Does the USA Lead the World? - 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!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally by activity where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.









Does the USA Lead the World?

Debate Information

@bjinthirty

We should just nuke all of Europe and Asia

I think it is laughable that a nation with so many nukes thinks they can obliterate the rest of the world when they have very little clue as to where the rest of the world is anyway.

"Hey Charlie, let's bomb Austria next, do you know where the heck it is?

"Yeah like sure Joe, it's right beside Nooo Zealand so I reckon that you should sorta aim over that ways a little, yuk."

"Gee, thanks Charlie, say can you lend me a buck?"

"Aw, I would Joe, but all these notes in my wallet are the same size and color and I can't see which is which...yuk yuk."

"Okay then, I'll just drive my automobile on the wrong side of the road without my seatbelt on and get some cash from the ATM machine".

" Aw well, while you're at it, can you get me a double hamburger with extra bacon and orange cheese with upsized fries and a sugar-infused soda on the side, just to tide me over until I can get to the diner now ya hear, yuk yuk."

Blastcat



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
11%
Margin

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • @Swolliw
    Well, let's as some questions of leadership in regard to legal precedent?
    How many nations have the United Socialist soviet republic purchased land from in order to make those territories part of their nation?
    How much land has Russia purchased?
    France?
    Canada?
    Germany?
    Iraq?
    Iran? 
    Saudi Arabia?
    Australia?


    Blastcat
  • piloteerpiloteer 1401 Pts   -  
    @Swolliw

    The US should lead the world. They are the superior moral nation. The only reason the US does not lead the world is because of self destructive internal policies, not because of any competition from any other nations. I don't believe the US should hold any other nations captive, but that's just because of the cost that would infer on US taxpayers to do that. But when we reach a point where it is needed for the US to take land from other countries for living space for Americans, we will manifest that destiny and we have every right to do so.       
  • @Swolliw

    We do not lead as much as we are at point on some topics which are held as a united state by people prejudice, organized perjury, the destruction of the world by its own powers.
    Blastcat
  • DeeDee 4385 Pts   -   edited October 9
    @piloteer

    Your whole post nearly got me …….for a moment I thought it was serious 
    piloteerPlaffelvohfenBlastcat
  • @piloteer
    I don't believe the US should hold any other nations captive, but that's just because of the cost that would infer on US taxpayers to do that. But when we reach a point where it is needed for the US to take land from other countries for living space for Americans, we will manifest that destiny and we have every right to do so. 
    We are the only nation to have purchased land from other nations in its formation. This is after nations like Spain, France, Mexico, and other nations had won land in wars they had fought against the active Indians.

    America has bought land from Native Americans, French, Spain, and England, American stands to lose land through the deceptive way some spend.
    U.S. Territorial Acquisitions (u-s-history.com)
    Blastcat
  • This is after nations like Spain, France, Mexico, and other nations had won land in wars they had fought against the active Indians.

    Sorry for the errors
    This is after some nations like Spain, France, Mexico, and other nations won from Wars they had fought against the native Indians.
    Blastcat
  • SwolliwSwolliw 1209 Pts   -  
    @piloteer
    The US should lead the world. They are the superior moral nation. 

    I agree and, with conflicts like the Second World War, they have shown to roll up their sleeves to save other nations, Vietnam was a tragedy yet still, there was a principal at stake. The problem with governance as I see it is that the USA is a collective of states, each with varying cultures and wealth distribution. Controlling that lot is never going to be easy yet the USA has done a better job at keeping united than say, Russia.

    piloteer
  • piloteerpiloteer 1401 Pts   -   edited October 10
    @Swolliw

    I was joking about the living space for Americans bit. Vietnam was not a war the US should have been engaged in. I find war to be the epitome of immorality, and I feel US war for profit is decadence at its best. The US tried to stop communism from spreading to southeast Asia. After 10 years of US involvement in Vietnam, almost 60,000 American soldiers died, while an estimated 400,000 Vietnamese soldiers died. And possibly 4million civilians died. Vietnam became a communist country after a 20 year civil war. 

    Now Vietnam has a very close business relationship with the US. Perhaps the US should have just sent in the US entrepreneurs instead of the military. There was no reason for all of those lives to be lost only for the US and Vietnam to have such a close business relationship now. The US could have skipped the whole war bit, and just gone straight to the business relations bit.        
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 4064 Pts   -  
    I think it is also laughable to take one comment from a random Internet poster as representative of the positions of everyone in a 320+-million nation.

    The US leads the world in many important ways - for instance, in science and technology. I do not think that leading the world in military terms is important at all; the ability to blow someone up effectively hardly has an impact on the quality of life of the average human on Earth, but companies like Tesla or Facebook certainly do, and almost all companies of this level of impact are founded and predominantly located in the US. Despite all the best attempts of the US government recently to make it as hard as possible for new companies of this kind to emerge, they just keep stubbornly emerging. Which to me shows that greatness of America has nothing to do with the government or the military, and has everything to do with the enterpreneurial climate here. Say what you will, but there is no place on this planet in which a talented person with a novel idea can as easily and quickly find investors and get the idea to take off and manifest in a real piece of technology as in the US.

    As much as the Chinese and the US governments pretend to be at each other's throats, they both understand that it is a strongly mutually beneficial partnership, both for the governments and the economies as a whole. And isolationist regimes like those in Russia, Iran and North Korea reap what they sow. I am intimately familiar with the situation in Russia, and the nationalistic vigor of both the government and the people there is the main (and, perhaps, the only) reason the country is not going anywhere. In mid-2000-s, back when I still lived over there, if someone told me that in 15 the average Chinese would be significantly wealthier than the average Russia, I would laugh at them: back then even in Russia, with its terrible product quality, Chinese products were considered the most budget-friendly and the lowest quality products in existence - something you bought when you had absolutely no money to spare. Now just look at China - and look at the pitiful Russia in which you cannot point to a single company that has a significant international presence.
    Blastcat
  • piloteerpiloteer 1401 Pts   -   edited October 10
    @Swolliw

    Just for the record, let it be known that I do not ever eat any cheese that is orange. And I also understand that "American cheese" is not actually cheese and I never eat that either.  
  • SwolliwSwolliw 1209 Pts   -  
    @piloteer
    Just for the record, let it be known that I do not ever eat any cheese that is orange. 

    Just as well since you have to be cognizant over what comes out. https://debateisland.com/discussion/7576/does-color-really-matter

    I am a bit of a foodie and from all the Netflix shows I watch, orange cheddar seems to prevail in American "cuisine".

    For the record though, I am a cheese connoisseur and the best smoked cheese from my local deli comes from New York, great stuff. Also, I think that places such as San Francisco have become go to places for great international and nouveau cuisines. 

  • piloteerpiloteer 1401 Pts   -   edited October 11
    @Swolliw

    New York cheddar is great. Very different than the Vermont cheddar which is also good. But the New York stuff is dryer than the soft cheddar of Vermont. The only true cuisine here where you'd find orange cheese would be macaroni and cheese, which I can't stand anyway, so you'd never see me eating that. I guess I'd say I've never had a true cheese product that I didn't like. I'm not sure if you can get Cabot Vermont cheddar cheese in the outback, but if you ever see it, it is also really good stuff.    
  • @piloteer
    Korea, Vietnam was a Military War that was to become a political agenda the principles of the Korean Vietnam war can be argued as just a part of WWII. Korea, China, and Japan are connected together with the a silk road.
    Blastcat
  • SwolliwSwolliw 1209 Pts   -  
    @piloteer
    New York cheddar is great. Very different than the Vermont cheddar which is also good.

    I got to the bottom of the "orange" situation and found out from an American woman who makes her own cheddar. She puts annatto in it which is quite common in America and in England the colouring is put into Leicester cheese to give it a more distinct look.

    My favourite cheese? I like the strong blue cheeses and for me the benchmark is "King Island Roaring Forties"; it beats the traditionals such as Stilton (too dry) and Gorgonzola (too mushy). In fact, you can't go wrong with any of the King Island cheeses if you can get them up your way....they will be costly for sure but then I pay over the odds for the American smoked cheeses I get which I think are the best of their kind.

  • piloteerpiloteer 1401 Pts   -  
    John_C_87 said:
    @piloteer
    Korea, Vietnam was a Military War that was to become a political agenda the principles of the Korean Vietnam war can be argued as just a part of WWII. Korea, China, and Japan are connected together with the a silk road.
    WW2 was not a war that should have happened. There was no way for the US to have not been involved in that war, but that's because the US funded the allied war against the central powers in WW1. And when the Russians dropped out of WW1, the British gave the US an ultimatum. Either join the war on their side, or lose ALL the money the US government, and US businesses poured into the allied effort in WW1. The reason the US was involved in the first world war directly was because the US stood to lose vast amounts of war profits if they did not pick up the slack of the Russians who were no longer fighting for the allies.

    It was profoundly unethical, both legally, and morally, for the US to have allowed private businesses, and the US federal government to buy the allies war debts to fund WW1, or any countries war debts in that European war. Because of that, the US needed to send troops to recoup that money. That was unethical for two reasons. The first being the tax burden this put on American citizens for the investment made by the federal government for the allied effort in WW1. And it was also unethical because the US began drafting its own citizens to fight a war where the only interest was profit, not national defense. 

    Not only is that a sheer violation of the US constitution and a total disregard for the liberty of US citizens, it has caused the US to continuously be involved in all of the wars and skirmishes that have happened as a result of our involvement in the first world war, which the most obvious one that comes to mind is WW2. Because the allied forces in WW1 wanted to get back whatever money they could from the cost of the war, they took whatever spoils of war they could from the  central powers. Only days after the signing of the treaty of Versailles, John Maynard Keynes (the economist who secured the US loans for the allies war effort) called the treaty a violation of the basic humanitarian rights of the people in the countries of the losing central powers. The economic burden that was put on the central powers made it impossible for them to have ever been able to pay the allies back without going so completely bankrupt that they wouldn't be able to provide basic necessities like food and shelter, for their citizens. Mr Keynes predicted on that day in 1919, that there would be another world war within decades because of the impossible economic terms the allies placed on the central powers. Unfortunately, he was correct. 

    The US has spent an existence of perpetual warring because of the blowback of their involvement in WW1. That includes, WW2, the cold war, the Korean War, the Vietnam war, the war to fund the Afghani resistance against the Russians, funding the Iraqis in their war against Iran, the first war against Iraq, the war against the Taliban, and the second war against Iraq. The US citizens are on the hook for funding these wars, and being expected to fight them. Each new war makes new enemies for the US, but it is the citizens who are required to fund them and fight them. The US uses war as an institution for profit and the repression of sovereign nations, and its very own citizens. The only "principles" of the Vietnam and Korean wars were for the purpose of making the US an empire for war profits rather than a nation that embraces liberty. It is an egregious violation of the principles of the constitution!!!!!!!!!!              
  • piloteerpiloteer 1401 Pts   -  
    @Swolliw

    I really like stilton. We have a stilton with blueberries in it at my local grocer, it's so good it makes me dance.  
  • WWI may have been scientifically unavoidable as advances made in the science of property surveying land on a scale of greater accuracy were not openly accepted as a blessing.
    Not only is that a sheer violation of the US constitution and a total disregard for the liberty of US citizens,
    I need more direction in understanding your violation of grievance in basic principle in what united state was border scale and placement to be held as a state of the union. Surveying of land at this time of global history was a great loss to the liberty of many American citizens and Nations of the world. There are issues of commerce that are not reflected in detail in the events surrounding conflicts between Countries that had already been at war for centuries before WWI. 
    Blastcat
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2021 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
Terms of Service

Get In Touch