Post in this thread if you're looking for someone to debate with, along with your topic suggestions, debate style suggestions and such. You're old enough to figure this out for yourself.

Amusing is certainly one way to put it.

kfs vs milton would be much more amusing for flame potential, though.

I got that much, but what do you mean by arguing pro-Pal? Does it mean arguing for terrorism, saying the PA is good, what exactly?

Milty no contest.

Thats not so much as a debate as it is a massacre.
(Or is it not a massacre when its only one guy?)

MWO,

Generally, I would say arguing in support of Arafat...

Then I'm out.

But... you can suggest something else...

As I said, I'm only comfortable as Neither, as this is a conflict that I prefer not to be a Devil's advocate.

Besides, I don't have time for it now, next semester is coming up and I'm supposed to study 90h/week.

np... Anyone else?

Ok, new idea... anyone wants to debate whether polygammy should be illegal (I am for polygammy)

damnit, so am i, or i'd give you a run for your money.

though if you want to limit your argument to PURE polygamy, i'll argue for the totally open system of multiple partner marriages...


but thinking about it, i cant see how such a debate would last a long time :(

still, you up for it?

Sure...

nothing to add im just last posting every forum ok

I was hoping you were going to argue with Rolly about homosexuality.

I can't remember which one, mhallex or ro4444, is the history nut.

Whoever it is, what sort of period interests you and what potential controversies are their <--(Edit: there) that you would like me to research and then debate?

This post has been edited by Sir Buckethead: Apr 24 2005, 08:48 AM

History nut? Definately mhallex.

Not to the extent that you are to be sure, but I dabble and am actually taking a history degree along with my international politics major,

My interests are rather broad but I rather like the early modern european period, formation of the nation-state, the international system all that jazz.

Of late Ive also been studying quite a bit of the history of New York City, especially ethnic and immigrant neighborhoods. Mostly for classes, and for some work I was doing for an exhibit at the Museum of the City of New York. Did some reseaarch and some photog work for them, got a photo hung out of it, all quite cool.

Yeah, you should debate mhallex, since I'm busy with upcoming finals.

On the other hand, you could answer this post, which Bar-Aram hasn't responded to yet:

http://www.utopia-politics.com/forums/inde...ndpost&p;=300668

My time online is a bit limited of late as my hard drive went again and my laptop is useless(who ever said Macs were user friendly?)

Also, Ive quite a bit of work to do at the moment, a paper on the Directory and another on Napoleon, a study of conflict between the white and immigrant communities in a neighborhood in Queens and a rater major paper on NATO persistence in the post-Communist European security enviroment and its relationship to EDSP and Common Security Policy(Javier Solana and all that stuff that hasnt added up to much yet but just might have some potential.)

ok rolly ill see what i can do

ill pwn anyone who wants to argue against european intergration.

P.S. rolly dont hold your breath, but when i dont have a full reading plate I will research it.

Oh come on, neither my account of Timur's campaigns nor my argument in favor of him our exhaustive. It's not nearly as long a post as it could be.

I cant argue about what I do not know, no matter how popular a practice it is on U-P.

I'm no history slouch myself. My absolute specialty is the American Revolution.

The Prompt: Knowing what we know now, should we have gone into Iraq?

I am pretty good at the history of the American Revolution myself. :)




Are you still looking to debate about this? If so, pm me about details, and we can possibly debate.

Given that I was anti-war from the outset, perhaps the statement could be amended to "Should knowing what we know now have altered the intention of attacking Iraq?

I call out anyone who wishes to debate me.

Bored and willing to take you up on it, Y2A. Now all we have to do is find an area where we're both competant enough to have an interesting one.

Alright....but what can we debate on? Possibly on public vs commerical broadcasting? I believe you said before that you thought that PBS member stations should not get funding aquired from taxes.

This post has been edited by The Poster Formerly Known as Y2A: Sep 29 2005, 12:50 PM