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
Report This User
Permanent Delete

Allies
View All
None

Enemies
View All
None

Hostiles
View All
None

RSS Lipyoung

Reward Points:4
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.
81%
Arguments:4
Debates:0
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
4 most recent arguments.
3 points

i disagree. you said that nuclear weapons should be for defense and if nations stockpile is because of fear. while in the first place why would the nation want to stock pile if nobody is planning to use it? if nobody wants to use it, why bother stockpiling? its all because Americans used it before and people are afraid to use it. however, by stockpiling more and more...more nations will fear that you might wanna start a nuclear war and fololw suit. so if in the first place, people know that there would not be a nuclear war, they would not need to stockpile them right?

3 points

Yes, taking the American Civil war in consideration, it seems to be a good idea as it has generated positive results and help the blacks,however, what about other instances or war? was dropping the two nuclear bomb a good intention? was fighting for the freedom of nationalist Vietnamese good? this is an isolated case and should not be used to claim that there are times where war is necessary. As war breeds more violence and suffering, not just to the people but to the economy.

1 point

How sure can you be that by waging war and bringing down the leader will lead to a beneficial long run? there have been examples of countries who were under the rule of certain people for a long time who could not cope with changes. look at Iraq, after Saddam Hussein was captured, was the country in a better shape then it was back then? in fact, it got worst and worst. And!!! they did not go to war with the German so as to liberate them from Hitler,they went to war cause Hitler was conquering many states and waging war against many smaller states in order to create a new world. they went to war against them in order to stop him from dominating Europe.

3 points

Yes, it is true that we have to fight to save people's life however, have you thought about the long term effects that could happen by waging war and using force to help those people?

Look at what deforestation brought us, a hole in the ozone and increase risk of having skin cancer. Look at what global warming is doing to us, how it affects us. when those polar ice caps melt, more people are gonna die then in a genocide. why? cause its going to be global, not just one country is affected but many. so what if by using those bombs and chemicals you can save those people now? you are in-directing killing them all off later. So then, is it necessary? its either they kill themselves, or you save them so they can die another day.

Lipyoung 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