azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

OK, you call America the largest terrorist organization on the planet and you don't consider that extreme? Wow! How can we even begin to have a discussion if we are no where near the same plane?That has killed 1 million people most of them innocentIf that's not hyperbole, I don't know what is. A million? Mostly innocent? America, all by itself did this? Again, wow! It's getting deep in here ;) if your country wanted to go and fuck up Iran or another country you'd fully support them and you'd probably lie to others for them and say were going in there to "help them"Actually, I would just tell you that we're going in there to help them just to hear you rant some more ;) But no, I wouldn't support such an action at this time. Our deficit is too large and we need to fix our economy first. Plus we need to manufacture 1 million more bullets to make up for the one we used up in Iraq and use them in Iran ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Firstly i dont see how using the 1 million figure is hyperbole, i mean thats how many have died, i already stated that they werent all killed by american bullets, best estimates put that at 100,000. Now your telling me given your history with Iraq, given what you've done to the country sicne 1990, the infrostructure destruciton, the sanctions, the invasion, given all these things you would not blame America for the 1milliion dead. I mena really Joe you call me a fanatic and then you refuse to acknowledge reality, i mean seriously like.Even hear you demonstrate how little you care about other peolpes, your like Obama who wasnt against invading Iraq because of the death and destruction it was going to cause, he was against becasue he thought your copuntry couldnt afforded. Your demonstrating a blatant disregard and respect for other peoples right to live happy secure and stable lives just like you.Ill bet if your economy picks up you'll jump on the bad wagon in support another 1 million dead, come fucking on, whos the real extremist hear. I could never condone such actions, your so brainwashed you'd probably participate in them.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

So, by your definition, every Iraqi that died between 1990 and the present is a direct result of American intervention because you claim that each one of those death can be attributed to either an American bullet or because of the infrastructure destroyed during the gulf wars, or the sanctions placed on Iraq. And I'm a fanatic? I think you're deluding yourself. ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Well i dont think every single death was Americas fault but you'd have to be an idiot to thinmthat 1 milion would have died in that country between 2001-2003 if your country and the UK (who by the way i view as being just as guilty) hadnt invaded. Now pior to that the sanctions were the primary cause of death and stravation your country and no other enforced these sanctions. You think im deluding myself, at least im willing to acknowledge whats true. Fuckin hell man get a clue for once in your life.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

I think that one million people died in our freeway system withing that period of time. What's the big deal ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

No they fuckin didnt ok, that a toll of 1 millioni in the space of 10 yrs is 100,000 people a year does that sound normal to you, cause to me it sounds like a brtual war was goin on in that country. Plus the Iraqis population is like a quarter of the American population so dont try to compare them.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

100,000 people a year Is that all? That's a drop in the bucket. What's the big deal ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Ok do you think that if 100,000 people a year started dying in your country it would be consdiered a drop in the bucket, you obviously didnt do very well at maths in school did you.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

I would consider it a drop in the bucket. Yes. There are about 115 automobile accident deaths every day in the U.S. And rush hour traffic still sucks. 100,000 a year is a little more than double but I doubt that it would make a very big dent in rush hour traffic ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Oh and by the way you can tell your rich Iraqis friends that they should be ashamed of themselves for welcoming America into their country when they know full well that the majority of their people are sufering greatly becasue of it. I have no respect for them.They laughed. Then they said that they fart in your general direction. They also said that they don't have any respect for your camel mother and your camel lover. They basically don't care what you think. Did I tell you that they refer to you as camel boy? Don't take it too hard, I think it is very fitting, don't you think ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Ya i dont actuall expect them to take me seriously.So they've seen monthy python have they, well good for them. Tell them i hopw they like the puppet government America choses for them, actually who i kidding people like are the ones who benefit, just like the elites in Egypt, i suppse tell them there whats wrong the world then.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

They think you are what's wrong with the world. You and your fanatical point of view ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

You know i could equally call you a fanatic, in fact id be lot mroe justified in doing so, your theh one who bases his opinions on what his government wants him to think, your pathetic.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

No, not really. See, the difference between you and me is that you believe...., you eat, drink and breathe, your own bull shit ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Not really, i dont agree, show me how something i beleive is wrong and i promise ill change my veiws on the spot, it wouldnt be the first time beleive me.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

OK. America does not go out actively seeking civilians to kill. Terrorists do. Therefore America cannot be the world's largest terrorist organization on the planet. Let's start there. ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Have you ever asked yourself why terrorist exist Joe. NO seriously i liked to know why you think there are people out there who are willing to blow themselves up just to kill a few of your soldiers. Now i admit there religious nutballs but really that doesnt cover it completely. Like there are people in palestine who werernt even really religious who had good educaitons, one example if of a solitor who strapped explosives to himself and detonated in a busy Jewish shopping mall, he wasnt motivated by his religion he was motivated by his hatred of the Jewis and his hatred stemmed from the fact that the were responsible for killing mot of his family and mistreating him and his people for his entire life.Now ask yourself this simple question, do you think if your country wasnt such a bully of a nation and satyed within its own borders and never interfered with anyone else in anyway, do you think there would be terrorits out there ready to blow themseleves up just to kill a few americans?
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Terrorist think like you. They think the whole world is against them and is plotting 24/7 to achieve their goal.Now ask yourself this simple question, do you think if your country wasnt such a bully of a nation and satyed within its own borders and never interfered with anyone else in anyway, do you think there would be terrorits out there ready to blow themseleves up just to kill a few americans?1. The world is moving towards globalization. It is impossible for any country to stay within its borders if it is to survive. Your world view is just too simplistic. You don't understand the deeper nuances and subtle consequences of such a world. You would have to turn the clock back hundreds, if not thousands, of years in order to achieve the world you are describing. You are feeling nostalgic ;)2. It doesn't matter which world view wins. There will always be someone who doesn't like and will disagree with it. There will always be people willing to blow themseleves up in an attempt to change the world to something more to their liking. That's just human nature. It's been going on for centuries.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

explain how globalisaiton infers the right to invade Iraq or prop up regimes all over the world to suit your own self interested agendaI did not say it gives one the right. I said that it is a two edge sword. When all economies are tied together, one country attacking another will hurt, not only that country but the other countries as well as itself. However, when one country makes a decision that hurts you, regardless of the consequences, you will react. It would be great if America drills for its own oil in its own territory. But that is not how globalization works. Globalization is where each country does what it does best. If that means building cars, then so be it. If it means producing oil, fine. But when that country decides to us its monopoly (car production, oil production, whatever) to benefit itself at the expense of the other countries, then a country as powerful as the U.S. will not sit by and allow such a thing to happen.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

I think your view of globalisation is just as twisted as most of views. Globalisation doesnt explain any of things you claim ot does, globalisation is a very bad thing as it is by-in large based soley on incresing profits for already wealthy peopel. Look one of the results of globalisation is that poor people are forced into more slave labour in Asia and Soutrh American and Africa as they can make products at a mcuh chjeaper price, they tend to negledct the fact that those people are woking them selves to death just to put the baer minimum of food in their system. Also, i find your rationalisation weak, if globalsiation means that the US is going to lose money on oil production which means they'll lose thje title of greeatest super power then thats what should be allowed happen, thats why we have rules and a system of law, it doesnt giev them the right to invade other countries. If there was any justcie in thise world your country should have to answer for its crimes i.e. Goerge Bush and Tony Blair and Rumsfeld and Cheeny all on trial at the Hauge just like the Nazi leaders had to answer for their crimes.Now you didnt comment on my argument about increasing extremism, do you agree that Americans actions has increased terrorims 19 fold or do you disagree?
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

What gives the peoples of the world the right to deny the U.S. oil? If there was any justice in the world their countries would have to answer for their crimes in trying to "choke" the U.S.Increased terrorism is a bunch of crap. They are nothing more than opportunists. We haven't been attacked since 9/11 so Bush did the right thing to take the fight to them ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Oh i dunno maybe it has something to do with the fact that its their oil. Its their land, not yours, therefore its their oil. This comment is a clear demonstartion of how much of a extremist you are my friend seriously, your a nut. Try to imagine a scenario where the middle east invades america to steal your resources without any justification aside from the shit you just wrote.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Their oil? Their land? Does a bear go to the stream and say, "Excuse me; Whose lake is this? I'd like to fish here."The land and the oil belongs to whoever is strong enough to take it. If they think they can come over here and steal our resources, then let them try. Last man standing gets to take it ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

People (i think) are not very different, no matter where you go in this world.Agreed. So to say that poor people are somehow better than the people you perceive to be screwing them up the ass is stupid because if the roles were reversed they would be the ones doing the screwing.It is what it is, it has been this way for ever, and it will never be any different. All that is required is to accept it for what it is and move forward ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

I agree completely, that in no makes it ok ,though. we have to strive for a better world if one is ever going to be achieved. Go read some of Orwell books, seriously.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Well...., we may be able to create a better world. But in order to do that, we'll have to break some eggs. You can't make an omelet without breaking eggs. So, if we get rid of the liberals, then we will be on the right track. Liberalism is a disease. Liberalism is a mental disorder ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

these people (at least the majority of them) would not be aginst the US if your country wasnt guilty of perpetrating such great crimes against them. It's not that I'm incapable of comprehending such a concept. It is that they are incapable of having any other perception. For example, as far as they are concerned, we are heathens. If we like to look at naked women, and women like to pose naked, then we are evil. If we are evil, then we should be exterminated like rats. If we do not accept Allah, we should be exterminated like rats. If we make fun of Allah, we should be exterminated like rats. If they desire to suffocate us by cutting off our oil supply, out life line, then we will exterminate them like rats. We would NOT be any better than they. But we won't feel any more guilty about it anymore than they would feel guilty about killing us.Here's how America works. If you give us what we NEED, we don't care what you do. We do NOT benefit by killing civilians. We are NOT OK with it. It creates more terrorists. They do not benefit by killing heathens. But they are OK with it. When we target terrorists and accidentally blow up civilians, we do not take to the streets and dance, burn their flag and shout, "Death to the Arabs/Islam." But they purposely target civilians and when they score big (like 9/11) they take to the streets and dance and burn our flag and shout, "Death to America." So when you say that we are worse than they are, it has not effect. Is it a bad situation? Yeah. Do I care? No. Do I feel guilty or bad? No. Do I take sides? Not really. You only perceive me as taking a side because you have taken their side. And the fact that I don't take your side automatically means (to you) that I have taken the other side. When in fact, I don't care.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

No Joe your demonstrating your ignorance again im afraid, actually ill respond to this when i have more energy, i had a big Wind Energy report to hand up today and i dint really feel like ranting on for 5 pages on how everything you wrtoe is absolute shit, but remind later and ill tell why i think that opinion is garbage.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Good luck on your Wind Energy report. I hope you used spell check ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

do you not understand that the actions of your governemnt is breeding extremism, does that not make sense to youIt does make sense to me. Now, does it make sense to you that the actions of the terrorists (Actually, their position that the U.S. is Evil and that it should be destroyed), makes it impossible for us to trust them with our life force? We NEED that oil. We will NOT under any circumstance allow it to be denied to us. If they would just say, "You know what? We know you don't believe in Allah and we really don't expect you to convert and share our philosophy. But we can still get along and we'll sell you our oil." then things may be different..... if we believe their words.Bottom line, it takes two to Tango ;)They have brought American atrocities down upon themselves ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

this isnt which came the first eh chicken or the egg alright, the answer is quite obvious to anyone whos not completely ignorant (again im sorry that excludes you). You create terrorism, YUOU GOBERMENTS PPLOCIES. Your explaining it the other way round when the answer is readily available just look up the history of the middle east before you shoot your mouth off you ignorant prick. I mean fuckin hell you say this shit without knowing the full story. Its like accusing someone of murder even though the evidence is clear that it was self defense but you refuse to look at the evidence.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

What? Are you on drugs? They came to the U.S. to blow up the World Trade Center and kill thousands and you call that self defense? Your explaining it the other way round when the answer is readily available just look up the history of the middle east before you shoot your mouth off you ignorant prick. I mean fuckin hell you say this shit without knowing the full story. Its like accusing someone of murder even though the evidence is clear that it was self defense but you refuse to look at the evidence.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

BTW, the chicken came first ; )
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

they went in there for oilWhat the hell does that mean? That the U.S. attacked Iraq to keep the oil flowing? The oil was flowing. Why risk Saddam torching the oil fields and halting the flow of oil?Does it mean that the U.S. is now going in there with oil tankers, and filling them up with FREE oil? your country destroyed themSo there were no foreign fighters committing acts of terror? There were no Sunnis committing acts of terror? And what possible benefit is there for the U.S. to so completely destroy the country (as you claim)? And is the U.S. not helping rebuild the country like they helped Japan, Germany and Europe rebuild after WWII? It should have been left down to the Iraqis people to depose Saddam.Was it not the Iraqi people who put Saddam on trial and executed him?
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

No, god no. They went in to control the oil, ive made this perfecetly clear. CONTROL, CONTROL CONTROL. read up on it, they didnt steal it they sent in Americn corporations that effectively stole it but made it seem all above board. read the articles, find your own. American corporations had a monopoly on where the oil went.NO, fuckin hell man im not even gona bother with this one, i dont have the time and it'll take far too long.Just take from me, YOU'RE WRONG.Yes it was, but your amry destroyed there country(I'm trying to resist the temptation to call you an idiot). Gulf 1, Inhuman Sanctions that crippled the country, Gulf 2. This destroyed the country, it had the most modern inforstructure in the middle east prior to this. Your country now steals its oil build bases in ground thats not belonged to them, treats its people like absolute shit (have you read any wikileaks reports, oh wait of course you havent). Julian Assange exposed exactly what was going on in Iraq and now hes been extradited to Sweden where a few of there politicians will send him onto the US where he could face execution or life for a flimsy espionage charge.Heres a man championing feedom of the press by leaking documents from whistle blowers but no we can't have your dirty secrets aried in public then you might lose support for your dirty wars. Its also rumoured that the private Bradley Manning is currently being tortured (e.g. sleep depravation, water boarding etc. etc.) in order for him to implicate Assange,as the espionage charge wont stick if he (Manning) came to Assange of his own free will. I cant vouch for the veracity of this.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

OMG! You are full of conspiracy theories, aren't you ;)I bet the U.S. government is also hiding extra terrestrials in Area 51 ;)Oh, and how about 9/11? Did the U.S. have a hand in that too ;)Here's what really ridiculous about your theory. The rest of the world wouldn't stand for it.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Are you incapable of taking anything i say seriously. "Its also rumoured that the private Bradley Manning is currently being tortured (e.g. sleep depravation, water boarding etc. etc.) in order for him to implicate Assange,as the espionage charge wont stick if he (Manning) came to Assange of his own free will. I cant vouch for the veracity of this."This is the only rumour i have ever presented to you. I may seem like all the other stuff is just a bunch of antiamerican propaganda cooked up by some evil terrorist but its not.Ive asked you time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time again not to take my word for it and to challenge anything i say with your owns facts. If you werent such a lazy piece of shit you would have done this and learned something about your "holy than thou" government. But no its much easier to pounce on the one rumour ive ever presented (which i acknmowledged to be a rumour) and which i explicitly stated couldnt vouch for its veracity.Your just idiot, an ignorant American idiot and you do your country proud.The stereotype really is true. You your obviuosly an reasonaly intelligient guy but your level of ignorance indicates to me that there really isnt any hope for the rest of your country, there never gona wake up from their fantasy.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Did it ever occur to you that I just enjoy pulling your chain ;)
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Of course, give me some credit. I realised that quite quickly, i'm not stupid. What you dont realise is, what you dont realise i dont care.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

Really? You could have fooled me, but..., if you say so ; )
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: A resounding YES!

Well think about Joe, you've pulling my chain (excuse the euphemism) for quite a while now and im still reponding. And ill continue to repsond as long as im stuck on computers everyday which is gona be a while considering my masters which ends in september, so make all the stuoid jokes you want.
Debate: Can we use Non-Violence to destroy terrorism?
Side: What? Are you on drugs?

so make all the stuoid jokes you want.OK...., I will ;)So...., you're getting your masters degree....., in what....., bating fish hooks? What would that make you ;)