His last contention should not be apart of your voting. I can't respond to it.
If the military force is used there will be several wars ... perhaps a destructive third world war
@nseem_jubeh irrelevant to the topic
@nseem_jubeh I would argue that Its inevitable so the question is now or later? Is it better for the US to wait and wait or to go now?
@nseem_jubeh I don't think China is willing to defend NK, which they're actually tiring of given NK has been insulting China. The argument could be that If we wait China will be ready to defend NK in the future
@alot_like_locke makes a good point that the topic of timing is really to be debated- immediately or not? Whether to attack or not is a related topic. I think he did good pointing out the potential buildup and viability of an attack later. Neighbors will be effected no matter when so thats not necessarily related if one assumes an attack at all. I also agree with your point on the way embargos and sanctions only harm the people while the Kims live large no matter what. Sanctions, according to Albright herself, killed over 500,000 women and children in Iraq in the 90s alone and she said "it was worth it." even though it did nothing at all.
I suggest Michael Malice on this topic.
@benmouse42 good analysis thank you.
Requesting Judges review
@tcanada09 thank you.
@tcanada09 thank you, very helpful criticism for my next debate!
@alidia so because you are a TH and you gave your final judgment to the PRO side, does that mean I have lost the debate? The votes are still being casted...
@pepelvmc It's a best of 3, so only if another judge agrees. If the other two vote for you then you win it.
The fact that the Resident Judge was brought in to determine the conclusion of the debate before the 72 hr. period should nullify those conclusions. Only after the 72 hr. period & all the votes have been submitted can a debater contest the results with a Resident Judge adjudicating any discrepancies. Let's attempt to stick with the proper procedure & allow the established rules to dictate what is or is not acceptable.
@jordan_eugene_monteilh There has already been a precedent of people getting Judges before the debate. This is not an unreasonable position, especially based on current votes for other videos with respect to this one. Not sure why you are against this?
Well procedurally speaking, I believe that if a Judge makes a determination before all votes are casted than there is an inherent contamination of the voting process which has yet to expire, being the 72hr. period. I would have agreed with your contestation & your request for a Resident Judges review if it would have been requested after all votes were cast, so to avoid voter contamination by a premature determination by the judge. In short, it was hasty request (with all due respect), and the RJ deviated from proper procedure which is stipulated in writing on the website. "- If you feel the voting by the community was unfair and you would like to dispute the results, you may do so when the winner’s been determined 72 hrs after the debate is completed. In the case of a dispute, we’ll bring in 3 QallOut Resident Judges (Part of the QallOut Team) to judge your debate and determine the final winner (best out of 3)"
@jordan_eugene_monteilh To be fair, the RJ's have been leaving feedback on all the debates regardless of requests.You've got a point that maybe the capacity to sway votes (which I'm sceptical of btw) means that maybe they should hold off for 72 hours.Also the appeal procedure is a best of 3 judges anyway so this particular judges opinion isn't definitive either.
@benmouse42 @jordan_eugene_monteilh @alot_like_locke @pepelvmc passing this on to the founders for their review. Here it is, @gigi :)
@jordan_eugene_monteilh I would also like to make it clear that the circumstances which I am in are also a factor.