failed nations are a greater threat to the united states than stable nations

Because the Pro/Instigator has offered no opening arguments, I'll provide a quick summary of my position and we'll take this debate from there. In terms of "threatening" the United States, we can assume that this resolution is aimed at either the American economy and/or safety and well-being (military). That said, let's examine the list of the 10 most unstable nations; ratings are based on 12 social, economic, political and military indicators, such as: institutionalized political exclusion; "brain drain" of professionals, intellectuals and political dissidents fearing persecution or repression; massive and endemic corruption or profiteering by ruling elites; widespread loss of popular confidence in state institutions; deterioration of essential services (such as health, education, sanitation and public transportation); and widespread violation of human rights [1]. -- Most Unstable Nations -- 1. Sudan 2. Iraq 3. Somalia 4. Zimbabwe 5. Chad 6. Ivory Coast 7. Democratic Republic of the Congo 9. Afghanistan 10. Guinea In observing that list, Pro has the burden of explaining how these nations pose more of a threat than stables ones. The dictionary defines stable as: not likely to fall or give way as a structure, support, or foundation; firm; steady [2]. In other words, a nation that's not going to "fall." I submit China and Russia to be stable nations. For that reason, I will explain why these two 'stable' countries are a bigger threat to the U.S. than the list of the top ten most unstable nations combined. Economically speaking, China is a power house. Some people suspect that China will overtake the U.S. as the world's largest trade economy in a few years; China's rise in this respect means Americas decline. Additionally, another concern are the large and growing U.S. trade deficits with China. People feel that China uses unfair trade practices to flood U.S. markets with low-cost goods and to restrict U.S. exports, and that such practices threaten American jobs, wages, and living standards [3]. In that sense, China is a threat to the U.S. economy. Regarding our safety, China has the largest military in the world, meaning they could crush us in a land war. The world is trying to stifle China from ever developing a good navy; if they did, they would possibly pose the biggest military threat on the planet. On that note, their buddy Russia (who along with China has always been particularly hostile with the U.S.) has nuclear intelligence, bombs, missiles, etc. Lots of em. They easily have enough weaponry, technology and intelligence to take out the U.S., along with the incentive. In fact, that's the biggest reason why these stable nations and others pose the biggest threat to the U.S.; not only do they have anti-American sentiments, but actually the ability to severely hurt us in many ways. Indeed the unstable nations I have listed pose a threat because they're easy hubs for terrorist organizations. However, terrorists can and do exist in every country. Terrorists live and exist in the U.S. The point here is that just because these nations are more susceptible to mob rule and the like, doesn't mean that the nations themselves are to blame but rather the bad organizations that infiltrate them or take over. In fact, one of the reasons terrorist groups have such a hold in the Middle East is specifically BECAUSE of stable nations like Russia. The United States is considered to have the best military in the world, at least in terms of superior intelligence, technology and ability to fight/win a war. So, a nation that isn't even stable enough to effectively protect its own country is not going to be able to harm a world super power like us militarily or economically. I think I'll give Pro a chance to respond or at least present somewhat of an argument before I continue negating the resolution :) Sources: [1] http://www.cbsnews.com... [2] http://dictionary.reference.com... [3] http://www.fas.org...