Saito is a better role model than Kenshin.

CONT 1 1) My opponent contest my argument concerning his contention by first claiming that Kenshin's evil enemies all end up dead. This is claimed to indicate that Kenshin's problems were solved by luck rather than his ideals, hence such a strategy poses the enormous risk that the bad guys won't do themselves in. However, his conclusion couldn't be further from the truth. For instance, let us take into account the result of Kenshin's battle with Jinei. Although it did result in Jinei committing suicide, the fact of the matter is that Kenshin had already broken his the tendons in his arm that allow him to be a threat while wielding a sword. Taking this into consideration, we can also consider the demise of the first antagonist in the series (Hiruma Gohei) and note that Kenshin simply broke his hands. What do these two instances have in common? Adversaries were completely removed from being considered a threat to anyone without having to kill them. In other words, reliance on luck is not necessary when upholding Kenshin's ideals, contrary to what my opponent would have you believe. Kenshin could have just as easily crippled Shishio from being able to kill anyone else and he most certainly would have if not for the explosion. 2) PRO questions me on whether or not I believe Shishion needed to be killed? I'd say he didn't. I'd even go so far as to claim that he could have been rehabilitated. We have to keep in mind that this was a man who had never tasted defeat and had lived his entire life on the principal of survival of the fittest. Not to mention that in spite of his rash ideas, he was regarded as being highly intelligent. To be defeated, hence proven wrong by Kenshin would have gave him ample motivation to doubt his own philosophy. To add, Kenshin could have simply crippled him as he has former opponents, thus preventing Shishio from being able to escape any prison. I say all of this because this is precisely what occurred during Kenshin's prior battles with Aoshi and Soujiro (minus the crippling part). Both warriors who could be regarded as homicidal maniacs were rehabilitated due both to Kenshin's swordsman's skills as well as his deep understanding psychology (or perhaps just an understanding of fellow warriors). 3) PRO claims that my claim on Kenshin's superior mental fortitude is flawed. His estimation of Saito's character is quite false as Saito was shown trying to kill Kenshin in the very video he posted, in spite of the fact that Kenshin isn't evil, nor was it even his assignment to kill Kenshin. 4) As I said, I would clarify on my comment if necessary. The point I'm getting at with "the endless cycle of hatred" idea is that justification of killing as a means to end conflict is simply going to encourage more killings. Kenshin's ideals are better as they not only don't abide by this "endless cycle of hatred", but they even serve to encourage rehabilitation and become peaceful with one another. As we can see from our current prominent world philosophies, the elimination of blood shead is an effective way to better society. CONT 2: Even if we are to argue in accordance to the anime, Saito's commitment to his wife is vastly inferior to Kenshin's committment to Kaoru. I reiterate the point I made at the end of the previous round: Saito himself had claimed that it didn't matter if he had died after killing Shishio; killing Shishio (or rather Aku Soku Zan) was all that was important. He wasn't concerned with how his wife would feel about his deathl he was only concerned with his extreme values. This mindset is quite selfish. If there is any commitment between Saito and his wife, it certainly isn't much. On the other hand, Kenshin was clearly shown concerned with getting back to Kaoru rather than stopping Shishio at the price of dying. Fumbling every now and then when it comes romantic opportunities does not compare to this. CONTENTION #3: 1) PRO points out that it's irrelevant that Saito was not the one to originate the idea of recruiting Kenshin,however I'd be inclined to disagree. Once we move past the idea of recruiting Kenshin, the execution of such a plan is hardly a feat. All Saito had to do was fight kenshin to test his strength, only to then tell him about how he was needed in Kyoto. Incidentally, Saito couldn't even do this properly. Instead (as can be seen in the video), Saito is simply lulled into a battle to the death with Kenshin, only for his superior to end up having to clean up his mess. Unless my opponent can explain what brilliance there could have possible been in Saito's handling of an assignment given to him, I'm afraid there is no reason to buy this argument posited by CON. 2) Once more, PRO argues that it was all part of Saito's plan for Sano to be in Kyoto. He explains that Saito's goading was an attempt to inspire Sanosuke to greater achievement. However, this is clearly false we ALWAYS see Saito goading Sanosuke. Even AFTER he was in Kyoto. In fact, he does this all the way up to the battle with Shishio (he even did it during battle as I showed in the previous round). In essence, evidence points to such goading simply being in Saito's nature. I challenge my opponent to present a direct quote which indicates that this was part of Saito's plan. Otherwise, we have every reason to believe it wasn't. In regards to Saito's fight with Sanosuke, I would request that everyone observe the video to the right: http://www.youtube.com... Notice that Saito DID attack Sanosuke's right shoulder (twice I might add). Everything points to my characterization of Saito rather than my opponent's. If anything, it's more reasonable to believe that Saito's mock battle with Sanosuke was simply a means to show him that he didn't have what it takes to fight in Kyoto . . . only Sano ended up surprising him in the end. 3) Kenshin's defeat of Shishio was only the culmination of a group effort since he had been severely injured in his two previous back to back battles. There is ample reason to believe that a completely refreshed Kenshin would not have required any assistance. Granted, Saito had been injured as well during his initial encounter with Shishio, but he had only been injured by one opponent (one who was inferior to Kenshin's two opponents) not to mention that Shishio himself claims that Saito would not have been able to best him even at full strength. Furthermore, one could say that Saito was just as much as a loner as Kenshin. After all, he had come into the battle with the intents of killing Shishio himself. Aoshi was the only one who was trying to buy time for Kenshin to recover, hence the only one who wasn't a loner in terms of the battle. Furthermore, when again taking into consideration that Saito was simply "following orders", there's absolutely no reason to describe him as a team player, much less someone with a plan. 4) PRO claims there is not the slightest evidence that Kenshin was concerned about sacrificing his life to save the world from evil. ON the contrary, the second video I provided proves this beyond a notion of a doubt. The flashbacks of what Kenshin's teacher had taught him as well as all those dear to him even leads him to say "The will to live is stronger; stronger than anything else." He was concerned about sacrificing his life (which he had considered being okay with prior to the flashbacks in said video) and he was concerned about the impact this would have. As I've already discussed, Kenshin's vow is most important as its principals are the ingredients to true peace. Outta space and time. Will have to drop the last contention I made and concede. :( Later.