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.


FB
Facebook addict? Check out our page and become a fan because you love us!


pic
Identify Ally
Declare Enemy
Challenge to a Debate
Report This User

Allies
View All
None

Enemies
View All
None

Hostiles
View All
None

RSS Madibigler

Reward Points:6
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.
72%
Arguments:6
Debates:0
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
6 most recent arguments.
1 point

Yes, this deal is keeping Iran from making nuclear weapons as of now but what about long term? In 10-15 years this deal will be done with and Iran most likely will go right back to creating a atomic bomb. It is dangerous in all aspects, especially long term.

-1 points

I believe the Iran Deal made between Iran and the U.S. is not a good long term deal and favors more of the U.S. than of Iran. Right now, the deal has put restrictions on Iran's Nuclear Program, but does not cease it. In 10-15 years, Iran will be able to go back to enriching Uranium to Atomic Bomb levels and will be dangerous and threatening to the U.S. especially with their past acts of terrorism. The U.S. pressured Iran to agree to the deal by lifting the sanctions they put on Iran in turn for them agreeing. Some people believe that lifting these sanctions will give Iran more money to fund more terrorist groups and will give Iran more power especially once the deal ends. In conclusion, I believe we should continue the sanctions that create the global economic pressure until Iran is willing to cease its whole nuclear program and ambitions in making a nuclear weapon.

1 point

I agree with this. The Constitution is not focused on what makes us united, the common citizen. With the articles of confederation we are able to have more power to control what is happening in our state. The elites that would be controlling every state wouldn't know or wouldn't care to know what was happening in a small town in Virginia so to speak. They are worried about themselves and their own investments, and they are installing fear into us to try and win us over.

2 points

I disagree. You want a strong central government so it will benefit the "more experienced", the "well educated", and the "proper class", the class YOU are apart of. What about the majority? the laborers? the farmers that are out everyday working? We are content with the Articles of Confederation. Yes, it might have a few kinks but that's something we can change and work out. Not make a whole new constitution that benefits the minority. The Federalists are whipping up fears of chaos to win support for their constitution. You guys are only concerned mainly with protecting your wealth and investments. Our political system must be grounded in the common citizen--not a privileged elite. We must not give up the rights we shed blood to gain.

3 points

I believe we should keep the Articles of Confederation because I feel the Constitution is going against me, the majority. I am not fond of the idea of having an executive and judicial branch. We just got away from a king and I feel having an executive branch will bring that power back. Also, the Judicial branch will take away the power of the states, which is a power we feel is better for our country. In conclusion, we believe the constitution is not in the favor of us, the workers, the farmers, the laborers, but in favor of the elites.

1 point

I chose Option 1. My reasoning for choosing this option is because if we give North Korea more time while we decide what route we are going to take, it gives them more time to create better Nuclear Weapons that can destroy the countries around them, and now the U.S. With the creation of the ICBM missile by North Korea, Korea now has an equal playing ground with the U.S. North Korea has threatened the U.S. with shooting nuclear weapons on Guam, the U.S. President has stated, "the rouge state would face 'fire and fury' if it continued to threaten the United States." Even our U.S. President has already presented the idea of using a preemptive military strike against North Korea. We need to destroy North Korea's ability to make nuclear bombs, initiate the downfall of Kim-Jong-II, and send a clear message the U.S. will not accept nuclear proliferation.

Supporting Evidence: Source: (www.cnbc.com)
Madibigler 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