

The truth of the matter is, if we had sent the surge to Afghanistan instead of Iraq than Iraq wouldn't be in the condition it is currently in. Yes Iraq's army was forming but it was, and still is in a very fragile condition. Afghanistan is a very mountainous region, if we sent the surge their then the enemy would have simply moved to Pakistan. Therefor the surge was correctly placed in Iraq.

We currently do not have the political support from Pakistan to insure that the scenario that i previously stated wouldn't happen. Thanks for reading my points!
Debate Round No. 1
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

dairygirl4u2c forfeited this round.
Labrat228

Con

I am very tired, ive been playing PS3 all night :) Vote for MEEEEE!!!!
100 Characters
100 Characters
100 Characters
Debate Round No. 2
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

dairygirl4u2c forfeited this round.
Labrat228

Con

Vote for me! (the one who hasn't forfeited at all!)
100c (I hate clowns)
100c (I think pandas are creepy)
100c (I cant wait till the long awaited 3.0 version of the site comes out)
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Im_always_right 3 months ago
Im_always_right
meaning it is not always easy to find. I guess this will just stay here for years to come...
Posted by Im_always_right 4 months ago
Im_always_right
you should just delete it, there is a button on the top of the pageby the comments, bookmark, button that can cancel the debate. Just saying that because it is not obviously there.
Posted by PoeJoe 4 months ago
PoeJoe
There should be a thing where if a debate is not accepted with two weeks, it is deleted.
Loading voting charts...

Show people this debate by sending them this public link: