azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

What, im serious, what? I wish you knew what it was like to be in war zone, to be in an insecure hostile place being bombed by a hostile foreign power. I bet all your joking and not giving a shit would stop quite fucking quickly.The fact that you dont emphatise or even sympathise with these people is one thing. That only shows you up to be completely self-interested but supporting what your government does in your name with full knowledge of it makes you a very evil man.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Well....., what about those poor Americans that got killed by Somali Pirates?http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat-matrix/archives/2011/02/somali_pirates_kill_four_us_ci.php
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding NO

I absolutely agree. Of course we can and will destroy terrorism, but not with Non-ViolenceI can't believe those pansies want to do nothing to fight terrorism. And I really can't believe they think that would work. You are very brave to go after liberals like that, I do it all the time. We will get down voted and attacked for sure.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

It's not brave to stand up to liberals. They're pacifists.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: No I do not believe we can

It's not brave to stand up to conservatives. They're war-mongers. That makes every bit of sense as your statement. None at all! I am considered a liberal on this site but I don't consider myself a pacifist. I believe we can settle many differences by diplomacy but not all. Those we can settle by using détente and diplomacy, we should. Those we can't, let us find a way to diffuse some of the hatred if we can and if no other option is left then war could be considered. I do not believe we can use non-violence to destroy terrorism but I do believe that for situations other than terrorism, we can and should.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

I agree with everything except:"It's not brave to stand up to conservatives. They're war-mongers."If you don't stand up to a war-monger, it is because you are not brave. It is because you are a pansy ass. It is because you lack balls. BTW, when I use the word 'you,' I don't mean you so don't take it personal. English doesn't have a way to differentiate so I am making it explicit. I do not mean you explicitly. On the other hand, I'm not saying you have balls either. Not because you're a pansy ass but because you're a woman. It's just a figure of speech. And.... Oh, forget it. You either know what I mean or you'll choose to be offended. (;
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: I wish we could but it would not work

"It's not brave to stand up to liberals. They're pacifists"I was responding to what you wrote and clearly said that it was just as ridiculous. You can't make blanket statements like that and be serious and neither can I. Not every Liberal is a pacifist and not every Conservative is a war-monger. If you don't stand up to a pacifist it is because you are not brave. It is because you are a pansy ass. It is because you lack balls.BTW, when I use the word 'you' I don't mean you so don't take it personal...and blah, blah, blah.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

LOL, OK you win. One up vote for you but I do have balls (;
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Ya you've got big balls, big massive cohunas,big sweaty ones that weigh you down, your the man. Is this why you come to this site, ego enhancement, it is isnt it. Fuckin idiot.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

No, I come here so that I can tea bag people like you ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

What dunk your balls in and out of my mouth fuckin hell i didnt think you'd be into that kinky shit.Fuck it man im game if you are.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

OK, tell me where you live : )
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Uh! That's gross! I've called joe names before but you are disgusting. I know he makes you mad, hell, he makes me mad, but there are other people who have to read your crap so tone it down a bit.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding NO

very well put! and I agree, but you dont really think im a war monger do you?
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

I don't think you're a war monger.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding NO

thaaaaaaaaaaanks, the reason I put so many a's because I needed to have enough letters, at least 14 I think, so yeah, I hope it worked.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

those dang humanitarians always saying you can't commit mass genocide to take out a handful of extremist.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Who are these "pansies" you're refering to Jake?Last time I checked going after Osama was unanimous across the whole country,And it was a Republican administration who decided it wasn't that important, and started another random war for no real reason somewhere else while Osama is still on the loose.Have you been taking your hate pills again? The Bush years are over, we can all get along now.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Pansies are people who want to go after Osama with non violence.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Names please,because you specifically imply in your rush style, completely non-factual fear and hate based innuendothat liberals are these people.when nothing could be further from the truth.in fact, liberals want to get out of Iraq sooner, so we can concentrate on the guy who actually planned 911.Meanwhile, that silly president I'm sure you voted for at least once said, "I'm not to worried about Osama Bin Laden."hm, maybe he's just scared of Osama. Maybe he's a pansy.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

David, I think he might be a joke account. I certainly hope so.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding NO

"rush style", thanks I take that as a complement. (;It is not liberals who I am specifically talking about. What i meant was ANYONE who wants to take on Osama with non-violence is a pansie. "Meanwhile, that silly president I'm sure you voted for "I guess your talking about President Bush, no I wasn't old enough to vote for him at the time but I would have, Another complement. Thanks." said, "I'm not to worried about Osama Bin Laden." "I don't remember him saying that. But I'm sure you have some kind of proof. And hope your not taking that out of context.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Here is some kind of proof. Damn these facts and backed-up statements.http://articles.latimes.com/2004/oct/14/ nation/na-osama14
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

BUSH: Well, as I say, we haven't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run. I was concerned about him, when he had taken over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the Taliban.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding NO

So technically you did take it out of context, but whatever, that doesn't matter. My point is, you can't destroy Bin Laden or other terrorists with nonviolence.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Technically, we may be able to give Osama a stroke if we were successful at getting his top generals and the rest of his entourage to hold hands and sing, "I like to teach the world to sing..." in perfect harmony. But what are the chances of that (;
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Oh, I see! Then you see no bravery in non-violence?```````````````````````````````````````
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding NO

What is a pansy, in your book Jake?`````````````````````````````````````````````
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding NO

People that have let compassion get in the way of justice, not that compassion is a bad thing, bur just don't let it get in the way!
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding NO

Gotcha but compassion has its place here as well. These people have been being spoon fed this poop since they were kids. It's a difficult situation.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

You were the one who made the debate about hate leading to more hate. Surely you must understand that the same is true with violence...why are we attacking terrorists? Because they attacked us. Why did they attack us? Because we did something to them. Why did we do something to them? ect... and all the while innocent civilians get killed in the crossfire.Should we go after terrorists and those who attack us? Yes. Should we show indifference toward human life (thus provoking more terrorism) in the process? Well that's what we've been doing, and hey it's been working well, right?
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Surely you must understand that the same is true with violence...why are we attacking terrorists? Because they attacked us. Why did they attack us? Because we did something to them. Why did we do something to them? ect...So what did we do to them? Is it that we created a free market economy based on multi-national trade which let our country flourish while their land shut out the rest of the world and went into a spiral of poverty?
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

It's called Neoliberalism. International exploitation and technical slavery. Unconditional support of Israel's land grab and subsequent genocide. Read:Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global DominanceConfessions of an Economic HitmanSeriously. Even if you don't agree with the books. You will never learn anything new if you don't read anything you disagree with.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

How Naive!Ever since the fall of the Ottoman Empire at the end of the first world war (and probably before that) Europeans have been interfering with the middle east. Did you ever wonder why maps of the middle east look the way they do? Because the winners of WWI arbitrarily drew lines to divide up who would control what. That is why we have three groups in Iraq that hate each other.As for the U.S. specifically, pick a group and I'll tell you what we did to them. Iran? We helped the French replace a republic there with a puppet monarchy. The Iranians later staged a revolution and set up an anti-western government. That's why they hate us.How about Afghanistan? The whole reason Al Qaeda gained power is because the U.S. used them as a tool to fight the Soviets during the cold war. And trust me there are plenty more examples. So next time you think they hate us simply because we're rich, learn some history, then think again.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: Friends maybe

Why can't we just become friends with them? Who says we have to kill them all? If you go looking for friends you'll find them, if you go looking for enemies you'll find them alot faster. Trust devlops over time, we've pretty much screwed them over so far. Why can't all hate be put aside, we live on the same planet and we will always.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Well, in this last "mini war" Israel lost 13 people and the Palestinians lost like 1,300. I would imagine that with those numbers they should be the ones to capitulate first or become extinct in the process.Seriously, terrorism does not work. They have been trying it for 40 years. Gorilla warfare is far more effective. They need to change their strategy.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: in the long run

I doubt anyone uses terrorism as a "tactic." It's just what happens when people get really, really pissed off and feel the need to lash out in any way they can.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

If you were really, really pissed off at your neighbor, would egg his house if you knew he would destroy your home in retaliation? In other words, the cost paid by the nation sponsoring terrorism is astronomical.Maybe it's just me but terrorism is irrational.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

You dont get shit and thats clear from what you say. If you were really, really pissed off at your neighbor, would egg his house if you knew he would destroy your home in retaliation? The piont your missing is Isreal is destroying their homes regardless, thats why their resisting. Theres no major conflict right now but palestianians are still being forced off land and kicked out of houses that are rightfully and legally theirs.Fucking idiot (as you can see thats replaced peace out, i think its alot more fitting, dont you?)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Why doesn't Israel just nuke the hell out of them and be done with it? Why just destroy a few houses at a time? Just level the entire place.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Why do you call it a war. Nothing that happened there resembled a war. 4 of the IDF soldier killed were by friendly fire, so 8 vs. 1400 people (1200 proved to be civilians, 400 hundered children, what was their crime). IT WAS A FUCKIN MASSACRE. Bombs and white phosphurous were being dropped on civilians as they huddled in fear.There is no real fighting going on between Isreal and Palestine, what you have is an race of people being wiped off the face of the earth slowly but surely. Palestinian resistance is purely symbolic, they no they cant win but they continue anyway cause they dont want to go down on their knees, i happen to find that admirable.Call me what you want you biased american apologist.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Well..., let's see. 4 VS 1400. How long before we don't have to hear from you ;)Let's see how stupid you are. You kill 4 and lose 1400. I don't call that admirable. I call it stupid. ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

I was looking at it in the greater context of the Isreal Palestine conflict actyually (by the way a monkey would have been able to tell that) and yes i do find it admirable that they are willing to stand up to Isreal rather than be completley beatne down. If a young child stand up to large feared bully whos gona kick the crp out of him anyway, i find that admirable, this is exactly the same.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

I'm just afraid that the terrorists will hear you and continue what they are doing because it is so admirable and then they would win. The terrorists have been doing this for decades and they are winning. They are so close. Just a few more bombing runs and they'll win. Which is a good thing for them because they are starting to lose people to blow themselves up. I mean, you can't be killing 4 and losing 1400 forever! They are sooooo close ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Who are terrorists, the whole palestian population is it.I didnt kknow you were a filthy racist as well as being an idiot but you've just proved it. So, 1400 terrorists were killed in Gaza, not 200 Hamas officials and 1200 CIVILIANS. I dont consider teenagers whose families have been kicked off their land and treated like dogs solely because their the wrong ethnicity and religion, terrorists because they chose to throw stones at the people who did it. I admire them for them that. You dont even know what im trying to say, your incapable of it cause it just doesnt fit with your narrow view of the world. Your like a robot thats gotten the wrong instructions, does not compute, does not compute. People like are the reason these things are allowed to continue.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

I t must suck to be you. I mean, you're really serious about this crap and you want to change the world one person at a time by giving them links that talk about what is really happening in the world and the first person you try to convince (me;) doesn't give a rat's ass ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

I dont expect you to care like i do or even to give a fuck but the least you could do is acknowledge the truth of the situation. I mean if you see a child getting beaten and raped by two massive skin heads with knifes, i wouldnt expect you to jump right in and save the day, but i would expect you to textify to police that thats exactly what you saw, and not that the child was the one who provoked them and thus deserved everything he got. Don't take this anology too far, knowing your cartoonish style you'll probably try to use it against me . And believe me your very far from the first person ive tried to convince about anything.The fact is if i wasnt in college at the moment (and thus bogged down with course work and a thesis project with means im on computers 24/7) i wouldnt even be on this stupid site.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

And believe me your very far from the first person ive tried to convince about anything.And how many people did you get to agree with you ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

More than you might think beleive me. Its a two way thing, most of the people that were willing to listen changed there opinions maybe not completely and maybe not straight away.Thats also not to say that they didnt have an effect on my own opinions, as i said its a two way thing.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Are you sure they didn't just say they agreed with you in order to get you to shut up ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Ya, again you got it in one Joe.Fuck man how do you do that.I wish i was as smart as you. God i wish you were here now, just so i could hold you tight in my arms and feel your body warmt.Uhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

how do you do thatIt comes with age ; )
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

I find it funny you only took that from what i wrote, i mean really.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Well..., you write soooo much.... ; )
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Terrorists, terrorists, terrorists you have terrorists on the fuckin brain cant you see that. Ya, were so lucky we have the good just american army protecting all the peoples of the world, looking out for the little guy protecting us all from the scurge that is the dreaded terrorists. What would we do without the U.S.Fucking idiot.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

You know, maybe if you had stayed on topic.....This debate is about terrorism. This debate is NOT about what gary77777 wants to talk about or what he thinks is important or what he's passionate about. I cannot help it if you get easily confused when people talk about terrorism in a debate about terrorism. ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Oh dont you throw that shit at me. Come on, we both know exactly what i meant. Need i refer you to my opening comment about the U.S. being far greater terrorists than any of those organizations you want to think are a danger. Let me let you in on a little secret your governemnt is hiding from you, America is the big fuckin danger.Anyone who doesnt play by your countiries rules are automaitcally terrorists, that gives you the moral justifcation to go and destroy them. Just like the communists were evil 2 feet tall monsters, not actual people like you or me. Now Iran are the big bad. I'm not tryin to stand up for Iran but beleive the truth of what goes on in that country is far from whats depicted in your media, but obviously you think Ahmadinejad is Hitler casue thats what you've been told to think. Ya, your on the good just side, your country cares about democracy, just keep tellin yourself that the next time your country blows the shit out a bunch of brown people you fuckin hipocrite.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

I'm a brown person. America hasn't blown my people up. Hell, they haven't even shot at me once ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Please stop taking everything i say in the most literal sense. The only reason i said that is that so many of those who've suffered by your countries hand or its corporation have been from south america or the middle east.Both predominantly populated by brown skinned people.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

But the problem is NOT America. The problem is human nature. Name one country that is 100% nice to other countries and/or peoples. I wont even force you to pick from contemporary countries. I'll let you chose from countries from the way back in the past. All the way to the start of civilization ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Israel won hands down in the battle itself. But look at the world's reaction to their choices. PR victory for Palestine.Here's an analogy. Terrorism is to guerilla warfare as guerilla warfare is to musket volley fire. Greater psychological and tactical effect in proportion to (smaller) resources. If a state decides to fund terrorist attacks against us, the state has a much greater chance of dealing us a big hit without being found accountable.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

True, but the cost paid by the nation sponsoring terrorism is astronomical.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

How can you not see that what your governemnt and what Isreal does is also terrorism, really how do you justify that to yourslef.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Easy. Our stated mission is to kill soldiers on the battlefield. Their stated mission is to kill civilian infidels (men, women, children, dogs, cats, etc.). ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Oh, right and when your country is responsible for the deaths of far more civilians than any terrorist organisation could ever achieve, thats just collateral damage. Ya, all those people really shoudn't have gotten in the way of the terrorists. Do you even no how fucked up you are. Do you seriously think in the grand scheme of things of that there is any real difference between the extremists in your country and the islamic extremists, or are you that blind, oh wait, you dont need to answer that. You keep enjoying your delusion, i hope you live long enough to see it come crashing down around you.