Debate Info

Agree Disagree
Debate Score:2
Total Votes:2
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 Agree (1)
 Disagree (1)

Debate Creator

Axmeister(4320) pic

All Wars are a Waste of Human Life

This is an attempt to help provide the site with clear evidence that it is a debating site and note some social networking rubbish.  To ensure that a decent debate occurs, some rules have been introduced.

  • All arguments must be at least 1 paragraph long, they are to be serious arguments backed up with some sort of tangible evidence that actually brings something into the debate, your argument should consist of an interpretation of this evidence or reasons on why it supports your argument.
  • There is to be no personalisation of arguments, I know this is extreme but it to avoid any conflict between individuals within the debate, these debates are supposed to be thought and language developing activities, one shouldn't leave a debate feeling that their beliefs were violated or that they hate somebody for life. Thus, there will be no insults within this debate nor any personal remarks, please do not openly state your opinion, but instead appear to be open-minded and neutral on the matter, allowing debaters to arrive at a consensus. Avoid speaking in the first person.
  • Swearing and other fowl language should be kept to a minimal, its understable that some may feel a need to aggressively express themselves. But ultimately, debating is supposed to enhance language not to dirtify it.
  • When disputing try to address all of the points of the other person made, even if there is nothing else you can say other than an acknowledgement that they are correct, it can often been fustrating when a person disputes you and ignores half of your argument.
  • If there are any concerns that a debater has ignored some of the rules please put "Inquiry into Debate Etiquette" or (IDE) at the top of your disputing argument, many of you will probably have different ideas on what constitutes as 'evidence'. I will then attempt to look into it and take the matter to them personally. Please refrain from trying to interpret the rules yourselves as this tends to lead to the debate sidetracking on the subject of debating. Users will only be banned from the debate in extreme cases and if you have any disagreements or suggestions for the rules, please message me.
  • I hope these rules and guidelines are agreeable, I've tried to provide restrictions with the aim of augmenting the debating experience and I hope they haven't scared some of you away. Thank you for reading these rules.

On the matter of the debate topic, you are free to interpret the point any way you wish. One could look at it from a economic point of view and state that most wars have been for the economic benefits of the elite at the cost of lives for the masses. But wars can also have been said to prevent tyranny and evil from dominating the globe. Either way, please provide examples, preferably historical, but as said in the rules and sort of evidence can be used.


Side Score: 1


Side Score: 1

Wars are evil. All wars can be averted. War is no good.

Side: Agree
1 point

While I can agree that some wars may have been purely acts of selfish intention, not all wars have been a waste of human life.

For instance, the several Crusades in the Medieval Ages, while primarily having religious intentions, resulted in Europe gaining a lot of knowledge and products. Foodstuffs, such as rice, coffee, sugar and lemons were gained from the Crusaders being integrated with the Middle Eastern lifestyle, the Europeans also obtained key mathematical ideas such as algebra and the decimal system, as well as technological advances from the water wheel to medicines.

Though the war itself lasted for several decades the actual periods of conflict were few and far between, most of the Crusades were spent trading and trying to adapt to a different climate and lifestyle.

Side: Disagree