azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: U.S.A!

The EU has the highest GDP in the world.The countries of North America have a higher combined GDP than that of England, but does it really make sense to compare a group of economies to a single economy? Of course, there are more connections between the EU member countries than that of the members of the NAFTA but the fact remains: you are combining a group of countries to gain the ability to surpass one. The only significance that I can see in comparing the economy of the EU to the economy of the US is that it takes most of the EU member countries to equal the single American economy. A train versus two of the largest and most important buildings in the United States?Please do not pretend as if the same relatively proportional event could not have occurred in England. The absence of an attack does not render the possibility of a past attack impossible or even improbable. If England was as great a target as the United States, its doubtful to believe that England would not have been attacked.
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: U.S.A!

The countries of North America have a higher combined GDP than that of England, but does it really make sense to compare a group of economies to a single economy?That is irrelevant. I was refuting the notion that the U.S has the highest GDP, which it does not.
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: ENGLAND!

I was refuting the notion that the U.S has the highest GDP, which it does not.In a separate post on the same topic you said that "a nation is merely a group of people bound together by a common trait". A question that I have to ask is: what is the common trait between an international trading bloc with a population of 500 million and a country divided into states that has a population of 300 million. If the European Union "equates to the U.S federation in terms of the resources available to it", then how is there a difference of 200 million in relation to the number of possible consumers in each country?
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: ENGLAND!

what is the common trait between an international trading bloc with a population of 500 million and a country divided into states that has a population of 300 million.One hardly needs to be supplied, as it was never inferred that they were the same nation.If the European Union "equates to the U.S federation in terms of the resources available to it", then how is there a difference of 200 million in relation to the number of possible consumers in each country?Resources are quite the opposite to consumers.
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: U.S.A!

One hardly needs to be supplied, as it was never inferred that they were the same nation.How is that a common trait?Resources are quite the opposite to consumers.A higher total population means more human capital for labor. The more human capital generates money and, along with the higher population, creates consumers who increase the GDP.
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: ENGLAND!

yeah, but you tagged you arhgument as England, bahahahaha :D
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: ENGLAND!

i love it, absolute proof that england is better. an american is physically incapable of clicking a button.i can picture it now, (in between big macs)"cummon mouse move!, ah screw it ill just click england. omnomnom." (continues eating)lol feston a serious note, the uk kicks ass.
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: U.S.A!

i can picture it now, (in between big macs)"cummon mouse move!, ah screw it ill just click england. omnomnom." (continues eating)So is this you proving how England is better?lol festIn saying that I now realize you are either a preteen, or are suffering from being in the mental state of one.on a serious note, the uk kicks ass.How so? Fish n' chips have gotten to you my friend, go have yourself a scone and mock the biggest power in the world. However do these two actions separately, as I wouldn't want to see you hurt yourself trying to multi-task.
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: ENGLAND!

I think he was joking? maybe? ?
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: U.S.A!

I think he lacks the capability of making a serious post, honestly after seeing most of his posts on other debates I have come to the conclusion that he does not have the mental capacity to make an argument that has less than five grammatical errors.Did you have an argument for what I posted? Otherwise the notification for a dispute was rather worthless.
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: ENGLAND!

Yes, my point was that he was joking. As for grammatical errors, whilst being undesirable, they do not render an argument invalid.
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: U.S.A!

Yes, my point was that he was joking.One who jokes all the time is within himself a fool, defending a fool for no other reason than to point out that the person is a fool seems a tad bit worthless. As for grammatical errors, whilst being undesirable, they do not render an argument invalid.Did I say grammatical errors make an argument invalid? I was merely building a case for which I made what seemed, in your eyes, to be an overly aggressive dispute of his initial post.my point wasWhat is your point in disputing me? This debate is on whether or not England is better than the United States and vice-versa, you are pulling away from the debate at hand to defend a fool on whether or not I was harsh on my response to his post. In which case you trying to tell me this was off topic within itself.So once again, do you have a point in disputing me?
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: ENGLAND!

Ok you really need to get a life outside of this website; you clearly take life far too seriously.First of all i do not joke all of the time, I try to enjoy life and while that may come across to many of you as me spending my life larking about, i can assure you that is not the case. Now while you may argue that his argument for the grammatical errors is over aggressive, he has a valid point and in your own words "do you have a point in disputing it."Finally how dare you call me a fool, this has no point in an argument and you in yourself have no point in which to dispute the argument.I do not expect a reply from this and in future i hope that you will learn to try to use valid arguments, also i hope that in future you do learn to distinguish when a person is making a joke..
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: U.S.A!

Ok you really need to get a life outside of this websiteI spend roughly 10 minutes a day on this website at the maximum, just post a few of my thoughts and get on with my day.you clearly take life far too seriously.Oh I have a sense of humor, it just appeals to people who have gotten past elementary school.First of all i do not joke all of the timeAll of the posts I have seen you make are foolish within themselves.Now while you may argue that his argument for the grammatical errors is over aggressiveI was disputing him for calling me over aggressive, and was saying you appear to be a fool ;)he has a valid point and in your own words "do you have a point in disputing it."I disputed your argument due to the way it was set up. Your point was to make fun of Americans whom you stereotypically put us as obese and unable to even click the correct side. Your joke was distasteful and overly child like, it was also the 4th or 5th argument I had seen you make that was overly childlike in nature, and had quite frankly gotten annoyed at seeing them.Finally how dare you call me a fool,Act as a fool be called a fool, being a bit antithetic there Jeremy.this has no point in an argument and you in yourself have no point in which to dispute the argument.My point in disputing your argument was that it was distasteful in my opinion, and factually extremely childlike.I do not expect a reply from this and in future i hope that you will learn to try to use valid argumentsHahaha.also i hope that in future you do learn to distinguish when a person is making a joke.Oh I could tell you were making a joke, refer to my above comments.
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: ENGLAND!

like i say,either use a valid arguement or not.all you have done there is work in the word fool as many times as posible (maybe if the americans had a better education system, you would have a broader vocabulary) and made no points what so ever with regards to the arguement. now do you have a point you wish to convey about the given topic, or are you just going to continue wasting my time
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: U.S.A!

like i say,either use a valid arguement or not.Maybe if British people had a better education system you wouldn't misspell an average of one word per sentence, my vocabulary ( judging by what I have read you type ) is far broader than yours.and made no points what so ever with regards to the arguement.I didn't pull us off subject mate, you might want to re read previous posts before pointing your finger rashly as my original dispute did nothing but make a point towards your argument.now do you have a point you wish to convey about the given topic, or are you just going to continue wasting my timeIf I am wasting your time I suggest you don't reply, as me replying to your perforated arguments gives me nothing but easy points.
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: ENGLAND!

England I have lived in england my entire life the best country since 1945 when either Hitler shot himself and then his crew let england defeat them in the war england should of beat them any way. ENGLAND MUST WIN MY VOTE!!!!!
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: ENGLAND!

Which country is better - England or U.S.A?England because there are lesss fags there.
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: ENGLAND!

I am always happy when someone sets Britain and U.S.A against each other on a debate, as we are "apparently" great allies.The British Empire has been the biggest empire in all history we could have easily managed it and led the world into the next century. But unfortunately we got dragged into the world wars in which our armed forces were weaken considerably and our colonies followed the example of the U.S and revolted, so we just gave it up. At the moment I believe that we are a form of "retired" country who are waiting to step back in, but we have left the biggest mark on the world.The United States after revolting were a decent nation, but moving onto the next millennium they have got worse and worse, they made a huge, fat, profit on the 1st world war selling things to of Europe, then failed to help us(their apparent "allies") when we were at out worst during WWII, then after we start to win they join us.(I don't know about the rest of you but I think that the U.S only joined the war to show of their weapons to Russia, pearl harbour is just an excuse) even when Japan started to surrender the U.S nuke their towns , not army bases or military airports, but towns.They have started things that have failed(prohibition, league of nations etc.) and now they have thrown away traditions and the valued ways of their forefathers for modern day junk, they then proceed to force this modern day rubbish on the rest of the world. I have seen many "americanized" places in England which I am disgusted by.
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: U.S.A!

The British Empire has been the biggest empire in all history we could have easily managed it and led the world into the next century. But unfortunately we got dragged into the world wars in which our armed forces were weaken considerablyYour own fault. You know the history of empires. The military of Empires often become over-strained. Put you interest on too many fronts and your resources become spread too thin. If not for the rebellion of your colonies, your empire could have suffered the same fate of many past empires.our colonies followed the example of the U.S and revoltedYes, because of English tyranny.failed to help us(their apparent "allies") when we were at out worst during WWII, then after we start to win they join us.We didn't have a dog in that fight. We declared war on japan and Germany declared war on us, if not for the fact that German U-boats were killing American civilians we would not have had anything to do with Germany. Why do you think we were obligated to help you and yet where were the Englishmen when we were fighting the Japanese?Hypocrisy!pearl harbour is just an excuseYes, the death of 2,300 of our service-members, 1,100 wounded, the destruction of 180 aircraft, and the sinking of several warships was just an "excuse"...You have the audacity to say this.They have started things that have failedAnd your country hasn't? What was that you said about blind patriotism again? Pot meet kettle.now they have thrown away traditions and the valued ways of their forefathersLike monarchy.
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: ENGLAND!

"Your own fault. You know the history of empires. The military of Empires often become over-strained. Put you interest on too many fronts and your resources become spread too thin. If not for the rebellion of your colonies, your empire could have suffered the same fate of many past empires."We were culturally and industrially advancing the colonies of our empire(e.g railways all over India) I doubt they would want to rebel on people who are helping them. Also when i say dragged i literally mean that, we were pulled into the war because we were allies with France and Russia and Belgium, and because of the League of Nations which your country set up. "Yes, because of English tyranny."We were a democracy, I don't see where tyranny appeared."We didn't have a dog in that fight. We declared war on japan and Germany declared war on us, if not for the fact that German U-boats were killing American civilians we would not have had anything to do with Germany. Why do you think we were obligated to help you and yet where were the Englishmen when we were fighting the Japanese?Hypocrisy!"We didn't fight the Japanese because they were are allies in WWI, so in other words, you dont help us and then attack our allies."Yes, the death of 2,300 of our service-members, 1,100 wounded, the destruction of 180 aircraft, and the sinking of several warships was just an "excuse"...You have the audacity to say this."and over 300,000 innocent japanese people died from your nukes, even though they were planning to surrender."And your country hasn't? What was that you said about blind patriotism again? Pot meet kettle."I would like you to name some, here are a few of your country's failures:League of NationsVietnam warTop secret government cables that was publishedThe very recent oil spill, I cannot beleive you have the audacity to blame my country for something your american workers cocked up.etc."Like monarchy."I was meaning the basic morals you learn in childhood which your city culture has thrown away, you don't care about under-aged sex and even provide condoms for it, you have pollutted the air with extreme violence and pornography and replaced the world with new generation of rebel's.(though that last point was well played)
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: U.S.A!

We were culturally and industrially advancing the colonies of our empire(e.g railways all over India) I doubt they would want to rebel on people who are helping them.Yes, and the KKK contributed a lot to charity, these hardly makes up for some of the bad things they did. Likewise, your colonies revolted because of your oppression and control. In fact Gandhi, a man recognized as one of the greatest humanitarians of all time, spent much of his life protesting the exploitation of his country by the British. He said that the parliament of England was the epitome of corruption, having lived under their rule in 3 different countries. Also when i say dragged i literally mean that, we were pulled into the war because we were allies with France and Russia and Belgium, and because of the League of Nations which your country set up.Precisely why the United States wanted to stay out of war, which it maintained until it came under direct attack by the Japanese and German U-boats.We were a democracy, I don't see where tyranny appeared.You were, but your colonies were not. They had little say in what decisions you made of their countries. All colonists were 2nd class citizens.We didn't fight the Japanese because they were are allies in WWI, so in other words, you dont help us and then attack our allies.They attacked us....And what great allies they were, when they attacked British colonies, yes? Perhaps you should brush up on your history. and over 300,000 innocent japanese people died from your nukes, even though they were planning to surrender.Planing to surrender? Who told you this? They didn't even surrender AFTER the first bomb, what makes you think they were planning to surrender?I would like you to name some, here are a few of your country's failuresAnd here are a few of yours:MonarchyAmerican Revolutionary warAnglo-Spanish war2nd and 3rd Anglo Dutch warHundred years warOpium tradeAberfanPiper Alpha FireEvery colony they've lost."climate-gate"British Intelligence leak of Iraq invasion strategyThe very recent oil spillYou must mean the BP (British Petroleum) spill, yes?I was meaning the basic morals you learn in childhood which your city culture has thrown away, you don't care about under-aged sex and even provide condoms for itWe provide condoms precisely because we DO CARE. As you might be vaguely aware, denying juveniles condoms does not prevent them from having under-aged sex. However condoms do greatly reduce the risks of contracting STDs and prevent unwanted pregnancies.The desirability of sex to youth, is mostly a side-effect of the free market. Sex sells, and youth are very impressionable and so these sexed-up commercials/advertisements are bound to influence their attitudes.you have pollutted the air with extreme violence and pornographyOh please do speak on the morality of pornography, I would love to hear this!
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: ENGLAND!

"We have been a sovereign nation for 200 years. There is nothing to prevent us from having a colony."The veiws of your people, during a large amount of time within the 1900s-1950s the U.S citizens wanted to remain seperate from the rest of the world(isolationism)."The US has little control over what private businesses do in foreign nations."But we do, when we heard how cruel the East India Company was treating india we disbanded them."That may have been your original statement but on multiples occasions you've equivocated this with "The USA didn't help us" which is false."I only shortened it to save time and space, I meant the same as the original statement(maybe I should have made this more clear)"I will agree that your country helped us if you admit that we helped you, in WW2. Sound fair?"Fair. "Which means it's more powerful, somehow? Few countries have had any interest in conquering Siberia."One of the main reasons that Britain failed to keep hold of America was because the size of their army just couldn't cover the whole of the U.S"There were military installations in both cities. Japan is a very crowded country, a nuclear attack on any military installation would have resulted in massive civilian casualties, it is unavoidable."Point taken, I no longer wish to discuss the ethics of nuking."The idea that you could possibly construct a list of all of the failures of a nation and compare it accurately and objectively to another nation is grossly naive. "And I completly agree with that."Appearance or not, your argument was not even worth addressing. You could come up with a list American Failures and I would come up with a list of British Failures, then you would come up with some more, then I would come up with some more...which would boil down to a pissing contest which really doesn't prove anything. "When you came up with a list of my country's "failures" I dealt with them. "Even if by some chance miracle you came up with every single American failure in history, and presented them in an unbiased way and I did the same. We would have to take into account which Nation has more failures and how severe the failures were, we'd also have to take into account the fact that your nation is much older, then come to a conclusion based on our subjective perception of how severe each failure is.So you can see why this argument could not possibly amount to anything."You could say the whole debate is about the rights and wrongs of each country,"You mean "smash statements" based on terms that you invented AFTER THE FACT? No sorry, it doesn't work that way.You cannot say, "well I said this, but I meant this, therefore your arguments are wrong". You've committed a logical fallacy called "Moving the Goalposts".http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts  "I did say sorry, but once again you completly ignore all mty evidence.
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: U.S.A!

The veiws of your people, during a large amount of time within the 1900s-1950s the U.S citizens wanted to remain seperate from the rest of the world(isolationism).The United States maintained a non-interventionist policy for most of the 18th and 19th century, something I wish we would return to. Part of the reason we were so reluctant in joining WWI.But we do, when we heard how cruel the East India Company was treating india we disbanded them.Yes, and it only took you about 300 years and an Indian mutiny...how thoughtful of you. One of the main reasons that Britain failed to keep hold of America was because the size of their army just couldn't cover the whole of the U.SSorry, you're trying to equate the size of a nation with it's population. This is simply false. The population of Japan is nearly 4 times larger than the population of Canada.When you came up with a list of my country's "failures" I dealt with them.Are you certain about that? Or did you just then defer to American failures?I did say sorry, but once again you completly ignore all mty evidenceEvidence of what exactly? That we had allies in almost all of our wars? I never said we didn't, so your evidence was completely irrelevant.If you actually go back and look at the posts, you had originally said that the American Revolutionary war was one of few wars we won, then when I listed numerous other wars that we won you then claimed we didn't win the revolutionary war on our own. So you either contradicted yourself or you are subtlety changing your arguments mid-debate. You did the same thing in the when we were talking about the world wars which you claimed we didn't help you, I provide examples of the food, weapons, and supplies we gave you even before we entered the war (both times), you tried (unsuccessfully) arguing that these supplies didn't help at all, then you went on to say we didn't help you...when you needed it.You can't even keep your arguments consistent.
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: ENGLAND!

Englands got Mcdonalds, KFC, Taco Bell, Subway, Coca Cola was invented in England :p.We got a better football and rugby team than your country. you stole our language, way of writing. Our countrys more cleaner, also England is known to be one of the most greenest and eco freindly country in the planet. Our countrys more fitter than yours as nearly 75% of america is full of obesety. Although the recession, we're a bignation. we invented Dell, Alienware, HTC and the most popular and best technoligy the world knows today. So on...
Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: ENGLAND!

I really love the USA and feel a lot of kinship with most Americans.However England is my home, my land and the land of my ancestors for thousands of years...the home of the English language and fine ales and decent roast dinners.I've been to the USA many times and could live there easily...but England will always be in my heart.