CreateDebate



Welcome to CreateDebate!

CreateDebate is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
  • Find a debate you care about.
  • Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
  • Earn points and become a thought leader!

To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.



Be Yourself

Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.

Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.


Twitter
Twitter addict? Follow us and be the first to find out when debates become popular!


pic
Report This User
Permanent Delete

Allies
View All
None

Enemies
View All
None

Hostiles
View All
None

RSS Yeoman

Reward Points:3
Efficiency: Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive).

Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high.
80%
Arguments:3
Debates:0
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
3 most recent arguments.
2 points

As many things there are that would be much better use of funds than the Iraq war, the problem in most of the countries are not money related, rather to do with the countries infrastructure, education, the lack of skilled workforces. Pouring money into a problem like that seems more like flogging a dead horse than getting anything done.

1 point

Being by no means an expert on African or American politics having been to neither of the places, but a student of classics i can add that most of Africa is not suitable for cultivation, there are currently approximately a billion people there. the basis of my disagreement would be that its futile since the land cannot support the numbers of people living off it and it would be a massive effort to feed and care for that many people. If the people aren't being fed, there's not much point in supplying other forms of health assistance. I'm not saying ignorance is the best policy, but a solution to such a massive problem doesn't come in form of a half hearted aid effort.

0 points

As BLZBUB said a few comments back, in the grand scheme of things, it was the Capitalist countries that benefitted from World War II (it can be agreed that the war as we know it was due to Hitler). The soviet invasion of Europe could be a possibilty, although the soviet army wasn't mobilised at all when the war began, it did help with the progression of various technologies, namely automotive science, radio communications (britain sold magnetron techonology to the united states for development), computing (the colosus projects) and rocketry. It was believed to be possible to assasinate hitler, but not neccisary due to the fact that in the war Hitler made some very bad decisions and perhaps if it had happened without him the outcome would be different.

Yeoman has not yet created any debates.

About Me


I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!


Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here