CreateDebate


Debate Info

13
23
Yes No
Debate Score:36
Arguments:33
Total Votes:46
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (11)
 
 No (16)

Debate Creator

Cartman(18192) pic



Are Republicans Terrorists?

The Republicans whole platform is based on fear. War on drugs. War on Christmas. Immigrants are taking over. Refugees will bomb us. Muslims are dangerous. At some point does fear mongering turn into terrorism. Is living in fear that Democrats will destroy everything a form of terrorism? 

Yes

Side Score: 13
VS.

No

Side Score: 23

Within the most literal of definitions, yes. The Democratic Party is as well, though certainly to a lesser extent.

Within the definitions used by most people, no.

It's the different between simply using fear for the purpose of coercion, and using violent acts to incite fear for the purpose of coercion.

Side: Yes
SlapShot(2608) Disputed
1 point

"Using fear for the purpose of coercion."

Are you per chance referring to alleged False Flag Ops?

Are you a believer in those?

If so...would love to discuss sometime.

Side: No
1 point

No. Those who believe in the False Flag Ops could say that those who use them would fall under the colloquial definition as well, though.

Side: Yes
0 points

Look at France though. The Republicans didn't do the violent acts, but they have no problem using them to convince people we aren't safe.

Side: Yes
GenericName(3430) Clarified
1 point

Yeah but that just means they employing terrorism within the literal definition. Unless one commits the acts of violence themselves, then they are not a terrorist within the commonly used version.

Side: Yes
1 point

Republicans and democrats red and blue it's two wings on the same purple bird all striving to create a major world crisis to have all the struggling governments of the world unite into a one world government under ultimate European domination as the chief entity of this One world government. That is my take Thank you.

Side: Yes
GenericName(3430) Clarified
1 point

And why do you believe it would be under European control?

Side: Yes
6 points

The recognition of the threat posed by the Muslim's 'Trojan Horse' strategy, ( as discovered in English schools and local councils) as well as the ease with which Muslim youths can be radicalized and trained like animals to become suicide bombers is not a political tactic to alarm people, but simply the ability to see and acknowledge the glaring facts. It is the duty of all politicians to place such information into the public domain so that the population at large can remain vigilant, as they are advised to be by all democratic political parties. If no threat exists then for what the hell are we supposed to be looking? We're all living in the age of the ruthless terrorist and the longer it takes people to recognize which group of religious psychopathic zealots it is that represents the greatest threat the longer we will all have to live in the shadow of the Islamic terrorist. Thank god there are those who do realize this ongoing and extremely serious threat and dedicate their lives to thwarting most of the Muslim terrorist's acts of violence and countering their subversive political agenda so that those who want to sit back and get a free ride can do so in relative safety.

Side: No
2 points

What actions would make you feel the safest?

Side: No
Antrim(1287) Clarified
1 point

Well Cartman, it's not a question of feeling safe, it's more to do with actually being safe. I sure don't have the solution to the Muslim problem in my back pocket but there are certain measures which would help to reduce the menace their existing presence poses and minimize the developing threat which is coming down the line like an express locomotive. Before a problem can be addressed never mind resolved the existence of the said problem must be firstly be accepted. The degree of threat to the tolerant democracies of the west is frightening. Firstly I would impose a complete ban of all Muslim migrants regardless of their circumstances, i.e., those with a family in their intended host country, asylum seekers and so forth. I believe in simplicity and simply put, no exceptions, no ifs, no buts and no ''whataboutery'' pleas. Secondly I would, as a matter of urgent priority and with ruthless efficiency deport all illegal Muslim immigrants. Concurrent with these measures I would commence a programme which would require all resident Muslims to register their address and employment details and to carry identity cards at all times. Any Muslim not in possession of proper official identity documentation would be arrested and held until their legality could be verified. If found with false or no documentation, then immediate internment followed closely by deportation. All borders, land, sea and air would be sealed tight as a drum. Then I would present legislation for resident Muslims based on the Saudi Arabian laws pertaining to immigrants, that is anyone they deem not to be Muslim or a Saudi Arabian by descent. If you think the implementation of these proposed security measures would be expensive they would pale into insignificance in comparison to the human and material cost of remaining in cloud cuckoo land and letting the Islamist's call the shots. Currently we are playing their game and we're always in a reactionary/catch up position. I.S, is gaining in capability and we are going to see many repeats of 9/11, 7/7 and the Paris 13/11. The entire free world, including Russia must go onto a full scale war footing if the filth are to be defeated and the slaughter of our citizens is to be ceased. If such measures were adopted, which they won't be anyway soon, or at least not until the filth carry out a chemical or biological attack ( which is just around the corner) on one or more of the ''tolerant'' western countries, then the Muslims will only have themselves to blame. They were made welcome and their special ethnic needs were facilitated and, like a snake in the grass they bit the extended hand of friendship.

Side: Yes
GenericName(3430) Clarified
1 point

Banning brown people.

Side: Yes
2 points

No. Not at all.

But they ARE more likely to go after and KILL terrorists than the Lefties are.

This is why I believe it is essential that a Republican gets into the White House in 2016. What with the rise of ISIL and all. We have seen how the policy of appeasement has worked in the past with terrorism and foreign tyranny.

Just ask Neville Chamberlain.

LOL

Side: No

No...? What kind of argument even is this. Although I tend to lean left, there is no inherent reason to assume that a republican is a terrorist.

Side: No
Cartman(18192) Disputed
1 point

Have you heard the way people like FromWithin and outlaw talk about the refugees from Syria? It is all about making sure you are scared enough to agree with them. That's what terrorism is. It isn't assuming they are terrorists, it is discussing whether their form of fearmongering is similar.

Side: Yes
WastingAway(340) Disputed
1 point

This is a classic example of an anecdotal fallacy. You're taking a small example to explain the bigger picture. Being a republican doesn't inherently mean you are, or are like, a terrorist. There are some examples of republicans that do participate in fearmongering, and are probably the reason America fucks itself over whenever a terrorist attack happens. But that doesn't apply to the whole group.

Side: No

I think I've met a republican or 2 that aren't scarey .. lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum

Side: No

Does reading Plato count ?? lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum

Side: No
0 points

Hitler wasn't a terrorist either. Legislated brainwashing can never be terrorist as it obeys the law by default.

Side: No
1 point

Terrorism isn't, by definition, illegal.

Side: Yes
instig8or(3308) Disputed
0 points

"the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims."

yep, it pretty much is you just need to know how to read and interpret words correctly like 'unauthorized' and 'unofficial'

Side: No