Assignment 9 - Lindsey Angel

As you may already know, I am on Henry Clay's debate team. This past month, our debate topic was whether or not the deployment of anti-missile systems is in South Korea’s best interest. Just as some background, before a debate, each team (of two people) must prepare two cases - one supporting the resolution and one against. For this resolution, I was in charge of writing the case against the deployment of anti-missile systems. Now in my case, I discussed the effects of Chinese backlash on South Korea's economy and security, arguing that a stable economy, and therefore a functioning state, was a more prominent issue than that of deploying anti-missile systems right now. Many times, opposing teams would respond to this contention, with the argument that lives are more important in times of war than economic gains. My rebut was simply that in order for South Korea to be a functioning state, she must have a stable economy to ensure a quality of life for her citizens. In this case, it became a debate of which option was a lesser evil. Does South Korea deploy anti-missile systems and go to war with North Korea, or does she leave her people undefended in hope of reaching peace with the help of China? Either way, innocent lives are put at risk. When at war, they always are. The question is then if war is worth that risk? As a Christian, I feel obligated to say no. As a person, I'm not so sure. Lives are always at risk, even without war. However, war offers the option of liberation and security for countries who desperately need it. So while I believe the purposeful loss of lives is immoral, I also believe that if a country can bring about a positive change, and war is the only option then the end justifies the means.