|
Opinion #1
Debater: CJ07
|
|
Negative action
|
Safety can be achieved in more than one manner. It would be incredibly unintelligent of us to believe that just because the military is an authoritative figure in our country that means that any and all of its actions are justified. The means to which the topic is referring is abusive and, therefore that, itself, is subjective.
In order to determine if the ends justify the means requires the observer to disregard, for the most part, all subjects of beneficial means and solely concentrate on the question: are there other ways of reaching the supposedly beneficial ends? The answer is, of course, yes. Sadly, abuse and torture is the number one way of doing so.
Point being: Any military rejects the idea of negotiable ends. Due to the means by which the end is achieved, the end is tainted, therefore lacking benefit and completely useless. If the ends, themselves, are tainted and serve no purpose, then the means are not justifiable.
|
|
|
|
Opinion #2
Debater: neza
|
|
Affirmative
|
|
First of all, meands doesn't indicate torture and abuse. Secondly, you have no evidence! very important! Where I can provide the judges with evidence from Department of Defense saying torture doesn't occur. It is also against the International law for torture and abuse to occur. The means justify the ends when the means are legal. And we can only look to means being legal, because that is the only way they will occur. It is for benifit of our nation to collect military intelligence, so we can prevent future terrorist attacks or attacks period. By collecting military intelligence if we can save thousands of lives, then the ends do justify the means.
|
|
|
