CreateDebate


DKrent's Waterfall RSS

This personal waterfall shows you all of DKrent's arguments, looking across every debate.
1 point

The fear is not that we would send nukes-which we don't have- the fear is relenting to the over imposing power of America. All 3.67% enrichment is good for is energy. Who would it hurt as we develop our technology which requires 20% enrichment? These rules would cause a dependence on the U.S when it comes to protection, so why would we want that. We are seen to you as evil, so what ensures our protection?

1 point

Khamenei Hardliner

America, a world super power, correction the world super power what would lifting the sanctions imposed on us do to you? Oh wait it would lessen the tight leash you already have on Iran. Would lifting these sanctions not improve our economy therefore improving your's as well. This deal also wants us to reduce enrichment to less than 4% which is only good for energy development. Why keep a whole country of intelligent people from creating new technology and possibly cures for countless diseases which requires at least 20% enrichment. We fear of being hurt in this deal and that you will not keep your word on the stated deal. This deal also states mandatory inspections, but I ask you this why come in and plunder in our country when we have to basically destroy most of our centrifuges which I assure you cost a lot to build. This deal ask us to undermine our research and basically bow down to America for protection, but remember this we could negotiate it you're comfortable arguing with" pure evil."

1 point

I'm confused on the precautions you are referring to. I'm for freedom of all religion, so I'm a little confused on what you mean by this statement.

3 points

For one not all Muslims are extreme. And most Muslims do read the Quran which does mention some hate of other religions, but a majority of Muslims don't follow the whole Quran just as some Christians don't believe everything in the bible. Your argument targets a specific religion which is what would happen if the government could intervene in the first place. Most Muslims are Sunni and they don't preach the hate and murder that you speak of. Fun fact did you know that some Christian churches encourage people to bomb planed parenthood. It this not the murder of innocent people. But this side is typically not look at because it is America's primary religion. Bugging mosque would create even more prejudiced among people leading to more crime and even greater fragmentation.

1 point

Allowing a government to interfere with any religion is unconstitutional. Not only would this violate some of the basic principles of democracy by interfering and threatening the first amendment, but it would also create a tyranny of the majority.

If the government bugs a mosque or any place or worship for that matter it is violating freedom of speech. Most people for the violation of freedom claims it would reduce terrorist attack, and that may be true, but you're taking away these people's first amendment rights. They will become scared to practice and preach their religion. Which many of these people experienced in their home country. This would create a tyranny of the majority in America because America being a primary Christian country would essentially began targeting any religion they don't believe in or fear. You can say what ever you want and believe what ever you want, but it's your actions that can be against the law. Murder is illegal, but preaching to your followers in a religious environment is not. America is the land of the free so why can't all people be free to practice their religion?

DKrent(17) Clarified
2 points

Do you have any sources that I could see so I understand your view, and would this cut off Americans, Mexicans, or both from resources?

DKrent(17) Clarified
1 point

Would this wall not slow or even prevent incoming drugs and the crimanials who are smuggling them? When the original wall was established the amount of drugs confiscated dropped slightly.

1 point

The wall may not be the best idea for Mexico but it has some strong points. Not only would it decrease the amount of drugs smuggled into America but it would further protect American sovereignty. Americans spent close to $100billion on drugs every year according to a White House report . In 2014 34,840 pounds of meth were confiscated from Mexican cartels. Keep in mind this is only the amount that was found the drugs not found slowly feed into the black market. And sure with marijuana slowly becoming legalized this number will fall. Although I don't foresee hard drugs becoming legalized in the near future, so this is still a problem. Building this wall would prevent this amount of drugs from entering our country and polluting our fellow Americans.

This wall needs to be build primary for internal reasons such as establishing sovereignty over ungoverned or unruly lands, and protect America's wealth. Mexico may. It like the 20% tax but in the long run it will be beneficial to our country as well as theirs.

2 points

More over this deal makes it easier for global cooperations to move capital offshore leading to trade deficits and falling wages.

2 points

Thought you make some good points, the TPP will still cause countless problems. The TPP opens not only America but all off the countries in the agreement vunerable to being sued. Under the TPP’s investor protection provisions counties and companies can sue if they feel that their economy can or would be effected. An example of this would be America rising the minimum wage rate and Vietnam or any other country in the deal losing money or possibly losing money. This makes U.S companies vurnable it makes them scared to change anything for fear of a lawsuit. And if i've learned anything about the effect of fear on people is that it can make them stop or change and this is not always for the better. And how would this get rid of sweatshop? Companies are dirty and want to make the biggest profit possible. Is the money of the people who pay taxes everyday in order to better America going to go toward cleaning us other countries? I don't see this happening but you never know. Not only that but it allows other countries to challenge American laws under the ISDS which undermines american soverignity. This does not only discourage free-trade but it affects American economy which effects alot of other countries which doesn't discourage "sweatshops" but encourages them.

1 point

How are people who are basically forced into slave labor more capable than Americans at doing their jobs? The places these jobs are outsourced to are horrible . There are people who are forced into outrageous hours and absolutely disgusting work environments in these countries that the TPP would open up. If we as Americans chose to throw away the morals we vlaue as Americans then yes the TPP is a great idea.And do you really think that the lower-class are lazy or that they just aren't qualified. I would appreciate that statement being explained further.

2 points

The TPP could possibly ruin America's economy which is already close to a crash that would put the 2008 crash to shame. The TPP would essentially outsource thousands of American jobs to countries where they can and will be preformed the cheapest. Not only will this cause thousands of people to lose their jobs, but it will further put America in dept which if you don't know is high enough as it is. These thousands of people whose jobs have become outsource now have no money to feed themselves much less a family. So where do they turn? Sure they can find another job, but doing what? If the jobs are in another country it"s not like they can just fly over there and start working. So where do they turn? The only thing I can see happening is that they have to turn to the government for assistance. The tax payer's dollars are going to feed the American's whose jobs have been outsourced. Which even furthers American's overwhelming debt. Yeah the TPP sounds like is a sure fire way to fix America's economy.



Results Per Page: [12] [24] [48] [96]