Instigator / Pro
0
1528
rating
11
debates
59.09%
won
Topic
#1696
The USA has a stronger military than Russia
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After 8 votes and with 56 points ahead, the winner is...
VonKlempter
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 3,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
56
1523
rating
5
debates
60.0%
won
Description
Rules
1. No forfeiting
2. No trolling
3. No excessive cussing
Round Format
R1: Opening statements
R2: Rebuttals
R3: Defense
Round 1
Forfeited
USA - The United States of America, a country of 50 states covering
a vast swath of North America. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States] Stronger -
More able, competent, or powerful in a specific field. [https://www.dictionary.com/browse/strong?s=t] Military -
the armed forces. [https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/military] Russia - A
transcontinental country in Eastern Europe and North Asia. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia] I shall
now present my arguments on five fronts:
Military Technology:
Common propaganda considers American technology superior to that of Russia, yet Russia’s military has been more successful in recent conflicts, while the US has not. American wars in the Middle East became multi-year quagmires, in comparison to Russia’s rapid victories against Georgia and Ukraine. Most people consider Russian technology to be "Quantity over quality". Contrary to common understanding, I apply this phrase from a different perspective to the Russian military. To illustrate what I mean, take a look at two scenarios: First, Country X has terrible military technology; and they are massed. Second, Country Y has great weapons technology; and they are massed. Russia is an example of Country Y.
Quantity:
Throwing as much as they can muster into the fight is a classic Russian strategy:
- 22,170 MBTs, 3 times more than the US.
- 70 Corvettes, 35 times more than the US.
- 17 Submarines, 9 times more than the US.
- 449,000 personnel, 41 times more than the US.
Military Campaigns:
The US intervention in the war in Afghanistan, soon to enter its 18th year, is the longest-running conflict in American history. US-led forces managed to root the Taliban out from the country’s major cities, but have since been locked in guerrilla fighting as the Taliban still controls and contests much of the rest of the country.
Contrast Russia’s experience. In 2008, it launched a surprise invasion of Georgia, a small country on its southern border. Georgia’s two secessionist regions, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, worked quickly with Russia’s military to declare and secure independence. The war officially lasted less than a week, as Russian forces quickly overwhelmed Georgia’s army.
Expenditure:
Ask yourself: Do we know how much our adversaries spend on their military, and what they are getting for their money? Russia, for example, presents a glaring problem for academic and policy circles alike. Most comparisons are done in current U.S. dollars based on prevailing exchange rates, making Russia’s economy seem the size of South Korea’s. This approach is useless for comparing defence spending, or the country’s purchasing power. Yet, it is used frequently to argue that despite a large military modernization program, and a sizable conventional and nuclear deterrent, Moscow is a paper tiger. As a consequence, the debate on relative military power and expectations of the future military balance is warped by a low-information environment.
Servicemen:
The American Army was led by a Ukraine asset, although he is not technically Russian, Ukraine employs Russian technology, tactics and training, which proves that the Russian military is made up of more than a bunch of California gangsters. If you consider the American Army strong at all, it is because of the strength of this Ukraine commander.
Round 2
Forfeited
Forfeited
Round 3
Forfeited
I am unable to give any defense owing to the fact that my opponent has not given any sort of rebuttal.
One obvious difference between birther claims and Trump/Putin collusion claims is the source. The source for the disproved birther claim was Andy Martin, a well known hyper-litigant in Illinois who was banned from the draft and the Illinois Bar for "defect of character" and mental illness. Martin also originated claims that Obama was a secret Muslim. Martin also claims that Obama is the son of Frank Marshall Davis, a well known black communist in the 1950s- of course this claim contradicts the birther claim but I've never encountered a sincere birther so contradictions are beside the point.
Most of the evidence linking Trump to Russia is circumstantial but the evidence is mostly coming from within the US Federal Govt. The Mueller report documents tens of millions of dollars paid to Trump by Russian Oligarchs in cash real estate transactions, many of which paid two and three times the asking price. DeutcheBank which has pled guilty to laundering $80 billion in Putin's money between 2010 and 2014 also loaned Trump $360 million during the same period of time. DeutcheBank employees have also reported handling concealed million dollar transactions between Kushner and Russian Oligarchs. When a Judge ruled 6 weeks ago that DeutcheBank would be required to release all documents concerning Trump, the former exec in charge of Trump & Kushner's accounts, Thomas Bowers, hanged himself.
We know with a high degree of certainty now that Obama warned Trump in Nov 2016 that Mike Flynn was on the Russian payroll and in regular communication with Russia's spymaster, Sergei Kislyak. Flynn himself admitted to Trump on Jan 4 2017 that he was a Russian agent. Nevertheless, Trump appointed Flynn National Security Advisor (US spymaster) 3 weeks later. When the acting Atty Gen Yates warned Trump three days later that our top spy was an employee of Putin's, Trump fired her. Even after Flynn admitted he was a secret agent and pled guilty, Trump still stands by Flynn and says he would like to re-appoint him.
The CIA admitted this fall that they pulled their highest ranking spy in the Kremlin in early 2017 because they were convinced that Trump was seeking that man's identity and Trump had already shared highly classified intelligence directly with Spymaster Kislyak on at least one occasion. That is, the CIA has been convinced that the POTUS could or would give up US spies to Russian intelligence. If the CIA is that suspicious that Trump is a Russian asset, why shouldn't we all be suspicious?
To my mind, the most damning evidence is Trump's fawning compliance with Russian foreign policy- anti-NATO, anti-UN, anti-EU, refusing to condemn or respond to Russian attacks on US personnel, refusing to condemn or respond to Russian attacks on US allies, refusing to condemn or respond to Russian assassinations, surrendering US forts and abandoning US allies to Russian forces in Syria, withholding military aid to Ukraine for 9 months during wartime, opposed to Russian sanctions and in favor of Russia's re-admission to the G8, etc, etc...
I know you have been refraining from debating for a while but this would be a good topic for us to disagree about and we never got a chance to debate.
I think Trump being a Russian asset might be a rumor; it’s like saying that Obama was born in Africa. Is there evidence to back it up?
You did not abide by your own "No forfeiting" rule.
Thanks, I just checked my opponent's profile and I reckon I'll need that luck.
Good luck!
Infographics Show did a good comparison:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBapU_C76t0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6FuZNfFODM
Nope, he is a Ukranian asset now. Maybe he will be a Zimbabwean one next week.
An army is only as strong as its commander, and America's commander is a Russian asset. Therefore RU is stronger.
This is pretty much a truism.