azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: FDR

He did nothing to improve it, in fact during his first presidential campaign in the 80's he declared "I believe in states rights" in a town in the south were two civil rights workers were murdered, ask any black american who lived back then and i guarantee you, they have no fond memory of reagan
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: RR

You do realise that FDR's policy had state control of economy, civil rights AND political freedoms whereas Reagan only controlled civil rights.
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: FDR

Reagan expanded government too, FDR did it in a way that helped the common man, RR did it to help large corporations
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: RR

FDR is no hero.He was just as manipulative and fake as Reagan was. Reagan was just more assertive and had an overall more pleasant way that he went about doing his thing.Frankly, I don't really give a crap who was better or worse since neither was my friend or anything of the sort. RR knew what the right-wing stood for and stayed loyal all the way through FDR was constantly battling on middle-ground never really having a damn clue what he stood for or how to assert himself. He was a safe-playing politician, not a big-dog per say. To be ranked high in my book you have to take a gamble (and win, of course) Reagan did many big moves and most of them won, minus his international relations with the middle east.
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: FDR

RR was not even close to a hero, nothing he has done made anything better, FDR did way more to help the American people than he ever did
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: RR

Affirmative action FORCES people to hire less qualified blacks over more qualified, whites just to meet a quota. It's utterly restrictive and against civil rights.
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: FDR

Blacks even with affirmative action have a hard time finding jobs, i live in the south and i can tell you, racism is still live and well
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: RR

That doesn't prove how the actual fuck affirmative action supports anarcho-socialism in anyway. You have no clue what the hell you are talking about.
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: FDR

And you do? Im guessing you grew up in a white christian conservative family?
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: RR

My upbringing is totally irrelevant.Your actual belief system is contradicting your own value system.
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: FDR

How? I believe that anyone who is denied a service based soley on their skin color, sexual orientation, or appearance. In an anarchic society with socialist principles, this would still be possible
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: RR

Reagan didn't sign an executive order to imprison people just because they had Japanese heritage
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: RR

The New Deal paved the way for our monster government that we have today (not completely, the Federal Reserve also had to do with it). and while Ronald Reagan expanded the war on drugs, FDR made marijuana illegal for the first time. Sure, we can blame Congress or the Senate, but Reagan has just as much power as FDR when it comes to government's involvement with drugs.Reagan and FDR are both kind of assholes, but i'd say Reagan was at least a bit less of an asshole due to his philosophy of "less" government, even though he expanded the military. FDR was more like "fuck you, government must grow... grow ... GROW!!!" which still exists in the minds of elitists and Fascists today.Oh, right, and FDR detained Japanese, Italians, and Germans for being Japanese, Italian, or German. Both were war mongers, but Reagan was more of a Bush style War monger, while FDR was more just responsible for the Manhattan Project "lol, you want to create something that could possibly blow a hole in our atmosphere? go ahead".I'd say when it comes to comparing presidents, it makes more sense to ask "who was worse?"
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: FDR

The New Deal paved the way for our monster government that we have todaySo you think the US would have been better off with the great depression for the rest of the 20th century, I hate to tell you this but Ayn Rand laissez faire capitalism is completely outdated if we had no regulations on businesses,if we had no Federal Reserve, if we had no National Industrial Recovery Act there would be no middle class, the middle class would simply be non existent! Don't believe me? The top 1% has 40% of the nations wealth, now just imagine laissez faire capitalism applied to that. case closed
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: RR

The New Deal did not fix the economy. It actually slowed down economic recovery until the War increased debt and passed on the debt to future citizens. Ayn Rand laissez faire capitalism is completely outdated if we had no regulations on businesses,if we had no Federal Reserve, if we had no National Industrial Recovery Act there would be no middle class, the middle class would simply be non existent! Don't believe me? The top 1% has 40% of the nations wealth, now just imagine laissez faire capitalism applied to that. case closedNot sure if trolling, but here we go:Ayn Rand did not create Laissez Faire Capitalism. In fact, she still supported government and the Federal Reserve. She supported Aristocracies. She was just more for economic liberty than the progressive movement of the time (and the Socialists from her home country.) Most Market Anarchist views do not come from Ayn Rand. She's just a philosopher/writer that is influential in our view-points, but there are plenty of things that she conflicts with Libertarians and Anarchists.As for the rest, clearly the regulations and Federal Reserve have failed considering that the top 1% has 40% of the nation's wealth. Don't believe me? You just said it.
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: FDR

Well in that case its very clear that it was reagan who was the worst
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: RR

Ronald Reagan didn't put people into Japanese-American internment camps now did he?
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: RR

FDR had a lot good ideas, but he is the classic Fascist liberal. He was elected four times, attempted to water down the supreme court, unsuccessfully tried to stifle dissent within the democratic party. Father Charles Coughlin is the classic example where FDR used his covert powers to crush his critics. If you did not have a blue New Deal sticker at your place of business, his undercover mob would make sure you did.
Debate: Who was a better President? Franklin Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan
Side: RR

They were both great presidents, and they both had their faults. I just respect RR more than I respect FDR. FDR also how way longer in office than RR so he had more time to get things done.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.A

While supplying the entire allied nations in war supplies (including U.S.S.R.) AMerica was still able to single handedly defeat the Japanesse and still support other nations with people and back up (example D-Day).
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.S.R

"While supplying the entire allied nations in war supplies (including U.S.S.R.) "It's very easy to give people things when you yourself aren't fighting."AMerica was still able to single handedly defeat the Japanesse and still support other nations with people and back up (example D-Day)."Likewise the USSR managed to handle the entire Eastern front losing far more soldiers than the U.S did in the entire war.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.A

"Likewise the USSR managed to handle the entire Eastern front losing far more soldiers than the U.S did in the entire war.”If you judge the success of a battle by the amount of people lost, than i am happy about at least one thing, and that is you are not a general. All that shows is looking at people as worthless and expendable, not effectiveness.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.S.R

"If you judge the success of a battle by the amount of people lost, than i am happy about at least one thing, and that is you are not a general. All that shows is looking at people as worthless and expendable, not effectiveness."I assumed that's the standard measurement of contribution to war in the USA, considering how much credit you claim about D-Day.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.A

USA. It's not even close. -All of the European allies were struggling until the US pushed them over the top.And while doing all of this, the United States single-handedly won the war in the pacific.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.A

Cough, Britain helped in the pacific, cough.But yeah, USA ftw and all that jazz.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.S.R

Cough, Britain helped in the pacific, cough.Ya...in the same way a water boy helps win a football game...
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.S.R

Actually, you'd be surprised how much Britain was involved. For a start, it was the Japanese invasion of British Malaya that formally started the war (I know Pearl Harbour was obviously key for US involvement, but it wasn't the formal reason why the war started). They also attacked Hong Kong the same day as Pearl Harbour.I'm not saying we were massively useful. For the first 9 months or so, we were whipping boys. But, nonetheless, we provided important Naval support, alongside Australia and the Netherlands. And our colony of India led the Allied role in the Burma Campaign.One could even go as far to say (I wouldn't) that the US weren't even the biggest contributors to the Pacific War. China fought Japan valiantly in the second Sino-Japanese war. This war counted for over 50% of all casualties in the Pacific War.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.A

Actually, you'd be surprised how much Britain was involved. For a start, it was the Japanese invasion of British Malaya that formally started the warThis was independent of the United States's involvement.I'm not saying we were massively useful. For the first 9 months or so, we were whipping boys. But, nonetheless, we provided important Naval support, alongside Australia and the Netherlands.I will give more credit to Australia for their aid in some of the south pacific campaigns. Obviously their involvement is swarmed by the US, but nonetheless, the aussies had a role.And our colony of India led the Allied role in the Burma Campaign.I wasn't aware India was in the Pacific. Pfft. One ocean wasn't enough for them? ;)China fought Japan valiantly in the second Sino-Japanese war.As did thousands of US forces. Just sayin'. Regardless, this is independent of our primary involvement.his war counted for over 50% of all casualties in the Pacific War.These are two different wars.One could even go as far to say (I wouldn't) that the US weren't even the biggest contributors to the Pacific WarThat would be Japan, followed by the United States, then a distant Australia.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.S.R

I wasn't aware India was in the Pacific. Pfft. One ocean wasn't enough for them? ;)Lol. But for some reason, the Burmese campaign gets lumped in with the Pacific War. So it can be talked about within the Pacific War.As did thousands of US forces. Just sayin'. Regardless, this is independent of our primary involvement.C'mon, the US deserves a lot of credit for WW2. But you can't take too much away from the Chinese, I mean, they were still fighting with swords in the early stages of the war. But nevertheless, the Japanese were defeated. These are two different wars.And yet it is lumped in with the Pacific War. I also feel that they are 2 separate enitities, but meh.That would be Japan, followed by the United States, then a distant Australia.I meant on the allied front.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.A

So it can be talked about within the Pacific War.I don't see how. That is argumentum ad populum (ish). I mean, they were still fighting with swords in the early stages of the war.Their military incompetence does not make them any more influential in my eyes.And yet it is lumped in with the Pacific War. I also feel that they are 2 separate enitities, but meh.Argumentum ad populum (ish).I meant on the allied front.Well then, the combined forces of the entire British Commonwealth (not UK) would be a distant second.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.A

"Ya...in the same way a water boy helps win a football game..."Tell me about it, USA was practically useless.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.A

"Tell me about it, USA was practically useless.”Just because of your intransigence, you do not have the right to downplay the role of the U.S. in World War 2 to a level such as this, especially with your insatiable amount of knowledge on the war.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.S.R

"Just because of your intransigence, you do not have the right to downplay the role of the U.S. in World War 2 to a level such as this,"Just because of your blatant ignorance, you do not have the right to claim that the U.S deserves more credit than it deserves. "especially with your insatiable amount of knowledge on the war."Funny how you can claim that, when it's your country that teaches myth and propaganda as fact.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.A

Funny how you can claim that, when it's your country that teaches myth and propaganda as fact.For the fourth time, upon what factual basis or personal experience are you in any way qualified to make that assertion? That is nothing but an empty, pathetic emotional plea from a self-righteous ignoramus who is no more capable of free-thinking than the very americans you picture. You are a puppet of the Queen. Sad really...
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.S.R

"For the fourth time, upon what factual basis or personal experience are you in any way qualified to make that assertion? "On the debate: Japan vs USAI gave you the reason of Paul Revere and how your country have glorified him into a national hero for no other reason than a little rhyme."That is nothing but an empty, pathetic emotional plea from a self-righteous ignoramus who is no more capable of free-thinking than the very americans you picture. "Resorting to petty insults are we?"You are a puppet of the Queen. Sad really..."More ignorant balderdash, but at least you've used a stereotype, shows some progress in your intelligence.Anyway, what's wrong with our Queen?She'a lot better than your President.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.A

"Anyway, what's wrong with our Queen?She'a lot better than your President"Your Queen doesn't do anything, she is just a figure head, nothing more, hence the reason for a Prime Minister."I gave you the reason of Paul Revere and how your country have glorified him into a national hero for no other reason than a little rhyme."You clearly know nothing of military strategy, information is the key to every battle, it allows for a built up defense and counter attack. Look at the battle of Midway for example, America had information the Japanese didn't, as a result, the Japanese lost their ability to carry out their imperialistic ways.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.S.R

"Your Queen doesn't do anything, she is just a figure head, nothing more, hence the reason for a Prime Minister."Saying the Queen doesn't do anything is saying that the President doesn't do anything. She has weekly meetings with the Prime Minister where she advises him and gets information on what he's doing. She also has great diplomatic influence and receives more tourists than your President does. "You clearly know nothing of military strategy, information is the key to every battle, it allows for a built up defense and counter attack. Look at the battle of Midway for example, America had information the Japanese didn't, as a result, the Japanese lost their ability to carry out their imperialistic ways."He clearly haven't read the information I originally gave you, the whole Paul revere rhyme is a lie. That means it's not true. Paul Revere was one of many soldiers sent to warn of the regulators, he was one of three who failed the mission by instead deciding to go to a public house. Thus your reference to the Battle of Midway is useless aside from the fact that Britain and Russia also knew of the "military strategy" of gather information. Once again the U.S is nothing special.What's most concerning about your reply (aside from the fact that you assume I know "nothing of military strategy") is that you still believe the story of Paul Revere, You're right information is key, especially propaganda in history lessons.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.S.R

"USA. It's not even close."You simnply couldn't be more wrong if you tried."All of the European allies were struggling until the US pushed them over the top."Not true, the USSR were pushing the Nazi's back even before they received US aid."And while doing all of this, the United States single-handedly won the war in the pacific."This is probably the only true statement in your argument.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.S.R

COUGH, BRITAIN HELPED IN THE FUCKING PACIFIC, COUGH!But yeah, USSR ftw and all that jazz.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.S.R

Actually as far as I understand it the USA was providing aid via sea well before they got heavily involved and that aid in terms of materials was quite significant.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.A

"Not true, the USSR were pushing the Nazi's back even before they received US aid"This is actually impossible, Stallingrad started in August of 1942 (this date is before the German military reached the city). The Lend Lease act of 1941(I believe June) was an act that started America supplying the Allied nations with huge amounts of war supplies, the U.S.S.R was included in this aid. Stalin even addmited that a victory could not of been possible without this act "we would not of been able to cope".Here is an un-biased writing on WW2 from the BBC Uk.http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/how_the_allies_won_01.shtml
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.S.R

"This is actually impossible"It's actually not impossible at all."Stallingrad started in August of 1942 (this date is before the German military reached the city). "I'm well aware of when the battle of Stalingrad took place."Here is an un-biased writing on WW2 from the BBC Uk."My friend, all writing is biased to some degree, it is standard practive among historians motivated more by political consideration than historical truth (and most fall into this category) to exaggerate the importance of things like American aid to the Soviet Union.The fact is that the Red Army had halted the German advance and begun to counterattack by the end of 1941 in the Battle of Moscow – this is before any supplies had reached the USSR from the USA, Britain or Canada.The soviets would still have been able to defeat the Nazis but at much greater cost, this may have led to a stalemate on the Eastern front, I admit that is a very real possibility, for Russia to have beaten the Nazis alone, it would probably have taken another 5-10 years, and caused a few million more casualities, but regardless of US aid, not historian would argue that Hitlers invasion of Russia hadn't failed, all that is left to consider then is whether the USSR could have soundly defeated the Nazis, or whether it would have ended in a stalemate, i.e.""Initially, the Soviet forces conducted a strategic defence of the Moscow Oblast by constructing three defensive belts, and deploying newly raised reserve armies as well as bringing troops from the Siberian and Far Eastern Military Districts. Subsequently, as the German offensives were halted, a Soviet strategic counter-offensive and smaller-scale offensive operations were executed to force German armies back to the positions around the cities of Oryol, Vyazma and Vitebsk, nearly surrounding three German armies in the process.""This victory provided an important boost for Soviet morale, with the Wehrmacht suffering its first defeat. Having failed to vanquish the Soviet Union, Germany now had to prepare for a prolonged struggle. Operation Barbarossa had failed."Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Moscow#Soviet_counteroffensive  "Stalin even addmited that a victory could not of been possible without this act "we would not of been able to cope"."He did no such thing, and he never said "we wouldn't have been abale to cope", where is your source for that? did you simply make it up to suit your argument? Don't try to dodge this question;-)I beleive his exact words were:"Without American production the United Nations could never have won the war."You seem to think that quote impies Stalin meant the USSR would have fallen to the Nazis without US aid, this is false. US aid was necesasry for the war effort (on all sides not just that of the USSR , thats he says: United Nations) to defeat the Nazis in the timeline within which they were defeated the Nazis, and there is no doubt that american aid contributed massively to the Soviet Victory against the Nazis.
Debate: Who was the hero of World War 2?
Side: U.S.A

"I'm well aware of when the battle of Stalingrad took place." Are you well aware of when the Lend-Lease Act was initiated?"My friend, all writing is biased to some degree, it is standard practive among historians motivated more by political consideration than historical truth (and most fall into this category) to exaggerate the importance of things like American aid to the Soviet Union"I merely said that as to emphasize the Non-American perspective to contradict any argument that says it is un-fairly biased towards the U.S."the Red Army had halted the German advance and begun to counterattack by the end of 1941 in the Battle of Moscow"You could also say the Russian Winter halted the German advance (it certainly halted German vehicles).http://ww2db.com/battle_spec.php?battle_id=37