BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
United States should keep a military presence I'm the Middle East.

I believe the United States should keep a military presence in the Middle East. This view is adopted based on military tactics, and the notion that the United Stated will remain the dominant military superpower. No country could possibly sustain any military against the United States if we maintain military forces in that particular region. Global markets also require stability in that particular region, and cargo ships should be able to travel freely in those regions. A military presence will also be able to provide security for cargo vessels passing through the waters near those areas. Lastly, I believe a presence should be maintained, but it must be tactical. I do believe our presence there is too great, and there are ways to still maintain forces in that region in reduced numbers.
Germany Could Have Won World War II

I see your points, and I don't agree with those. I think "Germany's main base of the attack" stands for its HQ. Germany actually had many of them, but you're talking like Hitler had only one; and I started the debate starting with Operation Barbarossa, so I'll write down here the only bunker that has been used as HQ and created during that period: "Werwolf", in Ukraine. Used between 1942 and 1943, only 3 times. You can check the Wikipedia page about Hitler's HQs here https://en.wikipedia.org...; And you can check the Werwolf's Wikipedia page here: https://en.wikipedia.org...(Wehrmacht_HQ) But, unfortunately, that is not the true problem here. The problem is the atomic bomb's radius, which would have had effects on EVERYTHING, not just the people inside of it, but also the terrain, for example. Or the houses, on the monuments, on the buildings. And it would have not hit only the center of Germany, but also the other parts of Europe as well, even if not in a direct way. For example, Edible food caught by the bomb's radiations could have been possibly eaten by someone not directly caught by the bomb itself...and you surely know how bad can be something radioactive in your body for hours. And these are merely few reasons to explain why we don't use the atomic bomb today.About the deception, you obviously refer to Operation Bodyguard; which it was NOT to deceive Japan. I repeat one of my previous statement: "Japan never had an active role on the war on the European scenario". It served only to deceive Germany, and it was successful. And, for your information, I am not German. I'm Italian.
Germany Could Have Won World War II

The aftermath would have been apocalyptic, the Pro debated. However, I disagree since 1) Germany's main base of the attack was in the dead center of Germany. If the atom bomb had been dropped on that location, the results would, ultimately, kill most civilians in the center of Germany, but also the troops and Hitler. The radiation could be sure to hit the other troops that were around the area, ultimately leading to Germany's downfall and surrender. 2) The Soviet Union wasn't happy with the German's, either. They were attacking from the east while the U.S. was attacking from the west. We could have told the soviets to evacuate the area before the bomb was dropped, and then they would be thankful to us for shortening the war and not getting them killed on purpose. If Oppenheimer actually dropped another atom bomb on Germany, since the U.S. had the technology and resources to do so, Most of Germany's troops would die, leaving Hitler exposed. The Americans would have invaded his house/base, and he would have committed suicide again, playing the roles of how the second world war ended. Germany could not have won at the beginning, either. They were winning, sure, against France and other surrounding countries. That was because they didn't have the resources and the technology. However, that changed as when the U.S. entered the war, they had a whole new battle strategy. First they sent a batch of troops to the D-day area, but that did not turn out so well for the American soldiers, but it acted as a distraction for Germany and Japan to send their troops so that the U.S. could bomb Japan. P.S. This is not trying to offend the people of Germany. If you are German, don't take this personally, please.
Germany Could Have Won World War II

To drop another atomic bomb would have meant serious military, economic, artistic and cultural damage to USA's allies and neutral countries as well, long after the war. Germany is right in the middle of Europe, so one single atomic bomb would have caused ENORMOUS damage. The aftermath would have been apocalyptic. Germany started its project earlier than USA's. I think this quote from Wikipedia will, hopefully, solve your doubts. "The German nuclear weapon project (German: Uranprojekt; informally known as the Uranverein; English: Uranium Society or Uranium Club), was a clandestine scientific effort led by Germany to develop and produce nuclear weapons during World War II. This program started in April 1939, just months after the discovery of nuclear fission in December 1938, but ended only months later due to the German invasion of Poland, after many notable physicists were drafted into the Wehrmacht." And I'll quote a few extra parts, as well: "Even with all four of these conditions in place the Manhattan Project succeeded only after the war in Europe had been brought to a conclusion. For the Manhattan Project, the second condition was met on 9 October 1941 or shortly thereafter. Germany fell short of what was required to make an atomic bomb. Mutual distrust existed between the German government and some scientists." "As to condition four, the high priority allocated to the Manhattan Project allowed for the recruitment and concentration of capable scientists on the project. In Germany, on the other hand, a great many young scientists and technicians who would have been of great use to such a project were conscripted into the German armed forces, while others had fled the country before the war due to antisemitism and political persecution. This, obviously, proves my point: Germany could have won and developed the atomic bomb first, if it wasn't for its terrible decisions. I'll reply to your other points as well: even if the Third Reich survived the war (and Hitler didn't kill himself), at the time of his death the Reich would have surely done like the Roman Empire during the Thirty Tyrants: the most notorious commanders and officials would have fought until death in an epic standout for glory...and eventually managed to stay in command, crushing its pretenders.The Space Race began 10 years later, in 1955: long after the Third Reich ceased to exist. No nation would seriously think about space, when it has a mighty enemy like Nazi Germany (which managed to take on the entire world and survive for years with a incompetent dictator) at its doorstep.Also, Japan was struck down AFTER Germany's catastrophic demise. And this deserves a particular mention: "All of Germany's troops were losing, and many of them died, while the center of the city was left open to attack and eventually, for US to conquer." Germany was alone. Fascist Italy ceased to exist before Germany and Japan, and Japan never had an active role on the war on the European scenario. The Allied were too far to conquer Berlin...except for the URSS, which managed to get there first.You know the rest.
Germany Could Have Won World War II

The U.S would easily defeat Germany by dropping another atomic bomb because they had the technology first. The U.S. were far more advanced in developing nuclear weapons compared to Germany's atomic bomb, which their weapon blew up their lab and lost all their material. It would take a lot of time to gain all of it back. The U.S already surrounded Germany with many forces and their F"rher committed suicide right before he was captured. Without a ruler, Germany will fall. Hitler was the one in power, and he was the one that did all the bad deeds to the country. 🇩🇪 Germany was running out of resources since their Axis Allies were falling. Japan was struck by 2 atom bombs, and the Soviet Union was investing their oil in the beginning of the space race. Germany was on it's own, and there was nothing they could do. All of Germany's troops were losing, and many of them died, while the center of the city was left open to attack and eventually, for US to conquer.
Germany Could Have Won World War II

My question is if the Third Reich could have, actually, won World War II. My answer is, obviously, yes.In fact, Germany went really close to victory during the early stages of the war. Operation Barbarossa's start is a perfect example: the western front was secured, since France became the puppet state of Vichy France under the command of Philippe Pétain (An Hitler's sympathizer) and Britain was too weak to organize an offensive against Nazi Germany by itself. If it was not for Hitler's stubborness he wouldn't have lost as many troops as he did in a pincer movement by the regrouped and reorganized Red Army. If he actually cared about his generals's tips, he would have conquered Russia. And if he didn't ally with Japan, USA would have never entered the war.And he lost, even if he managed to create a powerful and feared army. Which means a lot, considering the really heavy limitations Germany had because of the Treaty of Versailles. I'll cite Wikipedia here, for only one of its many facets."Germany was to demobilize sufficient soldiers by 31 March 1920 to leave an army of no more than 100,000 men in a maximum of seven infantry and three cavalry divisions. The treaty laid down the organisation of the divisions and support units, and the General Staff was to be dissolved."He made terrible decisions all by himself, and his pride ruined it all.
Rattlesnake Roundups Should Be Banned: Change My Mind

https://gizmodo.com... This article proves they are still conscious after their head is cut off, and are not just snapping on impulses. The way snakes are treated in roundups is cruel and unethical. The snakes are forced into a high stress environment, and then killed as people celebrate and enjoy the festivity. The point is not to stop the hunting of these animals just because they are non-game, but to stop roundups or take a more ethical approach to them. Population control is okay, but a glamorized massacre is wrong. If the goal of roundups is rattlesnake education, there is no reason to kill and gut them in front of children. If you are going to make it a "family-friendly" roundup, do it more like the San Antonio Rattlesnake Festival. http://www.centralpascochamber.com...
Rattlesnake Roundups Should Be Banned: Change My Mind

First off: http://www.cnn.com... Yes, guests of rattlesnake roundups do use the animal's blood to make handprints. Second off, yes, rattlesnake hunting seems fair. The main reason I am against rattlesnake roundups is because of the methods used to acquire the snakes, which is by pouring gasoline and propane into dens, as well as the treatment they are given. If you are hunting them, you could probably just kill them with snake shot right in the head. Bang. Done. However, with roundups, the animals are caged and put under severe stress, before being beheaded. Because of their biology, rattlesnakes can survive for up to an hour without their bodies, so they may still be conscious after beheading. This is why people get bitten by rattlesnakes even after killing them. Despite not being fully sentient, they still feel pain. Third, it is perfectly fine to kill a rattlesnake on your property, especially if you have livestock, pets, and family to protect. It is not okay to gather them in the masses to be executed in a festive manner. Also, before you argue that they are used to gather venom to produce anti-venom, lots of snake keepers already harvest venom in a humane manner without killing the snake. It is a great source of business for them. Also, it is relatively easy to avoid rattlesnakes. The key is to just pay attention and listen to the rattlesnake's distinct warning, and watch where you step while in rattlesnake country. Most people don't bother to pay attention, or actively seek out the snake, and I hate to say it, but at that point it's their fault they got bit. I also apologize for the misleading title. I am not against roundups completely because they do support the economy, but I am saying that they take it down by several notches in intensity. First, kill the snakes more humanely. Second, lower the amount killed. Third, for the love of god, don't make handprints out of their blood and try to glamorize killing them. I actually don't think your position is unreasonable, and is quite agreeable. Honestly, I was expecting a redneck to debate me and throw in religious crap about how snakes are the devil's spawn.
Superpower face off

Sorry it took me so long to respond, but I've been busy. Anyway, when The Flash gets enveloped in her telekinetic bubble, before it can crash down on him and Rogue, he starts vibrating so fast his molecules separate like when he wants to pass through a solid object. Now I realize that a telekinetic bubble is far from solid, but the same principle applies. As he is vibrating, he is no longer a single lump of mass but rather billions of separated molecules all moving back and forth at the speed of light. He passes harmlessly through the bubble, because Phoenix, powerful as she may be, cannot grab something moving at light speed. To do so, she would have to be able to focus at that same speed. To focus at light speed you have to have the power to move at that speed. Like how The Flash and Superman can view their surroundings while running. After exiting the bubble, he realizes that he will not survive this fight on his own and would rather be unconscious than dead, so he runs over to Rogue and vibrates through her bubble. He solidifies just long enough to touch her hand, giving her his power and falling unconscious. She vibrates out of the bubble much like he did. Since he never stopped moving at light speed, this has all taken place in less than a nanosecond. She spears behind The Hulk, touching him and taking him out of the fight. In the meantime, Manhunter once again grabs Goku with telekinesis and sends him flying towards the sun. The fight is now two people on each side are awake, Goku is flying through the air, and Phoenix is standing there watching all of this transpire faster than she can even see or sense it, much less react. Your move ;)
Superpower face off

ok so rogue flies at flash since the phoenix is looking at the flash from a distance and lifting/choking him, she would be able to see if someone gets near the flash, now she can easily use her powers on two things at once. she could do 10 things at once very easily so phoenix sees rouge trying to go to the flash and traps her in a force field and crushes her with her power and stops goku from flying into her while she kills the flash and rouge. so phoenix crushes flash and rouge with her grasp and they die. goku is just flying in mid air hulk is waiting for action and u have two people dead. phoenix now being done of ur other two people goes after martian man hunter. she is a waaaaay more powerful telepath then him sooo i would like to see what u can come up with next =)
Superpower face off

Well, before Hulk lands, Rogue flies out of range of the shock wave that Hulk will produce as he lands and flies to The Flash and touches him, absorbing his speed and rendering him temporarily unconscious. Martian Manhunter phases out of physical form before Goku can land a hit and uses telekinesis to send him flying into Phoenix, disrupting her telekinetic choke hold on The Flash. Now Phoenix and Goku are in a pile on the ground as Hulk lands. You're up.
Superpower face off

Ok so you make a team of three super hero's or villains and we have a battle to the death!!! debate on how your team will win Rules: you can not choose the people who i have chosen you cant make up your people. nobody with omniscient omnipresent omnipotent ....you get it no omni all powerful type of powers or anything near that powerful. no magic. that way my opponent doesn't just say that they poof my characters away No gods. Basic artillery. no super ultra death ray that will denigrate everything just there basic arsenal (for example the bfg in doom isn't allowed) My Team: The Incredible Hulk, the phoenix (jean grey), and goku
Superpower face off

Well 1: idk how the same principle could possible apply, a telepath is using brain power, idk how the heck u gonna vibrate through brain power. .. . wait a second not even, you said " Now I realize that a telekinetic bubble is far from solid". .. now since u are not in a solid object, you have nothing to vibrate through you are just stuck in mid air. if you turn into molecules then u would just be stuck in mid air as molecules. .. . she has the flash in mid air under her control she can force him to not move witch she would probably do or already is doing. .. . 2: even if you could do that, i doubt flash can go from 0- to light speed in a matter of a nano second especially if he is in mid air. let alone turn into molecules get from where he is to where rouge is, then slow down enough to TELL rouge to take his powers (because molecules cant talk) or to just give her his powers and then get unconscious. .. .. .also if he was unconscious and with out powers as molecules he will surely die so then he would have to stop completely before rouge touched him, and if he did stop completely we will be right back where we started- flash in phoenixes grasp so highly illogical 3: also i said phoenix crushed rouge. a being such as herself should not take no more than 1 second to crush someone with her power already in her grasp. so by the time anything happened she would be dead BUT EVEN IF YOU STILL DID EVERYTHING THAT I JUST STATED COULDN'T HAPPEN 4 Like i said before the hulk is watching everything waiting for battle. now i am sorry for not mentioning which hulk i am using but i am using the the most recent hulk (no reason not too) that has been through everything and fought his own son who is a smarter hulk with battle skills. i am using WWH. (same with goku, i am using goku at the end of GT. .. now idk which flash ur using but i would assume that you are using that flash at his most powerful) . .. .he would see rouge coming because hulk is not that slow as many people may know. if anything he will thunderclap in her face and ground and pound BUT YET STILL IMA GO BY WHAT U SAID WOULD HAPPEN because i think i already have the extreme upper-hand by what i said. so goku instant transmissions back to the area and goes to fight rouge as a ssj 2 and phoenix goes against Martian man hunter in a battle of wits (telepathy), she goes inside his head and. .. . well we all know what is going to happen. :D keep in mind when goku first fought burter and jice he was dodging there attacks so fast that he didnt even look like he was moving. also at ssj 1 (even faster) goku moves so fast that he can not even be seen (as with his fight with cell) ALSO goku now at his base form makes light work of cell (so his current base form is more powerful then his moving so fast that he cant even be seen ssj1) so as an ssj 2 he is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay faster then he was . so he is faster than *moving so fast he can not even be seen*. minus well be at light speed. im sure he can keep up with rouge *side note: when rock lee opens 5 gates he is faster than the speed of sound.
Earth is a globe

Earth is a sphere, rotating at 1000 mph around the sun (which is 93,000,000 miles away.) I met this youth in the comments of a flat earth debate, he did say that flat earth is a fact, he said he would challenge me but I have not received anything, assuming he forgot, I decided to challenge him. Where to find the comment: http://www.debate.org... Rounds: 1) Acceptance 2) Opinions 3) Rebuttals 4) Defence Rules: 1) No trolling 2) No ad hominem 3) No forfeiting 4) Burden of proof is shared 5) Bring as much sources as possible and choose valid and reputable sources Good luck on this debate.
Gay marriage should be legalized in the United States.

This debate is being set up to argue the resolution that gay marriage should be legalized in the United States. I had intended for this to be a debate between myself and 16kAdams, but according to his profile, he is not accepting debate challenges at this time; therefore, if someone else beats him to picking up the gauntlet, so be it. Since I am the one making the claim that gay marriage should be legalized in the United States, I shoulder the burden of proof. Because I shoulder the burden of proof, it is appropriate that I have both the first word and the last word in this debate, as is common both in American courts and in other debates of this type. I will speak first, and I will speak last. To compensate for this, the length of my closing statement should not exceed the total unused character count in my previous statements. To put it another way, the total character count of my three statements (following this round) should not exceed 16,000, the same count that my opponent will have following this round. The debate will proceed as follows: Round 1: Acceptances. Round 2: Pro's first statement, Con's first statement. Round 3: Pros' second statement, Con's second statement. Round 4: Pro's final statement, Con does not argue. In lieu of argument, Con should copy/paste the following sentence into the final round: "By mutual agreement, no argument will be posted in this space." There should be no games with semantics in this debate. Once 16kAdams, or whoever beats him to the punch, accepts my debate challenge, I will post my opening statement.
We would all be safer if everyone of sound mind was armed

My opponent appears to have forgotten his own resolution. "We would all be safer if everyone of sound mind was armed". What this means is that he believes, that a society in which every adult( I'm assuming adult. He didn't specify but semantics aren't really my thing) is legally allowed to carry a concealed weapon on them at all times would be a safer society. I am not arguing against the right to carry a gun. I myself have two. I just don't believe a fully armed society is better for anyone. My opponent has not addressed any of my points so extend my argument into the next round. My opponent did not post the source of his information, but nevertheless I've found it. http://gunowners.org... Let the record show that I do NOT argue against most of his facts as they make my case for me. Our current stance on gun control is working. Like I stated before 10% of violent crimes don't involve guns. My opponent thinks the world operates like Grand Theft Auto and every criminal has a gun. The truth is 90% of them can't afford it. But see if you're arming everyone, that number goes through the roof. Even if you make the case to say that ex-cons won't be issued firearms, every murderer has a first kill.