Failed Nations are a bigger threat to the United States than Stable Nations

1. Wikipedia is not a valid source. Clearly, everyday humans can change this website. It is not factual or have any evidence. Any "evidence" found on wikipedia should be dropped. China is clearly, and still is, a communist nation. It is common knowledge to everyone. If you dont believe me, I can show you evidence. However, I see no need to when it is common knowledge. North Korea, I would argue, is a stable nation. We seem to be debating over what exactly a "failed" and "stable" nation is. North Korea has a stable government. Whether they can feed their people has nothing to do with how stable their government it. North Korea is clearly a stable nation. You then put many reasons how North Korea is a threat. Those arguements may be put on my side, because North Korea has a stable government. 2. Bush did not go into war with Iraq because of Terrorism. It was to look for "weapons of mass destruction." Bush's decision to go into war was not because of the 9/11 attacks. The united States was clearly allowed to recover from this incident. You say "Terrorist Attacks are not just in the U.S. but abroad." How exactly is a threat to the United States if it is against India. This attack doesnt really add up to your side of the case. How many Americans died in this attack? Not as many as people being killed by cancer, witch is caused by my first contention. I will go into that in a little bit. I am not exactly saying that a human life is less important than money. However, the environmental threats that Stable Nations produce, creates diseases, witch then kills many AMERICANS each year. Cancer is caused from environmental pollution and is the second leading cause of death in the United States. Clearly, it kills people. And because of the finiancial threat stable nations pose, it would lead the united states into a financial crisis. This financial crisis would push many under the poverty line, raising deaths due to poverty dramatically. Clearly, a huge threat. Ontop of that, it also hurts the United States economy. It kills people, and the economy. A much bigger threat than terrorism. Going back to the Enviornment: It is a much bigger threat than terrorism. According to Sean Aqul, "How much would you pay to avoid a 0.0000008% chance of dying? Its not an idle question. When allocating limited resources, the first step has to be defining the risk. We spend tons of money researching cancer cures because millions of Americans die from it each year. We spend almost no money researching mucopolysaccharidosis, witch kills its victims by age 25, but only kills 200 people each year. Since 1990, their have been four major terrorist attacks on the United States: Oklahoma City, the first attack on the World Trade center, the Olympic Bombing, and 9/11. Thats 4 attacks in 14 years; hardly a crisis. Now lets look at casualties. Those four attacks caused roughly 3,175 deaths over 14 years, in a population of 300 million. Thats an average of 230 deaths per year. Far closer to mucopolyacchidosis that cancer. Put another way, the average American has a 0.0000008% chance of dying from a terrorist attack" This proves that terrorism is not a big threat, the environment kills more people than terrorism, witch makes the environment a bigger threat. 3a. If these immigrants are illegal, the government doesnt have to pay for anything, even if they are low income families. Jobs wont be given to illegal immigrants. It plain and simple, illegal immigration doesnt hurt us. 3b. Thats not proving anything. I have been given no facts throughout this whole debate. 1a. Whether cancer was mentioned in R1 or not, it can still be in this debate. If it isnt, than anything you states above cannot be used in the debate. These environmental issues are not being controlled. I have the proof in my case. Please look. How many AMERICANS does AIDS kill each year? And how does it exactly spread to Americans? I can assure you that more Americans die of cancer than AIDS. Not only that, but AIDS arent caused by Failed Nations. b. Russia has a stable government. They are a stable nation. 2a. How is thew United States supposed to gain 800.5 billion dollars? Not only that, but you said we could tax people. That would still threaten the American People, and our economy. Even further proving that a finiacnial threat is a huge threat. 2b. How can we pay it back without hurting the American people or the economy? We need to look at what is a bigger threat t the United States. If we were debating what is a bigger threat to the world, I would be on pro today. But when it comes down to the United States clearly Stable Nations are a bigger threat. Obviously terrorism is a threat. But when you compare it with an environmental and financial threat, it has no comparison. Con has certaintly won todays debate.