It is because I believe in this quote/statement that I stand in firm affirmation of the resolve. Resolved: The US ought to end its provision of arms to foreign insurgents.
My value for today’s debate is duty and my value criterion is deontology.
My first contention is the US uses insurgents as a means for an end. To understand this we must first consider the motive, the reason why the US would support insurgents. The motive of the US is to spread democracy throughout the world. There are a few issues with this. First, this assumes that democracy is the best form of government for the people. We have seen democracy fail in Russia, Thailand, the Philippines, and Venezuela, resulting in disastrous effects. These democratic reforms did not help the people, the reforms harmed …show more content…
The use of money for insurgents would be better spent on domestic issues. One of the most notable examples of providing weapons to insurgents was Operation Cyclone. Within the first six years, the US spent $3.2 billion and would eventually spend $20 billion by the end of the operation. This cost would only grow greater in years when you realise that the insurgents we funded became what we know as Al-Qaeda. Outside of this example, we can look to France and their support of the US during the revolutionary war. This might sound like a stretch, but bear with me. France funded US insurgents only to send itself into an immense amount of debt, revolution, and government instability. With this considered, it is clear to see that the money spent on insurgents and thus uncertainty would be better utilized on America’s domestic issues. While in the big scheme of things the money used on insurgents is small, it is still a substantial amount that could be better suiting on less destructive things than weaponry like schools, infrastructure, etc. The means of funding insurgents only to harm the US is someway is not
My value for today’s debate is duty and my value criterion is deontology.
My first contention is the US uses insurgents as a means for an end. To understand this we must first consider the motive, the reason why the US would support insurgents. The motive of the US is to spread democracy throughout the world. There are a few issues with this. First, this assumes that democracy is the best form of government for the people. We have seen democracy fail in Russia, Thailand, the Philippines, and Venezuela, resulting in disastrous effects. These democratic reforms did not help the people, the reforms harmed …show more content…
The use of money for insurgents would be better spent on domestic issues. One of the most notable examples of providing weapons to insurgents was Operation Cyclone. Within the first six years, the US spent $3.2 billion and would eventually spend $20 billion by the end of the operation. This cost would only grow greater in years when you realise that the insurgents we funded became what we know as Al-Qaeda. Outside of this example, we can look to France and their support of the US during the revolutionary war. This might sound like a stretch, but bear with me. France funded US insurgents only to send itself into an immense amount of debt, revolution, and government instability. With this considered, it is clear to see that the money spent on insurgents and thus uncertainty would be better utilized on America’s domestic issues. While in the big scheme of things the money used on insurgents is small, it is still a substantial amount that could be better suiting on less destructive things than weaponry like schools, infrastructure, etc. The means of funding insurgents only to harm the US is someway is not