The IMF and its agents could beat MI6 and its agents in a fight

3 rounds4000 characters24 hours between roundsIMF = The Impossible Missions Force, the spy agency featured in the 'Mission Impossible' films starring Tom CruiseMI6 = The spy agency that is the Britain equivalent of the CIA that is featured in the 'James Bond' filmshttps://en.wikipedia.org...https://en.wikipedia.org...In this debate I will argue that the IMF, if it were real, would outmatch MI6 in a showdown. Con will argue that MI6 would outmatch the IMF. Con CANNOT argue that MI6 would win because the IMF doesn't truly exist, con MUST treat the IMF like it is an actual agency that does exist, and argue that MI6 would still outmatch them, or they will forfeit the full debate. Arguments for why the IMF would outmatch MI6:1) Number of agents in the field. MI6 has many agents in the field, but as shown throughout the James Bond franchise, MI6 agents never really team up with each other to accomplish their objectives. Its always James Bond doing missions on his own with the help of some gadgets he's previously been provided with. The IMF on the other hand frequently fields multiple agents on the same missions, as evidenced in Mission Impossible Ghost Protocol, Mission Impossible Rogue Nation, etc. In a field battle between agents of MI6 and the IMF, IMF forces would triumph over MI6 because IMF agents work as very integrated teams while MI6 agents routinely fly solo and fight on their own. While James Bond and Ethan Hunt might be equals, the teammates that Ethan Hunt has with him on missions would greatly assist him in beating James bond in battle, and the same would be true in other matchups between agents of the IMF, and agents of MI6, since MI6 agents fight solo, while IMF agents fight in teams. 2) Level of FundingThe IMF is funded by the United States government, a nation that is very notorious for pouring boatloads of money into intelligence and military agencies when such funding arguably isnt even needed in the first place. Great Britain on the other hand is far more limited in providing funding to its intelligence services and military branches, and spends only a fraction (1/7th) on its military that the US does ($581 billion from the US compared to $62 billion by the UK)https://en.wikipedia.org...While both the IMF and MI6 are even in terms of high tech weaponry, a prolonged fight/struggle between the IMF and MI6 agencies would favor the IMF since the IMF has far better funding from the US government than MI6 does from their UK government. 3) Level of secrecyIn 'Mission Impossible Rogue Nation', the IMF conceals its activities in the field from a Senate oversight committee trying to shut the IMF down, as indicated in the opening and closing scenes, with Jeremy Renner saying "I can neither confirm nor deny any details about any operation without the permission of the Secretary" whenever he is asked a question. The IMF though doesnt have an acting secretary, meaning that through this loophole the IMF can deny any request by Congress to explain its activities in the field and avoid oversight as a result. http://www.imdb.com...In 'Skyfall' however, MI6 is brought before a public inquiry from Parliament to explain how it failed on one of its missions, and MI6 cannot easily explain dismiss their mistakes or their activities that led to the negative result. https://en.wikipedia.org...This means that the IMF can operate more covertly without fear of government oversight than MI6 can, allowing the IMF to fight dirtier when MI6 cannot. This gives the IMF that much more of an edge over MI6 since MI6 has to answer to the UK government for its conduct than the IMF has to do to the US government. It is the nature of how their field agents operate, the disparity in funding between both agencies, and the difference in oversight that is held over each agency that is why the IMF could beat MI6 in a fight.