Resolved: The US Ought to Aid Ukraine Militarily

As a side note, I wrote my first points with an emphasis on my arguments, not on rebuttal. Your First Contention:I would strongly disagree. The United States is first in external debt, and by a head start of about 7 trillion dollars. That makes the United States’ debt about 5.6 times as much as China, which is 5th on the debt list at around 3 Trillion. In case you forgot, the total, astronomical figure, sits at about 17.3 trillion dollars. The U. S. is in a begging position, not a giving position. Our money is not ours. That rule goes for everything. I’ll remind pro that it costs about a Million dollars per solider per year in Afghanistan. I’ll also remind pro that a single tank up for a civilian Airbus A319 costs around $15,000We cannot afford another war. Your Second Contention:To contradict pro, I’ll say that the United States’ position as “lead hegemon” is being seriously contested. The United States may not have been seriously challenged, but that does not make them the true lead power at this point. China has around twice the active military man-power the United States has. In total, they are 9th for total army manpower. North Korea, if it pulled together, would have a total force of around 9 Million, with China in the next place, at 7 Million. We may have nuclear status, but so does Russia, the UK, France, China, and India…and probably Pakistan. How would you like it if China and Russia decided it had to “look at what acts will be best for [their] country first and foremost” and it came to the conclusion that the U. S. was sucking the world dry, and it was time to stop it. To quote Newsroom “…there’s absolutely no evidence to support the statement that we’re the greatest country in the world. We’re 7th in literacy, 27th in math, 22nd in science, 49th in life expectancy, 178th in infant mortality, 3rd in median household income, Number 4 in labor force and Number 4 in exports, we lead the world in only three categories: Number of incarcerated citizens per capita, number of adults who believe angels are real, and defense spending where spend more than the next 26 countries combined, 25 of whom are allies”Other RebuttalsI’ll correct pro in my comparison to Afghanistan; I never linked Osama Bin Laden to United States funding. I said “We supported the Mujahedeen in Operation Cyclone”, which we did. It’s not controversial. It’s fact. As for al Qaeda, yes that is controversial, and should not be taken as serious proof until proven right or wrong. (. http://en.wikipedia.org...)If Afghanistan is no good, then look up Pol Pot. He was supported because he fought the Cambodian-Vietnam war when the U. S. left Vietnam. Pol Pot ended up killing some 25% of his population. The main fact is not that these leaders and countries did bad stuff. We know they did bad stuff, and we know that they probably would have done bad stuff anyway, what’s truly terrible is that the US supported them, and ignorance is no excuse – and we cannot let this ignorance continue. Your hegemon theory is flawed. It is idealistic and misses out on the human element. You use the Roman Empire as an example, which is fitting, being that they collapsed after growing fat, corrupt, and lazy, and accepting other people to fight their battles. The Roman life was quite brutal, and the senate was mostly corrupt. I’ll remind you that Julius Caesar was one of the most ruthless dictators the world had ever seen. For example, in the Gallic wars, they slaughtered entire towns that resisted Roman leadership and faith. He is thought to have slaughtered some 1 Million Gauls. World powers come and go. That is how it is. That is how it will always be. All we can do is hope the United States’ successor is kind on us all. There is no proof Russia is “trying to rise again”. Putin is not a Hitler. The world has changed dramatically since the 1930s. You just can’t go traipsing around Europe anymore. Our technology has changed, something you are forgetting. Ground wars are a thing of the past. Russia has nuclear power, and is not that far behind the U. S. for active nukes. Are you willing to take the chance, and suppose that Putin isn’t capable of nuclear war if pushed? As for my historical mindset, I would say the same thing. That was a European matter, not an American matter. We did not fail in that situation, the British and the French did. But I don’t want to debate history. Your U. S. invasion theory is extremely flawed and dissimilar to the Ukraine situation. Canada’s population is 1% American. Crimea has 58% Russians, and 24% Ukrainians. America has no history in Canada. Russia has a long history of owning Crimea. Who are you to say they can’t take Crimea, especially if the majority is Russian, and the majority wants to be Russian? Isn't that what Democracy is? Or am I mistaken? I've got a better scenario. What if the U. S. tried to invade Syria, and China threatened to aid the Syrians with a military presence? Would we “go back with our tail between our legs”?