CreateDebate


Debate Info

60
64
Agree Disagree
Debate Score:124
Arguments:55
Total Votes:212
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Agree (18)
 
 Disagree (33)

Debate Creator

angelsong(114) pic



The presence of a foreign power always helps when a country is facing problems 11S03

Agree

Side Score: 60
VS.

Disagree

Side Score: 64
6 points

Natural disasters are inevitable in many countries and it leaves them in a devastated plight; the presence of foreign power in the form of humanitarian aid will help these countries get back on their feet. Natural disasters usually leaves the country in shambles and the people in distress. With the country's infrastructure disrupted, medical centers may not be available, food and water supply will be scarce, homes will be destroyed and people will be trapped under the cascading rubble. Many will need shelter and medical attention. Moreover, with the overwhelming number victims of this appalling incident, it is hard to cater to all their needs. A short term measure to ease the situation will require foreign intervention - humanitarian aid. This aid would come in forms such as rations, monentary means, medics and search parties. With this additional aid, countries will be able to recover in the shortest possible time. Take for example, the triple disaster in Japan, 2011, that left five hundred and ninety thousand homeless, about nine thousand five hundred missing, and 1.4 million without water. Countries like Singapore and USA supplied Japan with rations and manpower. Even the southen Afghan city if Kandahar pledged thirty thousand pounds in aid to Japan. Another example would be the Cyclone that hit Myanmar in 2008 that left 138,000 without food, water and shelter. Hence with the aid by the United Nations, Myanmar was able to recuperate. Thus this shows that with foreign power, in the form of humanitarian aid, will enable disaster-strickened countries to recover. Hence foreign power always helps when a country is facing problems.

Side: Agree
limjie12 Disputed
1 point

This argument is one sided, it only considers the view point of the suffering country.

The foreign aid might have ulterior motives.

Side: Disagree
6 points

Presence of foreign power can help to develop emerging countries. Emerging countries are often tender in their political system, infrastructure, economy and country identity. Such tenderness has to be rectified in order for these countries to emerge and grow. Foreign power can guide, lead and advise these countries to build a firm foundation of a society, economy and country as a whole. One successful example of an emerging country being developed into a stable and prosperous state with the help of foreign power is Singapore. A Britain major, Major William Farquhar was left in charge by Sir Stamford Raffles to establish Singapore as a free port in 1819. Using connections, Farquhar invited settlers and passing ships to stop by Singapore to promote trade and economic growth. This built Singapore up as a marine time state which produced an eight million dollars worth of trade volume in her second year of operation as a free port. Without such aid, Singapore would not have such a firm economic foundation that allows further progression and growth on the economy. Major William Farquhar is accredited for the success and growth of Singapore. Foreign power has indeed helped develop the young and tender Singapore into today's stable and prosperous state. Therefore, the presence of a foreign power always helps when a country is facing problems.

Side: Agree
teopoint(3) Disputed
2 points

At that time that you say they are intervening, Singapore was a colony of Britain. Singapore became a country in the late 19th century. This is not a case of foreign intervention but just investing in their own country. This 'intervention' was not to help build up an emerging country.

Side: Disagree
weiming(3) Disputed
1 point

Quoted from you, " This is not a case of foreign intervention but just investing in their own country."

You yourself said that Singapore was a colony at that point in time. As such, it is not investing in their own country. Why is your dispute contradicting yourself?

Side: Agree
3 points

The presence of a foreign power helps when a country is facing moral problems. Government wield the most power in a country. This power offen comes from the ability to control the country's military. With great power, comes great responsibility. However, irresponsible government might abuse their authority, inflinging on citizen's moral rights. Since, the citizen hold little power, they are unable to resist and have to put up with it. By condemming the government of their inmoral actions, foreign influence is required to relief the citizen of their misery. Taking Joespeh Kony as an example. Kony is head of the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA). Directed by Kony, an estimated 66,000 children have been forced to fight for LRA, and has also forced the internal displacement of over 2,000,000 people since its rebellion began in 1986. On August 28, 2008, the United States Treasury Department placed Kony on its list of "Specially Designated Global Terrorists," a designation that carries financial and other penalties. This resulted in Kony being on the run. With the help of United States of America, Ugandan's citizen are relieved from their tyrant leader, returning their moral rights. Therefore, the presence of a foreign power is helpful when a country is facing moral problems.

Side: Agree
joelyyy(4) Disputed
2 points

its not moral problems, its political problem. and there is an assumption made that the government has the most power and the citizens could only put up with any unreasonable actions made by the authorities.

Side: Disagree
kevincxw(9) Clarified
1 point

I feel that it is a more of a political problem as well. Your elaboration for your point is not very valid and needs some fine-tuning. The Spiderman's quote was also inappropriately placed.

Side: Agree
WenLi(6) Disputed
2 points

There is no emphasis of "always".

" By condemming the government of their inmoral actions, foreign influence is required to relief the citizen of their misery." - This statement is very weird, and by stating that foreign influence is required does not mean that the foreign power is always helping the country when they are interventing.

But, good example. =)

Side: Disagree
ponghaoyang(4) Disputed
1 point

The presence of a foreign power DOES NOT ALWAYS help when a country is facing moral problems. remember the iraq us war in 2003??? US relieved the iraq citizens of its tyrant government saddam hussein.Saddam was notable for terror against his own people. Saddam "murdered as many as a million of his people, many with poison gas. He tortured, maimed and imprisoned countless more. His unprovoked invasion of Iran is estimated to have left another million people dead. His seizure of Kuwait threw the Middle East into crisis. HOWEVER, iraq suufered a worsened economy. also, some US soldiers totured iraqs. even up until now, iraq is still a war torn country. walking on the streets is not safe. the long term impact on iraq due foreign intervention by US was very unfavourable to Iraq.

Side: Disagree
2 points

Through the times, foreign powers such as the United Nations have been providing assistance to nations that face problems. Regardless, in times of pandemics, liberation, conflict, etc. Most of the countries have received aid and have generally improved in health standards such as the pandemic of AIDS in Africa. Another example could be the liberation of Kuwait from Iraq in the 1990s.The Iraqi invasion and occupation of Kuwait was unanimously condemned by all major world powers. Even countries traditionally considered to be close Iraqi allies, such as France and India, called for immediate withdrawal of all Iraqi forces from Kuwait. Several countries, such as the USSR and China, placed arms embargo on Iraq. NATO members were particularly critical of the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait and by late 1990, the United States had issued an ultimatum to Iraq to withdraw its forces from Kuwait by January 15, 1991 or face war.On August 3, 1990, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 660 condemning the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and demanding that Iraq unconditionally withdraw all forces deployed in Kuwait. After a series of failed negotiations between major world powers and Iraq, the United States-led coalition forces launched a massive military assault on Iraq and Iraqi forces stationed in Kuwait in mid January 1991.Hostilities continued until late February and on February 25, Kuwait was officially liberated from Iraq. Hence, the intervention of foreign power proved to be successful in aiding countries who are in times of need.

Side: Agree
NigelTan Disputed
2 points

This is an example driven essay. Should have more elaboration about your point.

Side: Disagree
KohDunKai(5) Disputed
2 points

How can you be sure that a war between the colition forces and the iraqi military really helps kuwait? This conflict certainly cause lots of damage to Kuwait's infrastructure and not to mention the total number of lives lost. You maybe argue that the colition forces are liberating Kuwait, but in the process they are actually causing more harm to Kuwait as compared to Iraq invasion of Kuwait where minimum lives were lost and damaged cause as Kuwait did not put up much fight against Iraq.

Side: Disagree
kevincxw(9) Clarified
1 point

you do not have a topic sentence and and your second sentence has a grammatical error. try not to use the word "etc" . for the sentence "On August 3, 1990, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 660 condemning the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and demanding...." , it should be " and demanded".

Side: Agree
2 points

The presence of foreign power always helps when a country is facing financial problems. Foreign aid could be useful in alleviating a country from deficit and debts. Through loans, aid could be given to prevent a country from declaring bankrupt. Financial aids could be used to buy some time for the government to cogitate effective long term measures. One recent example of foreign aid provided would be the European sovereign debt crisis. In May 2010, Greece began to rely on an aid package of €110 billion agreed to by its richer European neighbors. The money loaned provided Greece with ample capital to resolve some of their debts, which helped Greece to avoid bankruptcy. Bankruptcy could have pulled Europe down with it. Hence, foreign powers are always helpful when faced with problems.

Side: Agree
limjie12 Disputed
1 point

Foreign aids does not necessarily help the country, the countries give loans, not grants. If they truly wish to help, they would not expect anything in return.

Side: Disagree
Cheriechan(1) Disputed
4 points

Help is not defined as providing without expecting anything in return. That is charity. Help, in this case, is provided for mutual benefits. The loan ensures that the whole of Europe's exchange rate and economy would not suffer, just because of one country.

Side: Agree
1 point

i also feel the other European countries are only helping to save their own economy not out of goodwill

Side: Disagree
Sherin(6) Disputed
1 point

As humans, we have our own sets of morals and values. One of our moral values is that we should help our own kind and not expect anything in return.

Side: Disagree
teopoint(3) Disputed
1 point

The richer european neighbours was willing to give an aid package as they fear that if Greece goes into banruptcy, it will pull all of them down with it as they are all part of the European Union. Hence, foreign powers are always helpful when faced with problems in other country that will adversely affect them. So it is only due to self-interest not kindness. Futhermore the loans results in debt for the country which can just be delaying the problem like how America is now feeling the adverse effects of its debt incurred by previous generations.

Side: Disagree
1 point

WAR

Military intervention by foreign powers can stop civil war, thereby ensuring peace. Countries experiencing chaotic situations due to war can be overturned with a third party stepping in to be a mediator, to negotiate and reach consensus among conflicting groups. With both groups compromising to reach an agreement, they will then stop fighting between each other. For instance, during the Sri Lankan civil war in 5 December 2001, the elections in 2002 showed a sweeping victory for the United National Front, led by Ranil Wickremasinghe, who campaigned on a pro-peace platform and pledged to find a negotiated settlement to the conflict. This prevented further internal war in Sri Lanka. Hence, military intervention is needed to stop civil wars as they act as a mediator between groups to come to a common agreement, thereby ensuring peace within the country.

Side: Agree
BoonKiat Disputed
2 points

Please remember keyword "always". I do not dispute the fact that military intervention may have beneficial implications. However, in Bosnia, the presence of UN forces did not and could not cease the slaughters that were carried out by the polarising factions. Hence your point is inconclusive as it is not an answer to the question, especially keyword "always".

Side: Disagree
WenLi(6) Clarified
2 points

The example seems irelevant; where is the part about foreign power helping and war? Links between military intervention and negotiation needs to be clarify. Overall, slightly confusing.

Side: Agree
KohDunKai(5) Disputed
2 points

How can you be sure the presence of a foreign power will not aggrvate the conflict in the country and hence further compromise the stability in the region. There is no certaintly that the presence of the foreign power will always end up helping to resolve problems such as civil war.

Side: Disagree
ponghaoyang(4) Disputed
1 point

YOUR FIRST STATEMENT IS A SWEEPING SATEMENT!!!!1WHO SAYS THAT MILITARY INTERVENTION IN CIVIL WAR CAN 100% ENSURE PEACE IN THE AFTERMATH???? a multi-state coalition began a military intervention in Libya to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, which was taken in response to events during the Libyan civil war. Despite the defeat of Gaddafi's loyalists, capture of last loyalist cities and Gaddafi's death, Saif al-Islam, Gaddafi's son and successor, remained hiding in the southern region of Libya until his capture in mid-November. In addition, some loyalist forces crossed into Niger, though the escape attempts exploded into violence, when detected by Nigerien troops. Sporadic clashes between NTC and former loyalists also continued across Libya with low intensity. On 23 November, seven people were killed in clashes at Bani Walid, five of them among the revolutionary forces and one Gaddafi loyalist. THE AFTERMATH OF LIBYA CIVIL CONFLICT WAS NOT 100% PEACEFUL. DOES THIS PROOF THAT PEACE IS ' THEREBY" ENSURED WITH THE USE OF FOREIGN INTERVENTION??

Side: Disagree
TanTianRong Disputed
3 points

dude, we are given a task to do a 1 sided assumption -.- your own point also is 1 sided right...

Side: Agree
weiming(3) Disputed
2 points

She wrote can stop. "Can" is defined as may or have permission to. In this case, may provides a tinge of uncertainty inside. Hence, the first statement is not a sweeping statement if it is not absolute.

Side: Disagree
teopoint(3) Disputed
-2 points
weiming(3) Disputed
4 points

It did stop the civil war. If the civil war was not stopped, they would not have came to a conclusion and decided to stay divided. If the war was not stopped, the fighting would have continued. The point that they came to an agreement to remain divided is proof that the Korean War was stopped.

Your point was that it did not stop the war. But, if the war was not stopped, they would have been fighting until one side won instead of staying divided till today.

Side: Agree
kennethkeong Disputed
1 point

Without the help of foreign powers, the will not be a 39 parallel between the north and south korea. This helps to lighten the tension between them.

Side: Agree
2 points

The presence of foreign power does not always help when a country is facing problems because they can instill their own culture which may clash with the existing culture in their country , which may cause internal conflict due to difference in culture . Just like the saying 'one man's meat is another man's poison' , what seem right in one country's culture may not be the same for another. This difference may therefore cause conflict as they argue over which culture is the right one. One example is the rise in American power in Iraq. Due to the prolonged presence of the American troops , American culture have spread quickly among Iraqis . Youths now prefer American pop music to their local music .This influence have hence cause conflict between those who are willing embrace American culture and those who refuse to accept American Culture . Therefore , the presence of a foreign power can cause more problems such as creating more conflict in a country due to the difference in culture

Side: Disagree
Dougg Disputed
1 point

You didnt really elaborate on your example and i didn't understand how intervention of a country could cause internal conflict until i read the example, so ya you have to make your explanation for your argument to be clearer.

Side: Disagree
liangda(3) Disputed
1 point

Your example is not really elebrolated and have certain flaw for example, you need to explain what is american power??

Side: Agree
2 points

Foreign powers may lack the adequate authority to exercise their power in the countries they are assigned to aid. Their power is restricted by other countires, stemming from the fear of the particular foriegn power accumlating excessive power. For example, the resolution of civil war in Bosnia by delegating UN peacekeeping forces to maintain order and to mediate between factions is futile. UN peacekeeping forces were restrained from using arms except to defend themselves - a stringent regulation conceived to contain the power of the UN. This culminates in the UN adopting no significant role in alleviating the national conflict in Bosnia since their power cannot be used to protect the people. Hence the presence of a foreign power does not always contribute to the solution of a country's visscitudes.

Side: Disagree
2 points

The presence of a foreign power may not be benficial to a country facing a crsis, as the foreign power may force their ideology on the country in internal strife. Different countries have different political systems, which may be adapted specially to cater to the needs of the country and to optimally meet the needs of their people. By forcing another ideology on another country, the latter country may not be able to accept and adopt it. By adopting the new ideology, this may worsen te state of affairs of the country, leading to internal unrest. An example of this would be the Siamese revolution in 1932, where before that, there was abosulute monarchy in Thailand and corruption in her main powers. Westernized bureaucrats overthrown the throne in Thailand reulting in constiuational monarchy. This however did not solve problems,but in reality even caused econnomic problems and further corruption in Thailand. Therefore, forced ideology by foreign powers will not necessarily help alleviate problems in a country and may worsen it.

Side: Disagree
TanTianRong Disputed
3 points

Wow this is the bomb. Contradiction within your points. You stated:abosulute monarchy in Thailand and corruption in her main powers. AND THEN you stated: Westernized bureaucrats overthrown the throne in Thailand reulting in constiuational monarchy. This however did not solve problems. HOWEVER, doesnt overthrowing the CORRUPTED monarchy and having a constiuational monarchy gives rise to an impartial judgement over policies?

Btw this is a CHina Lake, your argument is invalid.

Supporting Evidence: Rocket (www.store.justpaintball.co.uk)
Side: Agree
2 points

In the event of problems facing a nation, a foreign power may only make matters worse. War, either declared or undeclared, is a factor which must be considered; the powerful tend to exploit the weak, and nations are weakest when they are encountering troubles. Occupation and war already considered, there is the possibility of good coming from the appearance of a foreign power. Some argue that foreign aid is beneficial, but there are many that would disagree.

Side: Disagree
1 point

The presence of a foreign power may worsen a country's poverty.A foreign power may be present in countries that face poverty. foreign corporations may create jobs for locals when they outsource production and projects such as mining from poor countries. However, their presence may exploit the resources of the country at the expense of the locals, accentuating their poverty in the long run through ways such as the depletion of natural resources without replenishing or conservation, displacement of locals, low wages and the exploitation of labor. For example,

Tanzania's Usambara mountains are home to the plant Impatiens usambarensis, used by Switzerland-based Sygenta and sold as a hanging basket plant. Sygenta made £85m from it in 2004. The Tanzanian government has had no share in the profits. These plants are natural resoures of Tanzania' exploited by Sygenta, a foriegn company. These valuable resources will deplete over time and tanzania, a poor country, may face worsened economic problems in the presence of such a foreign power.

Side: Disagree
1 point

Although, this is factual. There are also many examples of how foreign interventions have aided countries' development. Singapore is one example.

Side: Disagree
Changhuiyi(1) Disputed
1 point

Although, this is factual. There are also many examples of how foreign interventions have aided countries' development. Singapore is one example.

Side: Disagree
AmandaTeo(3) Disputed
0 points

Include the intial intention as to why foreign corporations need to create jobs. To decrease unemployment? Allow people to work so they earn steady income to lift themselves from poverty? ...To be continued.

Side: Agree
-2 points
Sherin(6) Disputed
2 points

Firstly, you stated "the locals have their own preferred solutions and ideology, and do not like foreigners". This is a sweeping statement as there are countries that adopt other methods. For example, Myanmar is slowly changing their way of governance due to foreign entities. They are become open to change.

In addition, it is untrue and a sweeping statement to say that all locals dislike foreigners. For example, Singapore is open to foreigners and in certain cases, we do like them as they help with the growth of our economy.

Side: Disagree
teopoint(3) Disputed
0 points

Due to foreign intervention of a foreign power, Myanmar entered one of the longest running civil war in the history of mankind. The change in the way of governance cannot be totally due to foreign entities as these entities have been applying pressure for a very long time and it is only now that they start changing. Thus, it is more likely that the change is due to internal causes.

I agree with your second part and would ratify that mistake in the future.

Thank you for your comment.

Side: Disagree
kennethkeong Disputed
1 point

You did not state if the East Germany suffers or prosper under the communist rule. There can be more pros then cons of being a communist state.

Side: Agree
AmandaTeo(3) Disputed
1 point

What happens after forced communism? More conflicts/problems created instead? Make clear. & Please include "reason" in your link.

Side: Agree
Liting(4) Disputed
1 point

They may have conflicting solutions, they may fight and kill and burn, but ultimately, they still solved the problem. Isn't this the crux of the question?

Side: Agree
teopoint(3) Clarified
1 point

In the case of East Germany, The government have to stop the common people from exiting the borders which shows that the germans dislike being communist. It also resulted in many riots against communism and they were widespread poverty.

Side: Agree
-2 points
Liting(4) Disputed
3 points

You mentioned that the citizens of the country would lose trust in their government because they approached another country for help during a military crisis, and therefore the presence of a foreign power does not always help when a country is facing problems. However, the ultimate problem that the country is facing is the lack of military strength or such and, the loss of trust in the government is a consequence of foreign power, and not the existing problem that called for help from another country. So, the foreign power DID help with the country's military problem, the loss of trust is simply a consequence of its help.

Side: Agree
limjie12 Disputed
1 point

Correct, however, in the long run, the country ends up worse than before. Thus, the country tried to help but in the end, made it worse.

Side: Disagree