The Great Wall of China is in China. (The one that seperated them from Mongolians.)

Thanks for your response; this should be interesting. Following my opponents numerical ordering; ==Refutations== 1. Geography My opponent claims that I don't provide a source for my numbers, so my argument is invalid. He says I could have made it up "for all that he knows". And then he says that their boundaries constantly change because they're... communist? Last time I checked, communism was a sociopolitical system [1] Notice how I used wikipedia because it IS a reliable source. My justification? [2] That's at the bottom of every article- citations; followed by "further readings" and "external links". It's called an encyclopedia for a reason. Anyways, regarding the numbers.. Let's say I DIDN'T get my sources online. I used an Atlas. My opponent doesn't have to challenge my credibility by claiming that I made up the numbers; he could have easily just looked up the numbers himself as opposed to wasting character space which, in my opinion, should cost him a conduct point- he implicitly called me a liar. But just to be sure, I'll do his work for him. [3] His other argument comes at a later point (which is strange, organizationally), and he says that there are no "points" on a "rough circle". If I were to draw a random figure on an x-y plane, no matter how rough or jagged, it does go through certain points. I'm sure that we can both certainly say that the Great Wall of China definitely goes through specific points on the planet; if it doesn't then it doesn't exist, which would be a problem. So, we see that my opponent's arguments are deficient in regards to my geography points. So, (yes, already) I urge a pro ballot. Regarding the other arguments. 2. "Defense System" argument "No, the missles would not be outside of the country" my opponent claims, regarding my defense system arguments. He makes a completely unwarranted claim. As a matter of fact, I would argue that MOST missile systems are placed outside of the country in order to keep invaders as far as possible. A very popular and historically significant instance of this? [4] [5] 3. Building problems My opponent refutes my claims in two ways. First, he says that "They would not have to send warriors to protect the builders, because they do not need to expand the wall if they so chose." Is it just me or is that a non-sequitur? Let's take this apart. "They do not need to expand the wall if they so chose." My opponent's claim is that they DID expand the wall and built it OUTSIDE OF China. Hmm. "They would not have to send warriors to protect the builders" for that fallacious reason. Last time I checked, if I'm a builder in the bronze age, I wouldn't be adequately equipped to fight off a barbarian horde with my primitive hammer. That's the first problem with the wall being truly "outside" of China. The second, he says that "if they were building outside the wall, they would not be building in barbarian territory, because it would be considered theirs because they're COMMUNIST." Okay, to my opponent, I'm a communist, I want your house. Thanks... That made a lot of sense. That's not what communism is [1] first off, and second, Communism was developed by Karl Marx and Freidrich Engels, who, I hope my opponent agrees, were born WAY after China could ever have been classified as communist. [6] [7] [8] Finally, he agrees that it would be costly to transport equipment but disagrees that they would go as far as hundreds of miles past their country, but then fails to realize that workers had to walk all along the Great wall to build it which is THOUSANDS of miles long. My opponent has a lot of work to do here. 4. One wall He claims it is a fact that the Great Wall of China is "one wall". Look again to the source that my opponent didn't refute; rather, he chose to make the childish argument that an online encyclopedia is an unreliable source. I opened the picture this time; you can actually see that parts of the wall are disconnected. [9] 5. ??? I'm not sure why this argument went here because he referred to an argument that went in point 1. This is the organization issue I addressed, but I wanted my opponent to be able to follow the arguments. The missile analogy was already addressed. 6. ??? Also already addressed. Just to clarify about the points issue, I might as well have the link explaining it here. [10] 7. ??? For the third straight point, I'm not sure what argument my opponent is trying to make, but here, he challenges the validity of sources that he apparently didn't click on. The google link was for him to see a bird's eye view of the Great Wall and view the terrain outside of it; wikipedia was already addressed. As of now, there is no reason to vote Con. I urge a pro ballot. =========== Sources =========== [1] http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org... [3] http://www.infoplease.com... [4] http://en.wikipedia.org... [5] http://en.wikipedia.org... [6] http://www.enchantedlearning.com... (About the Great Wall; built 2000+ years ago) [7] http://www.historyguide.org... (Karl Marx short biography) [8] http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk... (F. Engels short biography) [9] http://en.wikipedia.org... [10] http://en.wikipedia.org...