Sith In The Sith era and Old Republic were much stronger then the new sith, and jedi in StarWars.

So if the debate is not about "power" but about "strength" then why did you argue power? "but thats not what this debate was about. Its about who was the overall most powerful." No matter, here is the definition of "stronger" with almost the same meanings as "power" has: http://dictionary.reference.com... "they could destroy whole planets with a hand gesture" This is not known. I am sure that if the Sith of Old could destroy planets with a hand gesture then they would easily conquer the galaxy. I bring you . . . FORCE STORM :D A power the Old Sith never used. http://starwars.wikia.com... "Traya would because in the heat of battle the palpatine would not have the time to be patient, cunning nor deceptive. His death star couldnt save him then, but where as he had the ability to use the force to control sevral lightsabers in unison like Traya then perhaps he could succeed" Traya was good at healing, draining, and using three lightsabers at once. Palpatine could create Masterful force lightnings and storms, could FLY, could use expert telekinesis, masterful Lightsaber combat arts, see far into the future and play mind games with people, and lastly he could mask the darkside to expertly that nobody knew who he was, even the most greatest of Jedi. I am sure Sidious would win. Although we cannot base it purely on assumptions like you do. "sheet of force armor" It was armor, and they helped him use the force better (I think you said ""they did grant him a powerful spare reserve of force power, enhanced his physical attributes, supplied him a healing factor and acted as a protective shield"), so yes it was a sheet of force armor, where the pain can be ignored mostly because of this: "host to ge berserk and mindlessly unleash the force on whatever was near". Most people when in deep mentally isane states tend to not care about pain, such as Vader at the loss of Padme'. "He saw a tacitic and acted on it as did Bane." Haha, Sidious CREATED the tactic and acted all around it. He didn't see it. "him any less brilliant then they" Yes it does ACCORDING to the Rule of Two. "Fate had other planes and it was you who took home the gold. Does this make me any less intellegant, or cunning then yourself? No it does not." Actually yes it does because of one important factor. I was the class clown while you were not. I used my ability to cheat while you decided to be fair and not use it. I created an opportunity for me to be put in the front of the class and I used it. That is why I take home the gold. "The only reason they fell from power was due to the actions of those around them such as Malak or Sion." But according to you Traya and Revan always had a plan predetermined? So Revan planned to get knocked unconscious and Traya planned to die? I don't think they were that strong. Darth Revan STILL got knocked out by a laser cannon and Traya was still weak compared to Sidious. "These are the sith steriotypes, the dark fools who linger around for no other reason but to kick a puppy, or torment a baby. They are the reason for the downfall of the sith, and it is due to their actions that the sith were almost always destined to fail." Funny how this applies to mostly Sion, Malak, Naga Sadow, Ragnos, and Kaan all of whom are old Sith. "As you know at this point in the story Anakin jumps into the air in attempts to be on equal footing with his master and decapitate him. It didnt work. Rather then force pull him and slash him with his saber when he was close enough, or use the force to lift the lava and fling it at Obi Wan, he decided, like an idiot to take a leap of faith, [or in this case a leap of idiocy] and lost all his limbs due to it." Thank you for backing me up on this. It seems you forgot the topic of the debate: "Sith In The Sith era and Old Republic were much stronger then the new sith, and jedi in StarWars." You have to say the Sith in the Old Republic and the Sith Era, while MY subject is the New Sith and ALL the Jedi. You just said the new Jedi were powerful than Vader, which makes my argument also right. If Vader had beat Obi-Wan at first, then I would still have my argument backed up. You just trapped yourself in that argument. "They knew more of ther force and were stronger for it. Any star wars fan could see this plainly." Wow, I could also say the exact opposite to this and say "Any star wars fan could see this plainly", but it just wouldn't make any sense. To sum my arguments up, the New Sith and ALL Jedi were better than the Old Sith because of these: 1. Sidious showed equal power as to Nihilus and Naga Sadow and Traya, but he escaped death more than they did many a times. The Rule of Two backs this up (as does the Ro2 back up that Sidious was stronger than Bane). 2. The Jedi overall had constantly beat the Sith of the past and the New Sith, while it was only the New Sith that had taken over the Republic once. This obviously shows that the New Sith and overall amount of Jedi would beat the Old Sith. 3. The New Sith showed power and ability with the force, and with Lightsaber combat. The New Sith also showed an ability to keep themselves secret and to be able to deceive the entire galaxy. The Sith of old had merely relied on the force. That is why they never won fully. 4. The New Sith were not stagnant. The New Sith never fought over power amongst each other. It was always the one true Master, and the one true Apprentice, and when the Apprentice was powerful enough he would kill his Master, thus becoming the Master. That was the Rule of Two, and it worked. The Old Sith kept on killing themselves and slowly beating themselves down with their old philosophy. Overall, the major flaw in my opponents debate is that he never looked at the Jedi and how the old Sith could beat the Jedi. He focused his arguments on the New Sith. Overall, the Jedi were stronger in most cases (with the exception of that one time Sidious overthrew the Jedi and the Republic). This proves overall that CON is correct in this debate.