The amount of foreign aid given by developed countries should be increased.

First I am going to defend my own case and then I will go on to attack my opponent's. I'd like to remind my opponent that all of this money that developed countries spend on foreign aid can be spent in a number of ways including money, food, and weapons. The truth is developed countries DO aid developing countries in the form of weapons because somehow that will help the people against whatever force they are fighting against. I said earlier that I concur with my opponent's definitions, and I do because he defined foreign aid as wealth given from one country to another. However, he didn't specifically define wealth. Wealth can be given in a number of ways. So my definition is basically the same as my opponent's but don't try to say that aiding developing countries with weapons that developed countries pay for is not a form of foreign aid. My opponent also stated that I only used the United States as an example of a developed country. He said, " You've taken one country that's responsible for the Global Financial Crisis, who's doing arguably the worst out of the developed countries, and then placed it on a pedestal to act as a general example of what all developed countries are going through" Where is the evidence of this? How did the U.S cause a global financial crisis? As far as I can see, the United States has given the world capitalism and the U.S dollar, which more and more countries are beginning to accept. And I used the United States as an example because it is the best example. As a single country, the U.S has given more foreign aid than any other nation. So to say that I have generalized developed countries' use of foreign aid, I am just giving the voters the facts about what happens when foreign aid is given in these numbers. I can give you another country as well. The UK gives almost 20 billion a year in foreign aid and to what end? They arm Saudi Arabia to fight in the war against the Houthi Rebels in Yemen. This is not a generalization anymore. It's a pattern. http://rt.com... https://en.wikipedia.org... https://en.wikipedia.org... My opponent began attacking my second contention by saying, "The whole argument afterwards is irrelevant, as this type of aid does not match the aid that is outlined in the definition. " The type of aid I mentioned is weapons, which are paid for and are therefore a form of wealth, so yes it does fit the definition. He also states, "Thus, the only contention my opponent has made is that Foreign Aid is harmful to the interests of developed countries because the United States (possibly the worst developed nation in terms of economics at this point in time) is near broke and borrows money from China in order to help the budget, coupled with the argument that foreign aid takes money from the poor and middle class and it is sent to dictators." If my U.S example does not satisfy my opponent, I can again refer to the U.K example in which billions of dollars in money and weapons are being transferred from the U.K to Saudi Arabia. The foreign aid turns into weapons of war and much less goes to help people who are actually starving in Saudi Arabia. My opponent also says that developed nations have more means than developing nations. This is definitely true, and this problem ought to be solved, but foreign aid isn't the answer. Again, the money goes to dictators and mostly becomes weapons of war rather than things that assist people in poverty. http://rt.com... My opponent argument seems to be irrelevant. He says, "However, to ensure that wealth is allocated correctly, we must send people in and personally be responsible for the transfer of aid and wealth. If a large portion of the developing nation believes it can stand on it's own, then we do not have to give foreign aid to them for now and allocate the wealth back into our own country." Well many countries already give aid to Israel which is likely to stand on its own as long as it has allies. And the resolution is about whether or not foreign aid should increased, not whether or not the system should be reformed. Now I will attack my opponent's arguments. Opponent's Contention 1: We have a moral obligation to help the poor. This is true. We do have a moral obligation to help the poor. I believe we should take care of the poor in our own country before we worry about those in other nations. Cities like Detroit and Chicago are crumbling and are exploding with crime. Nevertheless, we should also help those in other countries who are in need. But it is a fallacy to think that we can help them the same way we can help our own. For example, if the U.S federal government were to give a billion dollars to the city government of Detroit, which is crumbling, I trust that that money will be utilized correctly because the mayor of that city lives there and wants to fix the problems. If the federal government gives the same amount of money to a developing country, the money usually goes to a dictator who has other interests and is less likely to help the poor. I agree that we have an obligation to help the poor, but we need to seriously think about how to do that before we turn foreign aid. http://www.huffingtonpost.com... Opponent's Contention 2: Providing aid to poor countries allows a link/agreement between the two in which both nations benefit. This is only true in rare cases. For example, any developed country that gives money to Israel tends to have good relations with them. Many countries have collectively given hundreds of billions of dollars t Israel at the end of world war two. Most of these countries have good relations with Israel, but when you look at most other examples, there really isn't any correlation. According to the Washington Post, since the 1970's the U.S has tried to promote democracy in Egypt. The U.S spent billions in Egypt installing a democracy that eventually installed a more hostile regime from the Muslim Brotherhood. The U.S/Egypt relations were definitely not good after that. There have been examples like this throughout the middle east and it is clear that foreign aid does more harm than good in relations between countries. http://israelipalestinian.procon.org... http://www.washingtonpost.com... I look forward to my opponent's arguments.