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

Identify Ally
Declare Enemy
Challenge to a Debate
Report This User

View All

View All

View All

RSS Gunner1

Reward Points:2
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.
Efficiency Monitor

2 most recent arguments.
1 point

We need the Articles! The constitution gives too much power to the national government and it will overshadow the hardworking citizens of this country. We'll be under tyrannical rule before we know it. We need to give more power to our state governments instead. Each state will have at least one representative to act as their voice. This will make it feel like the citizens do matter and their voices are heard.

1 point

(Option 3) I think that bilateral negotiations could potentially work in dealing with North Korea. The reason the six party talks failed in the past is because North Korea's biggest problem is with the U.S. alone. Having to negotiate with the other countries also clearly seemed unnecessary to them. Agreeing to a bilateral talk at least shows North Korea that we are willing to meet them half way, potentially improving our strained relationship. However, agreeing to this would make it seem as if the U.S. is giving in to the black mail from North Korea, but is giving in really worse the risking thousands of innocent lives? I personally think not. And who's to say that every other country is going to think the U.S. is weak for agreeing to negotiate with North Korea? If anything it would show that we are a country that doesn't immediately talk war any moment we have a disagreement with another country and that we resort to violence only when we have no other choice. That is another advantage to this option. If North Korea refuses to negotiate and we are forced to attack, then it is now their leaders fault in the destruction of their country. This was my biggest issue with the first option. Let's say we attack North Korea, destroying their weapon factories. Most likely we would have also killed thousands of their people in the attack. This would, first, destroy any potential relationship with North Korea and if their walls were to one day come down do we really expect the North Korean people to just become buddy-buddy with the countries that once destroyed their home? If it comes to attacking through option 3 however the North Korean people will know that we wanted to negotiate with them, but it was their leader that forced our hand to attack. From here the North Korean's hopefully won't have a grudge against the rest of the world and see the U.S. as their ally.

Gunner1 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