America has a moral duty to stop genocide, even if it means going to war.
True
Side Score: 15
|
 |
False
Side Score: 14
|
|
|
|
|
2
points
As the world's strongest country, the United States has an obligation to help as many people as it can. Regardless of what we think our role should be, the world will hate us for not helping those of who are in danger. The gain of being the most powerful country in the world is protection, the cost is having a moral duty to protect more than just its own citizens. Side: True
2
points
Okay. We have the strongest military in the world. Why do we still have to go and help everyone else in the world before we can help our own people? We have homeless people. We have natural disasters. Why can the other countries call us wusses and everything, but every time something goes wrong we have to be the ones to fix it. If all you other countries are so big and bad why can't you help them? Side: False
"Why do we still have to go and help everyone else in the world before we can help our own people?"- because our people are not being killed in packs by men with machine guns. "We have homeless people."- they arent being killed. "We have natural disasters."- those dont happen that often. "Why can the other countries call us wusses and everything"- they can call us whatever they want, the validity of the statement is all that matters. "If all you other countries are so big and bad why can't you help them?"- the United States is the most powerful and the one which can expend more of its power than any other country. Side: True
well ya but we are not going to be able to stop every genocide in the future and when we cant then the rest of the world will hate us anyway. So i believe that we should intervene only when it involves the United States so that way we can put our time, energy, and resources for helping our economy and our needs. Side: False
1
point
1
point
|
1
point
1
point
But America gets itself involved in all different types of disputes. It has happened for over a century - Cuba, Vietnam, Korea, etc. You just keep on fighting for political reasons. At least if you stop a genocide, you are saving millions of innocents, rather than killing millions. Side: True
2
points
America isn't killing millions though. Innocent blood isn't on America's hands for disregarding genocide. And if America has a moral duty to be the savior to all persecuted peoples, then the rest of the world should be shamed for looking away and assigning America as the world's deliverer. >>We didn't start it, why should we finish it??<< Side: True
1
point
0
points
I do not believe it as whole-heartedly as you people seem to think. Vietnam War was done to 'rescue' the people from Communist control. America had no business in Vietnam - they came in and started killing villagers and anybody of Viet Cong blood. They cared not who they killed, simply about the numbers that were killed. They lost the war, and as a result, it is no longer officially considered a 'war,' rather a 'police operation,' or something to that effect. Now, I ask you, why didn't they help when millions of Rwandans were being slaughtered? They will help protect people from communism - but they will not help protect people from genocide? Side: True
0
points
|
