BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Fictional presidential debate.

The terror group Daughters of Herano shall be pursued and dismantled by our government. We will make attempts to better secure our securities in customs and our patrols at border zones. Much of what my opponent has suggested sounds fine with me. Other options I might consider shall be kept secret at this time until a later date when their revelation shall not compromise our mission plan. If elected I intend on feeling out my opponent on his willingness to bring his own thoughts and collogues onto this problem that we can give these terrorists a fight with the best of our efforts and people. My question is The Natives Most of (planet name) is already populated by vast numbers of Stone Age level life forms. In fact, Only the polar ice caps are not already used. There are too many to just put them in reservations. What are your orders? How shall we act toward primitives on newly discovered planets?
Fictional presidential debate.

The question presented: The terror group in the Mishar Confederation, Daughters of Herano, Is beginning to smuggle fighters and supplies through the border between the our two countries. What is your plan to stop them from attacking targets in the Mishar systems? Our country will not condone the acts of the daughters of Herano. Our primary focus to defeat them and assist our adjacent allies. I will make it so that the specific ways they are getting through are prevented directly. This includes marking and tagging known members of the terror group and using advanced facial recognition to catch them. Once caught, If they come quietly, All of their robotic parts are to be either confiscated, Shut down, Or locked up to prevent escape. If I know my galaxy, The systems with hyperlanes between the Mishar border and us are Quebec, Gallot, And Farran. There is also a series of interlocked hyperlanes inside our border that are not a good enough bottleneck and have the highest rate of smuggling. So, My plan will be carried out like this. Draw back our Mishar border from the free cluster to a spot with only one hyperlane between two planets that people travelling between countries have to cross anyway. The planets lost in the border will not matter as much, As the choice of free immigration has been agreed upon by our two nations. We can place long-range scanners on the planets and moons searching for both illegal weapons and lead-lined stealth ships. All ships containing those things must be either boarded and searched with short range life form scanners and a minimum of three members of border patrol. At these choke points, The Daughters of Herano will have more trouble than success at smuggling fighters. I will also have our dual department of information launch a campaign made to expose the truth, Not the opinion, Of the Daughters. Included in this will be undercover agents set to record and broadcast exactly what happens behind enemy lines and on the battlefields. These will expose what the Daughters are really like and prevent further recruitment by them. This may unfortunately bring attacks upon our own country, But our country has the arms and power to deal with them swiftly. A few out of character notes: My opponent may present the question for the next round, As our questioner quit and I want to make it more fair. Also, My opponent may feel free to use their imagination when providing questions or answers, And I will do my best to "Yes, And-" anything he can throw at me, The same way he did for me.
Fictional presidential debate.

During my first 100 days in office I plan on streamlining the process to bring aid to The planet of Yibar. We have the know how and the beef to make it happen. I will allow the governor of that planet to enact a state of emergency to be reviewed one year from it's start. I intend on seeing to it that all AI that merit being called a being or a person are given the freedom equal to any citizen of our galaxies. Like all citizens however they are held to the same standards as everyone else in law. They are not for example, Allowed to manufacture themselves to the point they outnumber everyone else. Same laws we have for all species. I also plan on making the creation of new types of AI illegal, As well as the creation of new current AI illegal, By anyone but that type of AI. I want my soldiers to know they can count on me to keep orbital bombardment as a tool in our 'aggressive 'negotiations handbook. We have no reason to waste the lives of our people and soldiers if bombardment is a feasible option. If not feasible however, We Will Not commit to a bombardment! Further more I will focus on the strengthening of our current star systems and a slow and steady acquisition of any errant colonies upon the outer rim.
Fictional presidential debate.

The question presented: What would you do in your first 100 days in office? I would begin my term in the office by making reforms in the star fleet that prevents them from using orbital bombardment as a negotiating tactic. If we have reason to fight an enemy, We must do it fairly. The cost of morale and the lives of our own species living on the planet is too high for a reward of one successful hit in every hundred bombs dropped. In the most recent war, The acting president from the Luna Mon Mothma party killed billions of our own in an attempt to defeat an enemy without landing a single troop. After weeks of bombardment, We landed our troops only to find that there were never any hostiles on the ground to begin with. The standing armies had been evacuated and the only people we killed were peaceful civilians. After that is underway, I will also attempt to pass a bill that limits our robotic companions from ever posing a threat to us. Disallow them from piloting light-speed capable ships. Disallow them from owning guns. Disallow them from military or private security service. We have so many AI workers, That if they got mad, They could destroy our empire from within. Therefore, Simply prevent them from having an advantage over us. Lastly, I will work on providing super-complexes to the less fortunate planets in the outskirts of our nation. Sending in construction workers and foreign supplies to create buildings for jobs to find their niche and to give civilians homes once more. Take, For example, The planet Oscum. Early in the empire's life, We claimed the planet from the Vandekon federation, Our allies, Who had rebels blocking a trade route between our nations. Now, The rebels have been pacified, And poverty rates have soared. A market visible from outside the atmosphere has become a light tan splotch on the planet. All of those jobs, Each with only 25-75 cubic feet of space to use for making a life's profit. This is not a good thing for the galactic economy, So those supercomplexes must be put in place to make the planet healthy again. That is what my first hundred days will detail. Thank you.
Fictional presidential debate.

I am Karkess, Primary candidate appointed by the Federalist Party I stand for 'limited open and closed borders, And a 'highly regulated right of civilians to own an armed starship. I stand against 'advanced artificial intelligence, For Planetary bombardment when necessary, And for cryosleep colony ships. I stand for highly militarized star systems, And a powerful central government. (Where's the below from? ) The Federalists believe that difficulties may be overcome by improving internal efficiency. They think that optimizing the internal structure of the government will prove to be most rewarding. 20% economy bonus Equivalent racial bonus points: 3
Fictional presidential debate.

Ground rules: I have appointed a debate questioner. They will say the number of the round in the comments section, Followed by a question. This debate is fictional, As it is running for presidency of a star empire. The questioner can make up any question as long as it is a realistically unrealistic problem that could be faced by a galaxy-wide empire. An example question could be: "The planet of Yibar is currently facing a starvation crisis. All of the machines have stopped working and the civillians are stealing food to survive. What is your plan to fix it? " The first round will be introductions. Con can follow my lead for introductions. I am Ratha'To, Primary candidate appointed by the Omicron party. I stand for open borders, Free procreation rights, And civilian's right to own an armed starship. I stand against artificial intelligence, Planetary bombardment, And segregated colony ships.
Album: Young huck " 10 Plugs zippyshare mp3 torrent

Album: Young huck " 10 Plugs zippyshare mp3 torrent download Young Buck releases his new 10-song project "10 Plugs" featuring Boosie Badazz, Tray 8 & ["] https://audiomackmp3.co... https://audiomackmp3.co... https://audiomackmp3.co...
what cannot be cured must be endured

In any of the cases above, whether or not the affliction could be "cured" was indeterminate. The original argument was not "I believe that anything can be overcome with human ingenuity, and thus nothing cannot be cured, making the aphorism functionally irrelevant", it was "I do not agree that what cannot be cured must be endured, because I believe in fighting up for one's life so that others don't take you for granted". So, in this scenario, we're supposing that whatever the thing is, it is both determinate and knowable that it cannot be fixed. You have one argument to those ends: "Third: A person may have an incurable disease but that does not mean he has to endure the pain of it lifelong .He maybe medically ill but he can still lead a quality life by making people around him happy. Cure does not always mean total eradication of the disease. The way one lives his life is his definition of cure." Right, but he's not actually cured of the illness. We're now moving the goal posts: the fact of the matter is still that he is incurably ill, there's nothing he can do about it, and, in this scenario, he's not even pretending to do anything about it. So he's accepted his illness, and is enduring it, "quality life" or no.
what cannot be cured must be endured

Let us rewind the time a bit, say some thousand years ago. What we find is that some cavemen hunting in the forest trying to gather food and fighting with nature for their survival. Now we come to our present time. We find human beings producing their own food and even making changes in the nature’s laws for their convenience. What made it all possible? Simple, it is the fact that it is not in human nature to endure difficulties but fight it. I shall start my argument by giving some examples. First: Let us consider the condition of women in our country .For many decades the women have been suppressed and have been denied of their various rights. It was taught to the girls to endure pain and be suppressed. But is it right for us to take the blame for everything and be ignored? No we are not going to sacrifice any more or endure any longer. Now it is our time to fight back because we don’t want to be taken for granted Second: When we fail in an examination do we sit back enduring the pain accepting our fate? No we don’t do that .We start studying vigorously to prove ourselves to the world. Third: A person may have an incurable disease but that does not mean he has to endure the pain of it lifelong .He maybe medically ill but he can still lead a quality life by making people around him happy. Cure does not always mean total eradication of the disease. The way one lives his life is his definition of cure. So from these examples it becomes clear that it needs more effort to cure or solve a problem rather than enduring it. Many weak people find it easier to endure a problem because they don’t want to face the consequences of their action. But this is a mentality of an escapist. So if one wants to be an escapist he can follow this philosophy and blame his fate for his terrible life. But if one wants to be free then he should have the courage to challenge the unchallengeable and cure it . In this path we shall face many ups and downs but at the end of the day we shall emerge as an ideal person and be respected by the society. Someone great had once said that every dream comes with a price tag and the price we have to pay is to say “ NO” to our period of enduring pain and come out of our shell as a better and brighter person to face the world.
what cannot be cured must be endured

I disagree with your statement of the basis that implies that the fight should be continued for wholly performative means, i.e. so that others won't look down on you, which, quite frankly, asserts that the person in the position has already conceded that what was unable to be "cured" is merely being "endured". > A cannot resolve B, A must suffer B, and A has sufficiently knowledge to those ends. > A pretends to try to resolve B to save face for C. > No matter what face A may save, A has already conceded that B is irresolvable, and is thus still merely enduring it. The presence of C is irrelevant. The axiom stands. Q.E.D.
what cannot be cured must be endured

I appreciate the arguments of my opponent . What I wanted to say is that enduring pain makes a person weak and he should fight for it so that he is not taken for granted. As I had earlier said that curing does not mean total eradication of the disease but leading a quality life. It does not matter whether he is actually cured of the disease or not. It depends on his mentality to fight it in his own way. So I defended my arguments but as my opponent has not posted any argument of his own I have nothing new to write. Thank you.
Hypothetical procreation with aliens

Unless there's something I'm missing, I would have no problem with your line of reasoning. If aliens can breed to make biologically and mentally stable (In the chemical sense, Not moral) offspring and consent is involved, Then it would be okay in my book. I'm going to cringe writing this, But my mother made an argument against interracial breeding before saying that the child would have a bad life due to racism. I think this helps to show why this scenario is okay. If we agree that racism, Or in this case, Specism is a bad thing and add it to our previous points. It becomes clear that the child will have a good life assuming that we fight prejudice. I think all of the bases are covered. I'm convinced. Lets make some alien Babies!
Hypothetical procreation with aliens

For one, It is double entendre, Not double on tundra. (r/boneappletea) Next, The speciation limit fits with the hypothetical ability to create healthy test tube babies. The question in morality comes from a the possible genetic variations in the offspring, Either there would be the hybrids, Or one of either. Procreation between species could also protect both planets from planetary war. If there are species and mixed children on both planets, Neither species would be too eager to destroy the other planet entirely, Because they would hurt some of their own. Therefore breeding would be beneficial. A primary focus I had making this debate would be the treatment of the kids in schools. If the aliens are roughly humanoid, (Twi'lek, Klingon, Na'Vi) Then there wouldn't really be any issue beyond what has been previously experienced in times like the de-segregation of the public schools. However, If the aliens were less humanoid, It may become closer to immoral, Even if healthy breeding was possible. (Prometheans, Xenomorphs, Wookies) In this case, Breeding is possible, But it could create a child that is greatly abused in school. Breeding is shown very little in most games and movies. The only interracial couples in star wars were Leia and Jabba (more of a slave than consensual) and a relationship between a clone and a Twi'lek. The clone and the twi'lek had two kids, Which were clearly mixed race. The fact that you do not see this half-breed as a common species signifies that there may be some sort of rule against that. But there doesn't have to be. Those children are healthy and growing. That couple is a leading signifier as to why breeding with aliens should be encouraged. A picture of the couple can be found by going to: scifistack exchange. Com/questions /104126/what-happened-to-new-clones-after-the-rise-of-the-empire Follow the link by removing the space between Scifistack and exchange, And removing the space between questions and /. Go to the fourth picture down, And you will se a family portrait of the four.
Hypothetical procreation with aliens

You topic is out of this world! Was that too pungent? Well that's what happen when you put a double on tundra. Anyway. While I don't reject the scenario per se, I do have a few problems with the framing. So if I'm to accept this proposition, I'm going to have to operate under the assumption that evolution is still true and applies to aliens. My first thought was that the aliens wouldn't be able to breed with us because of speciation, But you made breeding possible in your scenario. This necessarily leads to the conclusions that the aliens would have to be humans, At least in the sense that they would have to share most of our DNA in order to be able to breed. If they weren't humans, We would either be unable to breed with them, Or the babies would basically be inbred but worse. Kind of like making mule but possibly worse. If the aliens our within the speciation limit, My argument would be that they are, Indeed, Human and procreation would not be an issue and they would even look human to us and be "attractive" by human standards, At least somewhat. If they're not, I would say that the breeding would be immoral unless we could necessarily prevent child birth, Since the children produced would probably live a life of suffering. Your floor.
Hypothetical procreation with aliens

To begin: In a hypothetical situation, Humans have made contact with aliens. We have gained the ability to travel between our two home worlds with ease, And Immigration treaties have been created. Recently, Scientists mixed alien sperm and human eggs, As well as human sperm and alien eggs, And the result has turned out to be healthy babies as consistently as 100% human babies. The aliens are humanoid, And the sexual organs they have are compatible with human's. Also, There are aliens on earth and humans on the alien home world. So, We can procreate with aliens, But should we? (If more specifics are necessary to make a decision, Let me know) I say we should, Because even though the aliens are not humans, If they can give consent and humans can be attracted to them, They should be considered possible partners. The diversity presented by procreating with this alien species presents great possibilities. Either it creates a different, Hybrid species, Or just makes a baby of one of the two species. The ability to procreate freely would also be similar two two clans having their kids marry to soidify a peace agreement. Neither of the species could start a planet Vs. Planet war because many of their own species would be too closely involved. Relations with aliens would offer humans protection. Since most spawn will be healthy, It also presents genetic diversity where it improves both the humans and the aliens by mixing traits. Since communication is possible and the spacefaring aliens are intelligent, They can decide whether they want to have relations or not, So consent is possible. Therefore, I say humans should be allowed to procreate with this species of intelligent, Compatible aliens. (Also, For those jumping to conclusions, I am not zoo-sexual and I am not referring to any fellow human beings as aliens. By aliens I literally mean aliens. )
This House Would Create A UN Standing Army

Opening Arguments:(None of these are rebuttal, that will be later))1. NationalismThe U.N army would have to come from somewhere. The countries in the U.N would fight over where the soldiers come from, who the generals would be, etc. The soldiers would still have ties to their respective countries. If the U.N were to decide to take action against the U.S or Russia or another superpower, this would lead to a huge chunk of the U.N army being withdrawn. The U.N army would inevitably divide against itself and it would be like a civil war, except that it is really just a World War under the pretense of a single U.N army.2. The Goals of the U.NThe purpose of creating the U.N was to solve international problems through diplomacy, not through violence. By having a standing U.N army, the majority opinion on a particular issue would be able to force there beliefs through violence and tyranny rather than through negotiation and reason.3. FinanceThe soldiers have to be paid somehow. This will result in one of two things: Either the richer countries with more money will own most of the soldiers, creating a hegemony, or the U.N will fight and squabble about this issue, ignoring the other issues at hand.Opening Conclusion: Creating a permanant standing army that answers to the U.N is not a viable goal and is not in accordance with the purpose of the U.N. I await Cons rebuttal and further argumentation.
This House Would Create A UN Standing Army

End American Hegemony: Currently, the US has committed a huge number of crimes internationally due to their current foreign policy. The US funded the Contra's well noted in the Iran-Contra affair. Committed acts of evil in Iraq especially with torturing prisoners of war, imposing the United Fruit Company in Guataemala, and attacking Philippines for entry into the Chinese market under Roosevelt. This legislation would make the US foreign policy more accountable, and end it's hegemony. Should the US invade a nation illegally the UN instead of advising the US to pull-out from a conflict would be ordered too, unless massive consequences would befall the US. Enforce the Genocide Conventions/Treaties in Place Should a civil war break out in say, Rwanda, the UN would be able to enforce the arusha accords and persecute the belligerents responsible for deaths there. Romeo Dallaire, who is an ex-Canadian Major General whom led the UNAMIR ops in Rwanda during the time of Genocide wrote a book called “Shake Hands with the Devil” in which discusses his issues with alcoholism, depression, and PTSD due to the trauma he suffered in Rwanda. In it, he noted that the US refused to support the Operations, Canada only sent in one soldier: him. And the only major states willing to send in anything were Belgium, Sudan, and Bangladesh. Even worse, the Bang.'s and Sudanese were sent in poorly equipped due to the fact that the UN's peacekeeping operations worked on a purely voluntary basis. Bangladesh, and Sudan sent in troops hoping someone else would supply the arms, and food. None never did. And solely on the basis of a lack of political interests, the US, British, France, etc..all stayed away from Rwanda, despite the fact that they could have ended the Genocide very easily. In fact, the most outrageous of this all, is the fact that those soldiers still answered to their commanders, and took precedence over Dallaire. Meaning they could outright refuse orders from a commanding officer, which resulted in the deaths of several Belgium soldiers while Dallaire watched. Make States More Accountable: In other words, when an UN standing army is now in place, it means select state actors will no longer be involved only on the basis of political convenience, but on the basis of humanitarianism's necessity. Now a deterrence for Genocide, civil war, etc.. is in place within the international community. We Already Have One: The UN already sort of operates like a standing army when they dawn the blue-barrets. However, they are poorly equipped for their jobs, and often times are put into positions of life and death with nothing to defend themselves. This makes them more efficient, stops political opportunism (makes all places equal when a genocide happens, no one “more important” area like Rwanda), and makes states too powerful to be convicted of their own crimes (the US, or Russia, or China) more accountable as a result. The resolution is upheld, the UN should have a standing army. Thank you!