BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
WAR GAME SCENARIO: Russia Versus Chosen Nation

Russian aggression this time led to the destruction of nature in the Middle East, including Israel. And it completely stopped global oil market activities. Jewish lobbies in the US pushed forward the declaration of war against Russian Federation. US fixed meeting between world leaders and announced the possible Third World War, if Russia don’t stop war. In case if Russia continues bullying: Japan take control of East Russia, Vladivostok – and will get Manchuria back, plus Port Arthur, after the war. China get control of South and South East Russia up to the North Pole - and will get its South gas supplies for 100 years. Great Britain and France will cover North West and North Russia, cooperating with China from South – oil resources. Germany, Italy, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine invade the West Russia – Ukraine will get Crimea back, plus Rostov. Israel and Iran control South-West Russia –Iran will get remains of Russian military equipment. * Russia weakened due to internal conflict between ethnic Russians and muslims, Siberians and other ethnic minorities. Barack Obama sends last message to Putin, that Russia is surrounded, and will be ereased from world political map for once and forever, if thou not surrender. And lets him know that in any case they will not use WMD against Russia.
WAR GAME SCENARIO: Russia Versus Chosen Nation

* Note: I reminded you before the start, this was a real war scenario. If you want to simulate a real war scenario, there are no rules in real war since it’s about surviving. It’s about tricking and deceiving. I had agreed your strict rules as a way of tricking. Saudi Government decides to fight ideologically rather than acting military. Saudi King call to muslims for action. There are over 10 million immigrants in Russia, labor force, came from former Soviet muslim states: Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Azerbaijan. Besides, there are local inhabitants, Tatar muslims, in Russia. June 18, Russiahttp://www.youtube.com...Saudi government fund US$ 12 billion into Siberian separatist movements, and fighters for the independence of Chechnya, and asks cooperate with muslims in the destruction of the state of Russia and ethnic Russian population in response to Russian neo-fascist movements. Muslim population gathered to annual public praying across Russian cities, and kills everyone who don’t speak a language other than Russian.http://www.youtube.com...
The United States of America's Constitution is not based on Christianity

Thank you Hunton711 for the response. You have stated: "I see no evidence behind those speaches [sic] that that you included in your argument." That is why I cited a specific source. I shall post it again: http://freethought.mbdojo.com... You continue to say, "I do still believe that it was founded upon Christianity because God is stated numerous times in our beloved country's many historical articles..." Yes, the word god is indeed stated in several historical articles. Deism is the belief in a god that simply made the universe and now stays out of everything. The word god is ambiguous when it comes to religion because Christianity is not the only religion that believes in a god. In fact, the word god is defined as "the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe." [7] Nowhere is Christianity mentioned in that definition. Several examples include Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, and the hundreds of primitive religions that came beforehand. [8] Now if Jesus Christ were mentioned, that might grant some merit to your case, however, due to the fact that you have failed to cite a single article that agrees with your statement from around the time the country was founded, your case has no merit thus far. Until you cite a valid article specifically saying the Constitution was based on Christianity, there is absolutely no reason for the voters to vote con. Finally, you say, "'One nation under God' is clearly recognized as a phrase pertaining to America being built upon Christianity." That is simply incorrect. Not only can you cross apply my previous arguments about the ambiguity of the word "god," but the words "under god" were not added to the pledge of allegiance until 1954. [9] The reason why those words were added was because America was engaged in the cold war and was locked in an "us-them" mentality, looking for something to solidify the separation of the two. Communist Russia was atheist, so John Dulles (then Secretary of State) said we should fight them do to that fact and supported the adding of the words "under god" as a political measure against those "godless communists." [10] I would like to extend the following unaddressed (so I safely can say they are conceded) arguments: The Treaty of Tripoli and its statement of America not being founded on Christianity The argument stating the complete lack of reference to god or any other religious figure in the Constitution. The fact that the founding fathers mentioned were deists. Thank you again for the response and I look forward to your next arguments. [7] http://dictionary.reference.com... [8] http://www.leaderu.org... [9] http://en.wikipedia.org... [10] http://slate.msn.com...
The Cookie Monster is the bomb.

Oh, well here comes little "I'M SO COOL THAT I WON'T OBEY RULE #2 OF THE DEBATE!" You is not cool, brah. Anyways, I insist by saying this, and only this: http://www.thelifestream.net... He looks pissed. You wanna fight him? PS: I know you're 3 feet away from me. I don't care.
The Cookie Monster is the bomb.

Taken that I have accepted the challenge from little brother, I will concede to his rules. To answer the question that RAP poses in his constructive, I contend that Big Bird is clearly better than Cookie Monster. Also OBSERVE that I need not prove one character to be superior than Cookie Monster, but I simply need to prove that cookie monster is not "the bomb" The bomb should, from hereon, be defined as: "A phrase, which much like Courtney Love, was only popular during the early nineties. At the time, it meant "exceptionally cool"[1] extremely: "Being in or attaining the greatest or highest degree"[2] cool: "In a casual manner; nonchalant"[3] So far, RAP hasn't given us any reason as to why we affirm, thus we default negative in the round. BUT! If that's not enough, I will address the solitary statement he proposed. Contention 1: Big Bird is a f*cking baller. When you crunch the numbers and look at the suit, Big Bird stands around 6' 10". Now, if you can imagine, pissing anyone off who is that big is NOT a good idea. Because Big Bird, or B-Dawg as they called him when he was growing up in the hard town of LA, is so massive, he is clearly the bomb, because if you think he isn't, he'll whoop some @ss. Also, anyone who can lynch a n***a, clean up the mean streets of LA the way only a big yellow vigilante can, buy more ammo, have lunch, save children from burning orphanages, help old ladies across the street, teach a JEW how to balance his checkbook, and STILL have time to record a daily children's television show is clearly someone superior to a heroin-infused-cookie addict. Contention 2: Cookie Monster is the Epitome of Over-rated-ness Seriously? He's ALL show, guys. When society claims that an addict to a certain substance that most certainly is not dough, sugar, eggs, and cream alone, then you might as well re-elect Bush, or elect Palin, and start killing every first-born child (or whatever else was on Palin's adjenda). Also, this is a key thing to note during the round, Cookie Monster is no longer the Cookie Monster. Now, he just eats healthy. Where's your bad@ss now, PRO? Again, my opponent has not told us how Cookie Monster is the bomb in the first place, so I cannot adequately address what isn't there. Thanks for the debate, and vote CON [1] http://www.urbandictionary.com... [2] http://dictionary.reference.com... [3] http://dictionary.reference.com...
The Cookie Monster is the bomb.

Name a better Sesame Street character. RULES: These shall forever be known as 'The Radioactivepotatoman Rules" 1. No seriousness. 2. No Walls of text 3. This is NOT a serious debate. 4. You do not talk about Fight Club. 5. You do NOT talk about Fight Club. 6. There are no rules. 7. Rule number 6 is not a real rule.
The Cookie Monster is the bomb.

Well guys, here's a quick wrap-up... I have made two explicit contentions proving my case. These went un-refuted but for one argument, which I have adequately defeated as well. Because of this, you will be voting NEGATIVE. Remember that if you think any character (Elmo ftw) is superior to the cookie monster, you vote for me as well. In conclusion, good debate, bro. Big Bird: http://www.youtube.com... [First video] vs. Cookie Monster: http://www.youtube.com... [Second Video] Which makes more sense? The choice is obvious. NEGATE
The Cookie Monster is the bomb.

Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay, A wall of text is an immense amount of text compared to my first post. It's short things like that. *facepalm* The big bird is clearly a terrible role model; he steals, he flips people off, and he is the symbol of big gangstas walking the streets with their gats headin to rob a kwikemart. The cookie monster is a loving and caring creature; he was a role model to fat kids in the 70s everywhere. You cannot simply blame himslef for converting to vegetablism; blame hollywood. How can a celebrity still get by without being twigthin, like Amy Whinehouse. He had to turn to vegetables, and yes, that might be his fault, but I mean, he didn't want to end up like Big Bird; he has REALLY let himself go. The cookie monster will always be the cookie monster. And, I was really contemplating posting this as my whole retort: http://media.photobucket.com...
The Cookie Monster is the bomb.

Alright, so, what we can see so far in this debate is that both my contentions go uncontested. The only argument against this is the claim that I violated Rule #2, however he doesn't clarify how I've done this, nor did he define what a "wall of text" was, so my C.1 and C.2 go through. Now, to address my opponent's new picture: 1) Cookie Monster himself has realized the error of his ways: http://www.youtube.com... [First video] 2) Would you really love a man who eats veggies over...wait...nevermind Anyway, here's some other info about Big Bird: 1) Big Bird dealing with paparazzi http://www.herecomestheboss.com... 2) Big Bird takin' care of buisness http://roflrazzi.files.wordpress.com... 3) When Big Bird was young, he had to learn how to survive on the streets http://www.lolhome.com... 4) H stands for Ho' http://seedgivethtree.files.wordpress.com... 5) What I wear at school http://rlv.zcache.com... Clearly, the resolution has been NEGATED.
In the criminal justice system, more emphasis should be put on retribution than rehabilitation

26 Minutes to make a complete vote worthy conclusion? I'm game. In conclusion: More emphasis should be placed on retribution over rehabilition. This is supported by two core facts I've proven below. - Rehabilitation Programs for violent offenders such as Sex Offenders do not have segnifigant enough data to warrant mass use. - America has a much larger recidivism rate than that of China. Therefore it can be assumed that if America used methods as strict as China's, America's rate of recidivsm would also fall. I believe that more should be done to punish criminals outside of their current treatment but that the current system and more leniency (of which Rehabilitation is) is the complete wrong way to go about it. Insted, emphasis should be placed on retribution for victims and preserving Justice. And the job of the American government is to safe guard all citizens living under it's protection.
In the criminal justice system, more emphasis should be put on retribution than rehabilitation

Rebuttal: America's Prison Population Accepted, America has the World's Largest Prison Population. Also according to the International Center for Prison Studies, Zhong Guo (Hence forth referred to as China) has world's second largest Prison Population [1]. America currently has 2,228,424 people imprisoned; this is due largely to America's life imprisonment. To quote whowhatwhy.org [2]"With 40,362 lifers, California had one-quarter of the country"s life-sentenced population. Other lifer-leading states were Florida (12,549), New York (10,245), Texas (9,031), Georgia (7,938), Ohio (6,075), Michigan (5,137), Pennsylvania (5,104) and Louisiana (4,657)"According to research carried out by the VERA Institute, Californian tax payers alone pay approximately $47,421 per inmate annually [3]. According to the International Center for Prison Studies, China has 1,701,344 people imprisoned; 527,080 less people that America. This is largely due to China's far more strict manner of handling Criminals. A case of this comparison would be the crime of Drug Trafficking. In America, the act of Drug Trafficking carries a minimum sentence of fines or time spent in prison. While in China, Drug Trafficking is a mandatory death sentence [4]. Rehabilitation over Retaliation In countering the argument that America needs to focus more on rehabilitation to lower rates of recidivism, I will cite my argument from above regarding China's more strict method of punishment. The beauty of China's law enforcement system is that it it get's results. China has one of the lowest rates of Recidivism in the world: commonly held to be around 5%-10% [5] [6]. This is a stark contrast to America's 76.6% as of 2005 [7]; as concluded by a selective study by the Bureau of Justice Statistics . SummaryIn summary, America would be quite better off if it began behaving more like China. Thanks to China's rather unique and often sketchy practices reguarding the handling of Criminals, they have managed a feat most Western societies can only dream of. They have almost completely nullified their rate of Recendivism. [1] http://www.prisonstudies.org...[2] http://whowhatwhy.org...[3] http://www.vera.org...[4] http://www.eai.nus.edu.sg...[5] http://www.unafei.or.jp...[6 ]http://www.china.org.cn...[7] http://www.bjs.gov...
In the criminal justice system, more emphasis should be put on retribution than rehabilitation

I welcome Con as my opponent. Without further ado, I shalt begin building my case. Definitions: Crime: an illegal act for which someone can be punished by the government.Felony: a crime for which the punishment in federal law may be death or imprisonment for more than one year.Capital Punishment: the death penalty for crime. Recidivism: a tendency to relapse into a previous condition or mode of behavior;especially : relapse into criminal behaviorCite: Merraim Webster Before I begin on my case, I will state a fact. I am arguing for the punishment of criminals who have commited Felonies such as:-Murder-Rape-Armed Robbery-Arson-Illegal Drug Sales-Kidnapping-Treason-Income Tax EvasionCase: - Incarciration and rehabilitation often fail, execution does not. According to a study carried out by the National Institute of Justice themselves, the current rates of Recidivism are currently very high in America.To quote: "Bureau of Justice Statistics studies have found high rates of recidivism among released prisoners. One study tracked 404,638 prisoners in 30 states after their release from prison in 2005.[1] The researchers found that: Within three years of release, about two-thirds (67.8 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested. Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested. Of those prisoners who were rearrested, more than half (56.7 percent) were arrested by the end of the first year. Property offenders were the most likely to be rearrested, with 82.1 percent of released property offenders arrested for a new crime compared with 76.9 percent of drug offenders, 73.6 percent of public order offenders and 71.3 percent of violent offenders." Cite: http://www.nij.gov...- Time in prison just makes criminals worse.While in prison, a harmless criminal can become indroctrinated and trained by more violent ones. Hereby rendering the thought of using prisons as rehabilitation facilities mute. - What gives someone the right to kill and live? No human has the right to unjustly take a life or victimize another without suffering consequences equal to or greater than their actions inflicted. That is a fact. If they were somehow given that right, what forbids the Victim or the Victim's Family from pursueing vengance? Or even a Purge like scenrio becoming common place? - Executions should be cheaper.As it stands now, it costs approximately $90,000 to house an inmate on death row and the state of Califronia alone spends $250 Million on every execution. According to a study conducted by the Los Angeles Times in 2005, this is around $114 Million dollars more than the cost of keeping a criminal imprisioned for life. Cite: http://www.deathpenalty.org...For the price of twenty American dollars, I can buy a length of rope and execute a criminal. This alone would save taxpayers millions.
In the criminal justice system, more emphasis should be put on retribution than rehabilitation

This debate is for round 1 of Lannan13's February Beginner's Tournament. The contestants for this match are 1harderthanyouthink and YamaVonKarma. The mentors are Debatability for 1harderthanyouthink and BLAHthedebator for YamaVonKarma.Resolution: In the criminal justice system, more emphasis should be put on retribution than rehabilitationPRO - YamaVonKarmaCON - 1harderthanyouthinkStructure: R1. Pro constructs caseR2. Con constructs case/Pro rebutsR3. Con rebuts/Pro defends caseR4. Con defends case/Pro rebuts & summarizesR5. Con rebuts & summarizes/Pro waivesRules:1. No forfeiting2. No trolling3. Citations must be within the rounds 4. No new arguments in each respective final round5. The definitions as given in the R1 are not to be argued6. BoP is to be sharedDefinitions:retribution - A system of criminal justice based on the punishment of offenders rather than on rehabilitation.rehabilitation - Restore (someone) to health or normal life by training and therapy after imprisonmentVoting:To avoid poor votes being cast, a base of 2500 Elo has been set to vote. I also remind all that the fellow contestants of this tournaments are not allowed to vote. For reference, these people are dsjpk5, Dpowell, The-Voice-of-Truth, Varrack, That1User, and RevNge.Thank you Yama, and good luck.
the Obama administration shouldn't try to defend their policies to Republicans or anyone else

When anyone who opposes some policy of the Obama administration, The administration should just say no comment rather than try to explain it. Whenever they do this they just raise more questions than they answer. The Obama administration does not need to convince anyone of anything. They control the White house and both branches of government. They should just ramrod everything through and just let whoever complains, cry all they want. Once Gov't passes something it is there forever. They could pass anything they want. Why do they bother with "bipartisanship"? It is so phony and disingenuous. There is nothing that the left or the right have in common, why should the left cave on anything? They don't have to. They should just pass every single piece of legislation they want passed and be done with. The right has voted almost 100% against every piece of legislation put forward by the Obama administration, there is no reason to even discuss anything with the right, they still pass everything anyway. My opponent can say there should be debate, I say why, It is a big waste of time and it is all for show to make it look like Congress works together and discusses issues and comes to compromises. But it does not. I use the voting record as evidence. The Obama administration should use this opportunity to ramrod everything it can down the peoples throats while they have the opportunity, while they have all the votes to do it in both branches of govt. Even if they make people mad it wont matter as everything they pass will be permanent and can't be undone. No gov't program has ever been eliminated in the last 35 years, they have only grown exponentially. And gov't is way to big now that spending will never be decreased it will just get bigger and bigger and there is nothing either side can do about it. So it makes sense to force as many pieces of legislation as they can through congress while they can and stop trying to convince people they are good ideas. Who cares whether the people think they are good ideas as a whole. If Obama thinks it's a good idea then he should just ramrod it through. They should just have show trail debates and let the right say what ever they want and make no rebuttals. when the right is done talking they should just vote and pass it. They don't need any Republican votes to pass any piece of legislation. If there are a few Dems who might say no they can just grease and bribe them into voting their way. That's how it's always been done why stop now.
Resolved: Krabby Patties are superior to Purple Penguins

My opponent has great arguments, but they fall short. 1. Better pets? My opponent's point falls against her. "you could probably stuff them in a refrigerator and get away with it. " she says. This means that theifs could easily steal your purple penguin. On the other hand only one guy wants to steal the krabby patty. "GIMME THE KRABBY PATTY!!"But again, this guy is so small you could easily smush him to death in one stomp. As for extensive care, while the purple penguins require some, the krabby patty would require NONE. In addition, the krabby patty does not easily rot. My opponent's source number one says "Six hours later, the patty has spoiled." This means that the krabby patty is good for six hours...and keep in mind it wasn't even in the refrigerator! If Spongebob had kept it in the refrigerator, it would have been prolonged much further and been able to be useful.Speaking of usefulness, we go onto my rebuttal of my opponent's 2cd point...2. Better Secretaries? Now, you may have think I completely ignored the fact that my opponent claims that purple penguins can karate chop monsters in half. That's actually nothing. See? As far as we're concerned, Squidward only ate four patties, since he was holding six patties and then he was holding only two patties....the rest is math. As we cn see, there were tons and tons of patties availible, so the sacrifice of merely 4 patties is nothing in comparison. And as for pay, the krabby patty doesn't even need fish meat. On the other hand, my opponent is incorrect about how much pay is needed. Penguins need...90 fish per day. (1) That's a lot! And considering that on average, per kilogram fish costs about $7.00 (2)...well, good luck paying the money!My opponent also hints that purple penguins can do much more than krabby patties. Again, she is wrong. While she states "A purple penguin could help you staple papers, answer phone calls, write down notes, and other helpful activites." A krabby patty can do all of the above, and blow up people....and you can sleep in a krabby patty s://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com...; alt="" width="322" height="393" />Krabby Patty used as a stapler Patrick recieving a boring phone call The infamous Krabby Patty notepad Oh yes, and Plankton even once used it as a backpack! 3. Purple penguins being cute and purpleThis point is stupid. Krabby patty are not only purple, they are all the colors within the spectrum. Therefore your point is nulled and krabby patties represent not only "sensitivity, love, understanding, peace, tranquility, imaginative, generous", but all the other kinds of personality as well, since all the colors are covered. (3)In addition, krabby patties are very cute. Spongebob even fell in love with one of them at a time! (1) http://wiki.answers.com...(2) http://www.indexmundi.com...(3) http://www.empower-yourself-with-color-psychology.com...