White nationalists have declared war on the US! - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com. The only online debate website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the leading online debate website. Debate popular topics, debate news, or debate anything! Debate online for free! DebateIsland is utilizing Artifical Intelligence to transform online debating.


The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

White nationalists have declared war on the US!
in Politics

By piloteerpiloteer 427 Pts edited August 7
Extremist factions within the republican party are committing acts of war on the US. Either the republicans sever ties with the white-nationalists, or be considered a foreign nationalist terrorist organization and expect the people of the US to respond in kind!!!!!!
CYDdhartaHumbugAlofRI



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted To Win
Tie

Details +



Arguments

  • What ties do Republicans have with white nationalists?
    AlofRIPlaffelvohfen
  • SharkySharky 97 Pts
    A better idea would be for Democrats to seek mental health treatment for their collective case of "white nationalist hysteria". 
    HumbugAlofRIPlaffelvohfenjesusisGod777
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1127 Pts
    edited August 4
    piloteer said:
    Extremist factions within the republican party are committing acts of war on the US. Either the republicans sever ties with the white-nationalists, or be considered a foreign nationalist terrorist organization and expect the people of the US to respond in kind!!!!!!

    What more needs to be said?  How could such groups be more strongly condemned?

    We must love each other, show affection for each other, and unite together in condemnation of hatred, bigotry, and violence. We must discover the bonds of love and loyalty that bring us together as Americans. Racism is evil, and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans. We are a nation founded on the truth that all of us are created equal. We are equal in the eyes of our creator, we are equal under the law, and we are equal under our constitution. Those who spread violence in the name of bigotry strike at the very core of America.
    https://qz.com/1053270/full-text-donald-trumps-statement-on-charlottesville/

  • TKDBTKDB 256 Pts

    Have white nationalists declared war on the US?


    No, they haven't.

    But the various cultures in the U.S., have been shooting, maiming, and hurting each other, and the individuals from other cultures, for years now.

    Drive by shootings, that in some cases, have killed innocent family member, in their own homes.

    Murder, sexual assault, domestic violence, and abuse, murder/suicides, kidnappings, abductions, robberies, muggings, and the other, thousands of crimes, that have been happening, year after year.

    The mass shootings, are another part of the above crimes, as well. 

    There are 400 million guns in the United States, that now outnumber, the 329 million citizens who live in this country.

    And of those 329 million citizens, 900,000 of them roughly are Law Enforcement.

    The real Wars, are the ones against the "Second Amendment, and on the Bill of Rights," that have been used and abused, by those first time offenders, and those criminals, and offenders, who used their guns to kill their innocent victim's with.
    AlofRIjesusisGod777Sharky
  • piloteer

    Just because White Nationalist register predominantly as Republicans doesn"t mean they even really have a voice within the Party.

    The majority of Republicans do not buy into thier ideologies.

    Yes Extreme White National groups are considered Domestic Terrorist if they plot against the government and take it past the point of just plotting.

    They, howerver can not be called  "foreign nationalist terrorist organization" as they are American citzens whether we like it or not.

    On the otherside of the coin shouldn't the Democratic Party call people who call themselves ANTIFA and commit violent acts against others just for having a contrary opinion to thiers, which are generally Republican views, as Domestic terrorists?
  • @piloteer ;
    Have white nationalists declared war on the US?
    Nope the democracy has declared War on the American republic United State Constitution. A democratic majority is not a united state by legal precedent and basic principle. 
    jesusisGod777
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1793 Pts
    I find it much more concerning how popular socialism is becoming in the US, and how all participants of the Democratic candidates essentially represent various shades of hardcore statism.

    I have yet to see any white nationalists among the prominent Republican politicians. I am not a big fan of the current Republican platform, and Trump is a fairly despicable human being - but it is not the Republican party the danger to our free nation is coming from.

    What is more dangerous to the nation: several mass shooting incidents affecting a few dozen people, or systematic push for regulations making FDR look like an anarchist in comparison, affecting 300+ million? It is clear who is waging minor acts of terror, and who is at a full-scale war with the ideals of the Founding Fathers our system is based on.

    Just as these acts of terror happened, Democrats immediately started using them to argue for imposing harsh gun control laws. I think this speaks volumes about who really seeks to get advantage out of the situation.
    jesusisGod777
  • HumbugHumbug 13 Pts
    I am in total disagreement with the short minded bias from the poster, which clearly speaks his day and night dreaming hallucinations from a one minded liberal hysteria prospective. I'm no racist but I respect the right of every living American individual to express themselves in any which way they see fit, even when I severely disagree with their views. It is foul manner and conduct which I despise and disapprove of, never the manner of free expression and free speech! I'd go full-blown ghetto on anyone trying to forcefully impose their views and conduct on me or mine! Take a long hard look at yourself and at your affiliation with the party of your choice (evidently liberal) and realize how much censoring you impose on those who don't see eye to eye with your views and how you shun outsiders from healthy debate, especially in circles of higher learning and academia... The left view concerning conservative republicans is that you need to forcefully impose a favorable outcome to your cause by all means and every dirty trick in the liberal book. The Liberal party waged war on everything American and white, funny how you don't view that as a serious case and issue of fascism and racism? Liberals would like to introduce every rogue element into our borders without screening and without walls, and to provide every amenity from our health, education and breadbasket to non-citizen criminals and illegals. Should heaven forbid, we oppose your plans, you will spare not a single foul element against us... Liberals are enemies of the state, brainless, conscienceless, foul and destructive, I am disgusted with you until my very last dying breath and then some, but I still respect your rights of free speech and expression so long as you're not thug violent and ill forceful to achieve your goals! I can only wish that you'd be so kind to express similar consideration to opposition, but I doubt that you are capable of "kind" in treatment of opposition... 
    PlaffelvohfenAlofRISharky
  • AlofRIAlofRI 247 Pts
    No. They haven't "declared war", they are still in the guerrilla stage. Few, IF ANY, are waging war on the Second OR the Bill of Rights, that's hogwash. The Second gives U.S. the right to bear arms. It DOES NOT  designate which arms. To listen to the right, the U.S. has more "mental health" problems than the rest of the world. That is, in itself, crazy! We have more than our share of racism, of far right groups (ARMED far right groups), and THERE lies the majority of our "mental health problems"! 
    Some insist on the rights of the Second Amendment over the "right" to "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness …. which is already LOST by the VICTIMS of the overzealous Second Amendment-ers. How is THAT fair?? There is NOTHING in the Second that gives one the "right" to bear ANY arms they choose. That is one of the few, but certainly not the only, places our founders failed to foresee …. "arms" that are capable of firing over a thousand rounds a minute. In their defense, they also allowed for changes to work for a "more perfect union". Changing, but not abolishing, the Second is well within our rights as citizens!  
    I'm sorry, children of the Second, that we, in a majority, want to take away some of your dangerous toys. It seems we do that every now and again to our other children … the ones we don't want to see hurt, and sometimes they throw tantrums also. Sorry, kids, it's in YOUR best interest and OUR sense of self preservation, given TO U.S. in OUR Bill of Rights, that drives U.S. to do this. The rest of U.S. have rights, also.
    CYDdhartapiloteerPlaffelvohfen
  • AlofRIAlofRI 247 Pts
    Quote:  A people who values its privileges over its principles soon loses both.  * D.D. Eisenhower *


    piloteerPlaffelvohfen
  • piloteerpiloteer 427 Pts
    @AlofRI

    "they are still in the guerrilla stage".  :D HA!!!!!! I like that. Please don't be mad at me if I steal that one. I'll make it my catch phrase. 
    AlofRIPlaffelvohfen
  • piloteerpiloteer 427 Pts
    @MayCaesar

    This discussion is not an endorsement for democrats, or socialistic policies. I too find the popularity of socialism quite concerning, but if your trying to argue that the white-nationalists, or the current administration are vehemently capitalist, then I question if you understand who and what we're actually talking about here. Protectionism is socialism. When we place tariffs on foreign goods, it raises the cost of living for everybody in America because American labor costs are too high because the minimum wage is too high (we shouldn't even have one really). Since when did forcing the public to buy American for the sake of American workers, regardless of the costs, become a non-socialistic policy? It's no different than a nation wide "profit sharing" policy. And not for nothing, it's not like people are inspired by Nancy Pelosi to go shoot people at their local wal-mart, so YA, I'd consider the war the white-nationalists have declared a little more alarming than the democrats.

    And if there's anybody who is actually a threat to our second amendment, it would be the people who are doing the mass shootings, not the democrats. If we didn't have a mass shooting every single day in this country, do you think the argument to ban weapons would gain any tread?

    The white-nationalists are no less guilty of categorizing US into groups as liberals are. Whether we are expected to work and think for the common good of our country, or our race, it's of no value in the scheme of things, because it's still just communism. A collectivist is a commie, no matter what party they belong to. What ever happened to the republicans that said it's OK to think and work for yourself, and not the country as a whole?  I have a lot of conservative views, but the party I used to rely on to stand for those views is gone, and it's been replaced by a morally deficient fascist party. Republicans need to get back to conservatism and disassociate themselves with the storefront crowd. 
    Plaffelvohfen
  • piloteerpiloteer 427 Pts
    @CYDdharta

    National Socialist Germany wants peace because of its fundamental convictions. And it wants peace also owing to the realization of the simple primitive fact that no war would be likely essentially to alter the distress in Europe... The principal effect of every war is to destroy the flower of the nation... Germany needs peace and desires peace!

                                                                                                                                             adolf hitler.

    At least adolfs lip service was more poetic than your guy's.

  • piloteerpiloteer 427 Pts
    edited August 5
    @Humbug

    I know I know. We're not supposed to make fun of your kind anymore. It's not nice. But just because you're short a chromosome doesn't mean your good at making a valid argument. My foul manner IS my free speech, and it satisfies me to anger simpletons. I'm not a liberal by the way. I'm an ACTUAL conservative.
    Plaffelvohfen
  • piloteerpiloteer 427 Pts
    @WinstonC

    I think you and AlofRI should duke it out to figure out who should rightfully keep that avatar. 
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1127 Pts
    piloteer said:
    @CYDdharta

    National Socialist Germany wants peace because of its fundamental convictions. And it wants peace also owing to the realization of the simple primitive fact that no war would be likely essentially to alter the distress in Europe... The principal effect of every war is to destroy the flower of the nation... Germany needs peace and desires peace!

                                                                                                                                             adolf hitler.

    At least adolfs lip service was more poetic than your guy's.


    What are you talking about, my guy?  These tragedies were committed by social justice warriors.  They were fighting for socialist causes.  Put the blame where it belongs, on the left and on leftists.
    AlofRIPlaffelvohfen
  • @CYDdharta the guy who released a manifesto hating all non-whites, and encouraging those on 8chan to spread it, minutes before opening fire in a Wal-Mart was an SJW?? 
    Plaffelvohfen
  • piloteerpiloteer 427 Pts
    @CYDdharta

    I was simply pointing out that lip service does nothing in the way of action. Especially when the lip service belies the true intent. Nobody here has compared trump to hilter..........................woop, wait a minute :anguished: .Nobody but you! Sounds like somebody is effected by a guilty conscience!
    AlofRIPlaffelvohfen
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1127 Pts
    @CYDdharta the guy who released a manifesto hating all non-whites, and encouraging those on 8chan to spread it, minutes before opening fire in a Wal-Mart was an SJW?? 
      Damned straight he was.  He was anti-corporation;

    The inconvenient truth is that our leaders, both Democrat AND Republican, have been failing us for decades. They are either complacent or involved in one of the biggest betrayals of the American public in our history. The takeover of the United States government by unchecked corporations.

    pro-UBI and universal healthcare

    Joblessness in itself is a source of civil unrest. The less dependents on a government welfare system, the better. The lower the unemployment rate, the better. Achieving ambitions social projects like universal healthcare and UBI would become far more likely to succeed if tens of millions of dependents are removed.

    and an environmentalist

    The American lifestyle affords our citizens an incredible quality of life. However, our lifestyle is destroying the environment of our country. The decimation of the environment is creating a massive burden for future generations. Corporations are heaing the destruction of our environment by shamelessly over harvesting resources. This has been a problem for decades.




    AlofRI
  • piloteerpiloteer 427 Pts
    @CYDdharta

    Why am I not surprised you had that manifesto on hand so you could whip it out at the drop of a hat? It was like you were just waiting for the right moment. Did you help proofread it? :D
    Plaffelvohfen
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1127 Pts
    piloteer said:
    @CYDdharta

    I was simply pointing out that lip service does nothing in the way of action. Especially when the lip service belies the true intent. Nobody here has compared trump to hilter..........................woop, wait a minute :anguished: .Nobody but you! Sounds like somebody is effected by a guilty conscience!
    ...except that I haven't compared Trump to Hitler.  Sounds like somebody is effected by a wishful thinking combined with poor reading comprehension!
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1127 Pts
    piloteer said:
    @CYDdharta

    Why am I not surprised you had that manifesto on hand so you could whip it out at the drop of a hat? It was like you were just waiting for the right moment. Did you help proofread it? :D

    You shouldn't be surprised.  You should know by now that I post with facts and evidence.  You should try it sometime.
  • AlofRIAlofRI 247 Pts
    Hitler?? No. I watched Hitler rant, scream and pound his fist. I also watched Mussolini. Now, THERE'S a comparison! The way he stuck his chin in the air, stuck his chest out, said how dumb everybody else was. The two are peas-in-a-pod! Every time I see him talk I think of ol' Mus! Just about the same size and girth too. :D
    Plaffelvohfen
  • AlofRIAlofRI 247 Pts
    Hitler?? No. I watched Hitler rant, scream and pound his fist. I also watched Mussolini. Now, THERE'S a comparison! The way he stuck his chin in the air, stuck his chest out, said how dumb everybody else was. The two are peas-in-a-pod! Every time I see him talk I think of ol' Muss ! Just about the same size and girth too. :D
  • AlofRIAlofRI 247 Pts
    Hitler?? No. I watched Hitler rant, scream and pound his fist. I also watched Mussolini. Now, THERE'S a comparison! The way he stuck his chin in the air, stuck his chest out, said how dumb everybody else was. The two are peas-in-a-pod! Every time I see him talk I think of ol' Mussolini ! Just about the same size and girth too. :D
  • AlofRIAlofRI 247 Pts
    Woops! I dunno how that happened! ???????
  • @CYDdharta yeah did you miss the part right after his "anti-corporation" sentence where he says the Democrats are going to be the single ruling party by committing a coup with the importation and legalisation of millions of immigrants, giving them free healthcare?

    I don't know about you but I haven't seen a single SJW say any of that is an atrocity. But then again this is just your brain trying to protect your internal views from lining up with anything even slightly negative in the external world, like a racist mass shooting, that even Trump called out.
    PlaffelvohfenCYDdhartapiloteer
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1127 Pts
    @CYDdharta yeah did you miss the part right after his "anti-corporation" sentence where he says the Democrats are going to be the single ruling party by committing a coup with the importation and legalisation of millions of immigrants, giving them free healthcare?

    I don't know about you but I haven't seen a single SJW say any of that is an atrocity. But then again this is just your brain trying to protect your internal views from lining up with anything even slightly negative in the external world, like a racist mass shooting, that even Trump called out.

    Nope, didn't miss that at all.  His anti-corporate stance make him sound like he'd fit right in at a Bernie rally.  The difference between this guy, as demented as he is, and the typical Bernie Bro is that he saw one-party rule by socialists as being bad, while most of them embrace that as the goal.  Your post is more projection from the left.  This guy was fighting for the left's causes.
    piloteerPlaffelvohfen
  • @CYDdharta fighting for the lefts causes? He literally brings up how terrible immigrants, not illegals literally all immigrants, are in every section, but the presidential candidates are talking about including immigrants. He says UBI and welfare programs are bad, not what the left says, just that they would be more likely to succeed if we kicked out millions of people.

    For someone who is all about the "facts" you sure do like to pick and choose
    piloteerPlaffelvohfen
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1793 Pts
    @piloteer

    You do not get to say that someone is a threat to the Second Amendment, if as a result of their actions someone else violates it. It is those who stomp on the Second Amendment for the sake of their political goals who are the culprit, not the shooters.

    I am also yet to see any evidence suggesting that white nationalists represent either a significant fraction of all shooters, or a significant fraction of all Republicans. I am not aware of a single Republican official who is an open white nationalist. There could be closeted ones, but they do not affect anything because of their closetness.

    I fail to see why a party should "denounce" someone they do not associate with in the first place. You could use the same logic to claim that I should denounce Putin's actions against dissidents in Russia, solely because I hold a Russian passport; I have no association with Putin and have spoken on countless occasions in support of unrestricted free speech, so me not denouncing some particular dictator openly and, instead, denouncing them all at the same time does not make me a Putin supporter or anything.
    WinstonC
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1127 Pts
    @CYDdharta fighting for the lefts causes? He literally brings up how terrible immigrants, not illegals literally all immigrants, are in every section, but the presidential candidates are talking about including immigrants. He says UBI and welfare programs are bad, not what the left says, just that they would be more likely to succeed if we kicked out millions of people.

    For someone who is all about the "facts" you sure do like to pick and choose

    Your rose-colored glasses are causing reading comprehension problems.  He's an advocate for UBI and the only thing he says about welfare is that welfare dependence is a bad thing.  I suppose I have to give you that one, since social justice warriors love anything that increases government power and reliance on the government.  Still, that's 4 to 2 in favor of the El Paso shooter being an SJW.
    Plaffelvohfen
  • @piloteer

    @AlofRI joined first so he is the rightful heir to the beautiful red and black smile.
    AlofRIpiloteer
  • The opposite of nationalism is globalism, and globalism is a corrupt idea.
  • piloteerpiloteer 427 Pts
    edited August 7
    @WinstonC

    That's very noble of you Winston. But it looks to be purple and black to me. Or maybe it's magenta. It's certainly not red though. I must admit, that new avatar is quite dapper looking. Very posh.
    WinstonC
  • piloteerpiloteer 427 Pts
    @MayCaesar

    I'm shocked at how obtuse your last argument was. It's rather unbecoming of your argumentative style. Ya, I'm sure those who "stomp on the second amendment for political gains" totally understand the endless popularity they'll gain by trying to put restrictions on the second amendment when they're in the country with the most guns on earth :/ ?!?!? I'm dually sure that the perpetrators of mass shootings and their actions have no effect at all on the publics feelings about gun control :| ?!?!? Like I've said, even if those people were trying to get political gains with gun control, the only reason their message is gaining any traction at all, is because of the almost daily occurrence of a mass shooting. Those people wouldn't even have been voted into their positions 25 years ago, when there were no mass shootings. It certainly is because of mass shootings that the public is talking about gun restrictions, not because of the charm of Elizabeth Warren!!!

    Steve King, Steve Scalise, and Ron Desantis are the direct ties the republicans have to white nationalists on the federal level. Steve Scalise once described himself as "David Duke without all the baggage". But I wasn't just referring to ties to white-nationalists among the people who are voted into office, I was talking about any people who identify as republicans that should be made to know that their party is not a party that calls for violence. Cesar Sayok committed an act of war when he sent 16 pipe bombs to people he thought were enemies of president trump. The shooter in the wal-mart praised trump for trying to build the wall. His actions were an act of war on the people of the United States. I feel that when someone with a similar ideology commits an act of war, just turning away and calling them crazy doesn't actually distance them at all.  On top of that, there are no federal laws regarding domestic terrorism. Not only will a mass shooter not be charged as a foreign agent whose committed an act of war, they also won't be charged as a terrorist. The sentences handed down to those people are usually a combination of state and federal gun laws, so the death penalty is not always an option because of which state the act of war was committed in. That must change. The republicans must let their constituents know that they do not espouse acts of war to accomplish their goals. Thus far, they have failed!!!

    What, are we just dropping the argument you made about socialistic policies? That was the meat and potatoes of your initial argument. Remember how I pointed out that the republicans are no less guilty of pushing socialistic policies than the democrats? Are we just moving away from that part of the discussion? We are ignoring the fact that because of the influence of white-nationalists within the republican party, they are no longer a conservative party, they are a protectionist party. They no longer call for lowering, or abolishing minimum wage requirements. They no longer believe in working and living for "yourself" before the "common good". 


    CYDdharta
  • piloteerpiloteer 427 Pts
    "@YeshuaRedeemed ;

    Can you demonstrate the corrupt nature of globalism? If you don't want to be worldly, why should others be forced to be isolationists simply because of how you feel? 
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1793 Pts
    @piloteer

    That is like saying that the 9/11 terrorists were responsible for the following encroaching of the government on people's basic freedoms and privacy. No; it is the government officials that chose how to respond to the events. The terrorists did their thing, and the government used the public fear to its ends. 
    There is nothing obtuse here. People who enact bad laws, and those who support them, should take full responsibility for it, and the fact that mass shootings are common in the US has nothing to do with it.

    I have socialist friends at university. That does not make me "have socialist ties", and I do not have to denounce socialist explicitly just because of that. Everyone who knows me more or less is aware of what I think about socialism, and everyone who looks at the Republican platform in an unbiased way knows what it has to say about any form of identity politics, including white nationalism. Nobody has to denounce something on numerous occasions, when they do not associate with that something in the first place.

    There is nothing to say about socialism; Democrats are stuck in hardcore socialist policies. Republicans do favor some forms of governmental intervention in the economy, but it does not go anywhere near what the Democrats suggest. In terms of the policy spending, every single Democratic candidate beats even Trump by a large margin, and Trump is arguably the biggest spender among the viable Republican candidates.

    You are involved in the usual "nirvana fallacy", where you establish unreasonably high standards for some people's actions and then criticise them for not abiding by those standards, while not applying the same standards to the people you are more favorable towards. You will criticise Republicans for every tiny protectionist policy, while Democrats, who are stuck deep in socialism, are, at best, seen by you as the same.
    That is not reasonable. If you apply some standard to the Republicans, then apply it to everyone - and you will see then that the Republicans are not the ones violating it the most.

    There is plenty I disagree on with Republicans, but they get their policies much closer to libertarian ideals, than any of the current Democrats does. Claiming that they somehow associate with white nationalists, just because some of their members are friends with people who happen to be white nationalists, is disingenious.
  • @MayCaesar

    Perhaps you consider yourself a libertarian, but I don't. I won't get into past arguments you've made on this site that totally strips you of your libertarian credentials and puts you firmly in the neo-con category, but you have made those comments. I don't vote democrat, and I never have. As far as I'm concerned, anybody who votes for either major party in America is a commie. I also disagree with the socialist agendas of democrats, but that's not what this discussion is about because no one is committing mass shootings in the name of Bernie Sanders.  

    If people have reason to fear the terrorist attacks of white nationalists, it's because of the actions of the white nationalists themselves, not the general publics. In your mind it seems that the best tactic is to allow the white nationalists to commit acts of war, while the rest of the general public lets it happen. This is the fulcrum of this discussion, because letting a foreign entity commit acts of war while we just let it happen is the same as capitulation. I'm not arguing that guns should be taken away from responsible Americans, but we should be allowed to disarm the foreign entity that has encroached on our civil liberties. People who commit acts of war on the American public are committing acts of treason, therefore they can be considered a foreign entity no matter where they come from. Domestic terrorism is the biggest terrorist threat to the US. I don't think treating combatants as "domestic terrorists" goes far enough. They should be treated as foreign agents committing acts of war.

    I fail to see how I'm setting unreasonable standards for anybody. Protectionism, institutionalized nationalism, white supremacy, and acts of war on the American public are not the ideals the republican party stands for. Either they force those elements out of their party and distance themselves from them, or they embrace their new platform as a foreign entity who have declared war on the people of the United States. Those other elements should be forced to create their own party.
    CYDdharta
  • @piloteer ;
    Just to look at basic principle any person who has no allegiance to United State Constitution does not commit treason to the United States of America they are a saboteur to the United States of Constitution.

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/saboteur


Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2019 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch