2008 Woodie Awards
Iraq War Debate
Khalida Sarwari
Issue date: 3/20/07 Section: News
- Page 1 of 2 next >
The St. Mary's College Republicans and Democrats met on Thursday March 8, 2007 for their first debate to discuss the next course of action to be taken in Iraq. Representing the Democrats were Nathan Garcia '08 and Liz Ashman '09. They were opposed by members of the Republicans, Michael Antonopoulos '09 and Scott Cullinane '09. This debate took place on the heels of a new plan by President Bush to send an additional 21,500 troops to Iraq.
The tone of the debate was affable but also lively as the Democrats called for a phased withdrawal from Iraq while the Republicans countered with the argument that it would be better for the United States troops to continue to stay the course.
Both sides supported their arguments with facts, figures, and quotes from major political leaders. Valerie Renosto '08 said that while the information did not change her personal view about this issue, she learned a lot from the debate.
"They had good up-to-date information and both sides got their argument across," Renosto said.
English professor Brenda Hillman walked away pleased with the debate. Hillman said that it is important to have a debate on the Iraq war because it is an issue that affects everyone.
"SMC should get more political, more involved," Hillman said.
In their opening statement, the Democrats indicated that "this war has not worked" and that a phased withdrawal, while not the easiest solution, is the best solution for both American troops and citizens of Iraq. This argument was challenged by the Republicans who asserted that the U.S. is winning the war, supporting this claim with a list of statistics that highlighted some of the troops' accomplishments. They pointed out that despite the images of chaos that citizens regularly see in the news, the troops have succeeded in building 140 health care clinics and providing eight million textbooks. Furthermore, they maintained that the troops' efforts helped attain a 60 percent turnout at the polls during the 2005 election for Iraq's first full-term parliament. They declared that if the troops withdraw now, "the insurgents will take over." The Republicans also refuted the Democrats' assertion that the war in Iraq has been clearly mismanaged, arguing that on the contrary, the war has not been mismanaged given that the mortality rate of troops "is low for a war."
The tone of the debate was affable but also lively as the Democrats called for a phased withdrawal from Iraq while the Republicans countered with the argument that it would be better for the United States troops to continue to stay the course.
Both sides supported their arguments with facts, figures, and quotes from major political leaders. Valerie Renosto '08 said that while the information did not change her personal view about this issue, she learned a lot from the debate.
"They had good up-to-date information and both sides got their argument across," Renosto said.
English professor Brenda Hillman walked away pleased with the debate. Hillman said that it is important to have a debate on the Iraq war because it is an issue that affects everyone.
"SMC should get more political, more involved," Hillman said.
In their opening statement, the Democrats indicated that "this war has not worked" and that a phased withdrawal, while not the easiest solution, is the best solution for both American troops and citizens of Iraq. This argument was challenged by the Republicans who asserted that the U.S. is winning the war, supporting this claim with a list of statistics that highlighted some of the troops' accomplishments. They pointed out that despite the images of chaos that citizens regularly see in the news, the troops have succeeded in building 140 health care clinics and providing eight million textbooks. Furthermore, they maintained that the troops' efforts helped attain a 60 percent turnout at the polls during the 2005 election for Iraq's first full-term parliament. They declared that if the troops withdraw now, "the insurgents will take over." The Republicans also refuted the Democrats' assertion that the war in Iraq has been clearly mismanaged, arguing that on the contrary, the war has not been mismanaged given that the mortality rate of troops "is low for a war."